Abstract
Annual reports are an important element in the genre of corporate public discourse. The reporting practices mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for all publicly traded corporations are intended to render the annual reports a legitimate and trustworthy medium through which management communicates information related to the financial performance of the firm. The following discussion represents an inaugural attempt to investigate the ethical characteristics of the discourse found in corporate annual reports using Habermas' principles of communicative action. In preparing the Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) portion of the report, managers are charged with providing narrative information for investors and other interested third parties relevant to assessing the firm's financial condition. Previous rhetorical studies of the narrative portions of annual reports argue that they serve as means for both legitimate and distorted communication. We investigate this communication medium through the lens of Habermas' norms for communicative action, which require communicators to be comprehensible, truthful, sincere, and legitimate. The study represents an initial attempt to operationalization Habermas' principles of communicative action and to employ a methodology that facilitates their application to research within a business context. From one perspective, consistent with agency theory as specified by neoclassical economics, it would seem that firms anticipating worse-than-expected financial performance would be less likely to exhibit the Habermasian principles necessary for undistorted communication because they would attempt to strategically influence the message being communicated about the firm's financial position. Instead, employing rhetorical analysis software, Diction 5.0, we found that firms expecting both good and bad earnings surprises exhibited a higher level of communicative action than a composite average firm. Although preliminary in nature, our findings suggest that firms anticipating large earnings surprises, either high or low, use the narrative portion of the annual report as a vehicle through which to communicate information about managements' veracity and trustworthiness as well as the firm's financial position.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahamson, E. and Choelsoon Park: 1994, ‘Concealment of Negative Organizational Outcomes: an Agency Theory Perspective’, Academy of Management Journal 37(5), 1302-1334.
Adelberg, A. H.: 1979a, ‘Narrative Disclosures Contained in Financial Reports: Means of Communication or Manipulation?’, Accounting and Business Research(Summer), 179-190.
Adelberg, A. H.: 1979b, ‘A Methodology for Measuring the Understandability of Financial Report Messages’, Journal of Accounting Research(Autumn), 565-592.
Barron, O. E., C. O. Kile and T. B. O'Keefe: 1999, ‘MD&A Quality as Measured by the SEC and Analysts' Earnings Forecasts’, Contemporary Accounting Research(Spring), 75-109.
Bouwman, M. J., P. A. Frishkoff and P. Frishkoff: 1987, ‘How do Financial Analysts Make Decisions? A Process Model of the Investment Screening Decision’, Accounting, Organizations, and Society 12(1), 1-30.
Brummer, J. J.: 1991, Corporate Responsibility and Legitimacy(Greenwood Press, New York).
Chang, L. S. and K. S. Most: 1985, The Perceived Usefulness of Financial Statements for Investors' Decisions(University Presses of Florida, Florida International University Press, Miami, FL).
Collins, W., E. S. Davie and P. Weetman: 1993, ‘Management Discussion and Analysis: An Evaluation of Practice in U.K. and U.S. Companies’, Accounting and Business Research 23(90), 123-137.
D'Aveni, R. A. and I. C. MacMillan: 1990, ‘Crisis and the Content of Managerial Communications: A Study of the Focus of Attention of Top Managers in Surviving and Failing Firms’, Administrative Science Quarterly 35, 634-657.
Day, J. F. S.: 1986, ‘The Use of Annual Reports by U.K. Investment Analysts’, Accounting and Business Research 16(Autumn), 295-307.
Forbes: November 4, 1996, 'Short and Sweet Please!’, 192-196.
Forester, J.: 1985, ‘Critical Theory and Planning Practice’, in John Forester (ed.), Critical Theory and Public Life(MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 202-227.
Habermas, J.: 1984, 1987, The Theory of Communicative Action, Vols. 1 & 2, translated by T. McCarthy (Beacon Press, Boston).
Habermas, J.: Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action(MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
Hooks, Karen L. and James E. Moon: 1993, ‘A Classification Scheme to Examine Management Discussion and Analysis Compliance’, Accounting Horizons7(2), 41-59.
Lebar, M. A.: 1982, ‘A General Semantics Analysis of Selected Sections of the 10-K, the Annual Report to Shareholders, and the Financial Press Releases’, Accounting Review 57(1), 176-189.
Lee, T. A. and D. P. Tweedie: 1975a, ‘Accounting Information: An Investigation of Private Shareholder Usage’, Accounting and Business Research 5(20), 280-291.
Lee, T. A. and D. P. Tweedie: 1975b, ‘The Private Shareholder: His Sources of Financial Information and His Understanding of Reporting Practices’, Accounting and Business Research 6(24), 304-314.
Lee, T. A. and D. P. Tweedie: 1977a, The Institutional Investor and Financial Information(The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, London, U.K.).
Lee, T. A. and D. P. Tweedie: 1977b, The Private Shareholder and the Corporate Report(The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, London, U.K.).
Morton, J. R.: 1974, ‘Qualitative Objectives of Financial Accounting: A Comment on Relevance and Understandability’, Journal of Accounting Research(Autumn), 288-289
Rawls, J.: 1971, A Theory of Justice(Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).
Rogers, R. K. and D. Brown: 1999, ‘The Effect of EDGAR on the Financial Reporting Process: An Empirical Investigation’, Journal of Accounting and Finance Research 6(2), 18-24.
Rogers, R. K. and J. Grant: 1997, ‘Content Analysis of Information Cited in Reports of Sell-Side Financial Analysts’, The Journal of Financial Statement Analysis 3(1), 17-31.
Salancik, G. R. and J. R. Meindl: 1984, ‘Corporate Attributions as Strategic Illusions of Management Control’, Administrative Science Quarterly 29, 238-254.
Singh, J. V., D. J. Tucker and R. J. House: 1986, ‘Organizational Legitimacy and the Liability of Newness’, Administrative Science Quarterly 31, 64-81.
Staw, B. M., P. I. McKechnie and S. M. Puffer: 1983, ‘The Justification of Organizational Performance’, Administrative Science Quarterly 28, 582-600.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yuthas, K., Rogers, R. & Dillard, J.F. Communicative Action and Corporate Annual Reports. Journal of Business Ethics 41, 141–157 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021314626311
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021314626311