Professional Documents
Culture Documents
019 - Esch, 2018 The Dynamics of Financial Information and Non-Financial Environmental, Social and q2
019 - Esch, 2018 The Dynamics of Financial Information and Non-Financial Environmental, Social and q2
019 - Esch, 2018 The Dynamics of Financial Information and Non-Financial Environmental, Social and q2
https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-05-2018-0043
Downloaded on: 20 May 2019, At: 10:13 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 54 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 11 times since 2019*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:300473 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
The dynamics
The dynamics of financial of financial and
information and non-financial non-financial
information
environmental, social and
governance information in the
strategic decision-making process Received 18 May 2018
Revised 27 January 2019
7 March 2019
Martin Esch Accepted 10 March 2019
Mike Schulze
European Management School, Mainz, Germany, and
Andreas Wald
University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to link the fields of research on strategic decision (SD) making and
integrated reporting (IR) and advances knowledge of the concept of integrated thinking by describing how
financial information and non-financial environmental, social and governance (ESG) information are used in
different phases of the strategic decision-making process (SDMP).
Design/methodology/approach – In total, 15 senior executives from twelve different industries were
asked about the importance of different types of information within SDMPs. The data were analyzed by
means of content analysis.
Findings – The authors derive a four-phase model and explicate the utilization of financial information and
non-financial ESG information within each phase. The findings show that both types of information affect
SDMPs, but the importance of each type differs among the phases.
Practical implications – This study offers practitioners a yardstick against which to compare how they
use different types of information throughout the SDMP.
Originality/value – This paper provides a conceptual model of integrated thinking in SD making by
connecting two separate fields of research. This connection will permit deeper study of the field of information
and its implications for SD making. The present investigation shows that IR can promote integrated thinking
in companies, as the broader range of information at hand allows companies to form a holistic picture of
internal management questions and incorporate information that has not been previously prepared or
associated with existing information.
Keywords Integrated reporting, Integrated thinking, Strategic decision-making, Integrated information
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Strategic decisions (SDs) are a fundamental part of business execution and determine a
firm’s future (Eisenhardt and Zbaracki, 1992; Dean and Sharfman, 1993). SDs are shaped
not only by the strategic objectives of a company but also by external factors.
Uncertainties and imperfect information are the starting point of each SD making process
(SDMP), and enterprises strive to support decisions in the best possible way. As
improving decision-making will ultimately have a significant impact on the success of an
organization, studies of the factors that influence SDs have been at the forefront of
research in strategic management. Journal of Strategy and
Management
SDs are usually based on both financial and non-financial information (Frishammar, © Emerald Publishing Limited
1755-425X
2003), and firms use internal management control tools to provide and utilize both types of DOI 10.1108/JSMA-05-2018-0043
JSMA information (Henri, 2006). However, research on the use of different types of information in
the different phases of SDMPs is scarce. More recently, external reports have begun
providing non-financial information in addition to financial information to external
stakeholders seeking to assess the environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance
of firms (Cohen et al., 2012). This development has resulted in the creation of a new reporting
format: integrated reporting (IR). IR builds on the concept of integrated thinking and aims to
provide a comprehensive view of the value creation of a company (Dumay et al., 2016). In
contrast to the information provided by internal performance measurement tools such as the
Balanced Scorecard, the information in integrated reports does not include detailed key
performance indicators for strategy implementation. Instead, an integrated report depicts
how an organization’s strategy creates value by considering financial, governance,
environmental and social implications. Although originally developed to satisfy the
increased information needs of investors (Briem and Wald, 2018), the literature on IR argues
that the provision of integrated information (financial and non-financial ESG) can also play
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
2. Theoretical background
2.1 SD making processes
Mintzberg et al. (1976) suggested a framework of SDMPs that includes three phases and
seven subroutines: identification, development and selection (see also Schwenk, 1995). The
first phase consists of two subroutines and involves the identification of opportunities and
problems triggering decisional activity as well as the initial collection of information
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
relevant to their clarification and specification. The second phase also consists of two
subroutines and involves the generation, modification and possible redefinition of choice
alternatives that enable resolution of the decision matter. Finally, in the third phase, which
includes three subroutines, excess choice alternatives are sorted out, and a final decision is
made among the viable choice alternatives profound analysis, bargaining among decision-
makers, and additional further activities that may evolve throughout the process and are
necessary for the decision to be made (see Figure 1).
Each phase of an SDMP is influenced by a multitude of determinants and contextual
factors (Papadakis et al., 1998). Shepherd and Rudd (2014) deduce four categories of context
variables that substantially influence decision-making outcomes: top management teams,
SD-specific characteristics, the external environment and specific firm characteristics.
However, little research has been conducted on the role and nature of information provided
for SDs (Citroen, 2011).
Information is an indispensable resource for every decision (Meadow and Yuan, 1997).
In SDMPs, information helps reduce uncertainties pertaining to the selection of alternatives
(Citroen, 2011; Choo, 1996), especially in the second and third phases of the process (Citroen,
2011). Decision-makers need to identify and collect enough information (Meadow and Yuan,
1997), and assessing the adequacy, accuracy and reliability of information is a time-
consuming process (Schwenk, 1995). Information on internal and external issues accessed
through internal systems and procedures as well as external channels can trigger decisional
activity. Frishammar (2003) pointed out that the SDMPs always employ a combination of
different dimensions of information. The information obtained is sought by decision-makers
to frame and specify choice alternatives, sort out excess alternatives, assess remaining
alternatives, and finally decide on one choice alternative to be pursued (Citroen, 2011).
Despite its relevance as a factor impacting SDMP characteristics and SD outcomes, research
on SD making has largely neglected the role of information, presumably because
information after traditional financial information. The provision of a detailed and diverse
set of information is supposed to contribute to a company’s performance in the long term
(Druckman and Fries, 2010). Parrot and Tierney (2012) noted that the possibility of linking
financial information with ESG information will result in a higher degree of social
investment, as financial, environmental and social aspects can be taken into account equally
for corporate decision-making. In the same vein, Burke and Clark (2016) stated that a
consideration of both dimensions (non-financial ESG and financial) facilitates decisions,
thereby reducing both costs and reputational risks. This effect is of particular relevance for
SDs, which are crucial for a company’s success and often involve high risks (Cheng et al.,
2014). Furthermore, many companies are evaluated based on not only financial targets but
also non-financial targets (Cohen et al., 2011). Thus, the quality of decisions can be improved
when decision-makers simultaneously consider financial information and non-financial ESG
information (Hampton, 2012).
Dumay et al. (2016) called for further research shedding light on this interplay, which was
designated the principle of integrated thinking by the International Integrated Reporting
Council (IIRC) in the International Integrated Reporting Framework (IIRC, 2013) and
considered one of the major aims of IR. Coulson et al. (2015) added that integrated thinking
can be viewed as the promotion of internal “decision-making that recognizes the
relationships between the six capitals” mentioned by the IIRC. As integrated thinking
becomes embedded in an organization, the interrelations between non-financial and
financial metrics are expected to become clearer, and integrated information presented in
integrated reports and serving as a basis for corporate decisions (e.g. investment decisions)
will become more valuable for investors and managers (Atkins and Maroun, 2015). Investors
are already urging companies to provide more and more non-financial information, and thus
it is inevitable that this information will become relevant within internal communication,
managerial control and decision-making processes. After interviewing several pilot
companies, Druckman and Fries (2010) verified this point and revealed that integrated
thinking drives collaboration between different departments (particularly finance) and leads
to the incorporation of non-financial issues into decision-making.
Both literature streams, SD making and IR, have developed separately with sparsely
overlapping research approaches. However, it seems obvious that integrated information
can influence SD making. Eccles and Krzus (2010) suggested that amending and modifying
information processes in the utilization of integrated information to gather and process
information effectively will lead to an information set of higher quality and
comprehensiveness. Although there is consensus that SDs are backed by both financial
information and non-financial ESG information, the individual importance of these
information types throughout the decision process has not been studied in detail. More
recently, Esch et al. (2019) presented an experimental study on the effects of different
scenarios of information – financial only, financial and non-financial, and integrated The dynamics
information – on the outcome of strategic investment decisions. They showed that the of financial and
provision of integrated information (including financial information and ESG information) non-financial
ceteris paribus leads to decisions with higher sustainable value creation. Although their
experimental design did not consider the variety of internal and external determining information
factors that usually influence SDs, their results clearly indicate that non-financial ESG
information is of high importance for SD makers.
However, how managers evaluate the importance of each of the two associated
dimensions (financial and non-financial ESG), the steps in an SDMP in which one dimension
might outweigh the other, and how the provision of substantially new integrated
information alters recent decision-making processes remain unknown.
3. Methodology
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
As IR is a nascent research field, an inductive approach was adopted (Patton, 2002). The
decision to implement IR has an important impact on an organization, especially on complex
organizational processes and thus a qualitative research approach is appropriate
(Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). The strength of a qualitative approach is the deep and
realistic insights it enables, which make it suitable for this research setting, as this study
sets out to uncover perceptions of senior executives and explore how they use integrated
information to substantiate upcoming SDs. Taking into account that there is only limited
research on the interconnections between the research fields of IR and SD making, our paper
is exploratory in nature. Relying on the strengths of qualitative interviews we attempted to
understand the points of view of 15 senior executives from twelve different industries
(Kvale, 1996). We used semi-structured interviews as they are the most useful in
investigating opinions or complex behaviors (Clifford et al., 2016). We also decided to
conduct face-to-face interviews only (Opdenakker, 2006).
Our sampling strategy relied on a purposive sampling approach (Eisenhardt, 1989)
coupled with maximum variation sampling (Glaser and Strauss, 2009). We applied five
criteria. First, we chose interviewees from companies with more than €500m in revenue
and more than 2,500 employees to exclude small firms with a less formalized approach
to SD making. Second, we chose chief financial officers and heads of controlling
departments as interviewees, as these individuals have responsibility for decision support
within a corporation. We expected that holders of these positions have extensive
knowledge not only on how corporate decision-making is conducted but also on how and
with which kind (financial or non-financial) of information the decision-making process is
supported. Third, to avoid a too-narrow focus, we allowed a certain degree of variation
regarding the positions of the respondents. Accordingly, our sample included managers
with more global or regional focuses (e.g. Head of Finance, Germany). Fourth, to avoid a
potential industry bias we studied multiple industries. Fifth, we chose a sample consisting
of companies engaging in IR, companies that are planning to implement IR, and
companies that are not committed to an IR approach. In particular, we expected that
companies that are not yet engaged in IR would provide information on the potential of
ESG information for SDs.
Following a pre-test of the interview guide, the questions were organized in an easy-to-
follow structure for the interviewees that focused on the importance of non-financial
information in every decision step. Overall, the interview guide was composed of three
different sections containing 16 open-ended questions (see Appendix). A final question was
included and was asked if some important issues were missing. The homogeneous interview
content combined with the high degree of expertise of our interviewees “offers
comprehensive information from smaller interview samples” (Guest et al., 2006). Table I
gives an overview of the participating companies and the interviewees.
JSMA Company Sector Interviewees Integrated reporting Revenue
and financial information and their importance in each of the four steps. The model is
illustrated in Figure 2.
I Non-Financial II III IV
Open Coding Execution Period ESG-Matching Reporting
Determining Factors
1st Dimension
External vs
Conveyance Internal Environmental
information
Reputational Risk Factors
Financial Reporting
Social Factors
Transaction Security
Axial Coding 2nd Dimension
Governance Factors
... Qualitative vs Integrated
Integrated Reporting
Quantitative Information
information
Figure 2.
Use of financial
information
Low High Moderate to high Moderate The strategic decision-
Use of non- making process and
High Low Moderate to high High
financial ESG information its four elements
JSMA One interviewee emphasized the role of reputational considerations in selecting
prospective clients:
[p]rior to every decision to take on a new mandate, we scrutinize prospective clients in two
dimensions. Can we justify doing business with that particular client, and are there any
reputational risks attached to them? (Company H, Head of Finance).
Another respondent provided an example in the same vein:
We use a simplified five-question yes-check procedure to make sure that ESG standards are
adhered to on all management levels (Company I, Head of Capital Resolution).
Another executive pointed out the importance of organizational know-how as an internal
determining factor:
If we do not have the capabilities for setting up a new software tool, there will be no need for a
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
backed by qualitative assumptions and that those assumptions need to be fully understood
(Company G, CFO).
One executive raised the point that qualitative considerations may gain the upper hand if
certain quantitative preconditions are fulfilled satisfactorily:
Our financial evaluation is based on scenario modelling: if profitability exceeds a minimum
threshold, soft factors outweigh financial information (Company M, Vice President Controlling).
The examples discussed above demonstrate that both qualitative and quantitative as well
as financial and non-financial information must be used in combination. This conclusion
received strong support in a statement by one executive:
You need to make sure that qualitative and quantitative information are in harmony with each
other. An overly qualitative evaluation that neglects a truly quantitative subject matter oftentimes
leads to great risk. On the other hand, if you are too quantitatively oriented, you probably will not
reach the strategic breakthrough that truly leads to growth and competitive impetus. You need a
dualism of both (Company D, CFO).
Turning now to the challenges in incorporating integrated information, one executive drew
attention to the fact that quantitative information may be less indicative of the real
implications of a scenario assumption than qualitative information, due to the subjectivity of
processing and evaluating information:
A major challenge involved when including non-financial information into our scenario
modelling is the gap between the publicly perceived and actual risk of certain events occurring. If
we were to build a new nuclear plant, there is a risk of it blowing up. The probability of this
happening is close to zero, and so is the expected value in my business case. But this might be
perceived entirely differently by the public, which would then make it a soft factor (Company J,
Head of Controlling).
The importance of ESG information for SD is highly industry-specific. For instance, for us as a
mechanical and plant engineering firm, health and safety issues are preponderant (Company C, CFO).
Another interviewee supported this view by stating the following:
If I am working in the automotive industry, my products and their image speak on my behalf.
Pharmaceuticals producers have a genuinely different appearance in the perception of the public.
This requires us to communicate way more intensely as to the qualitative characteristics of our
products and their implications, which is something we as a finance department have been doing
for several years and keep on supporting (Company K, Head of Finance and Accounting).
These statements highlight that pure ESG information differs in nature and importance
depending on the industry a company operates in, whereas broader restricting factors, as
described earlier, exist uniformly across industries. Moreover, traditional ESG information,
in the context of integrated thinking, addresses mainly external issues and is therefore
considered constraining rather than beneficial in nature, as the requirements that
accompany the acquisition of ESG information are often viewed as the originator forcing
companies to think about more complex, targeted and differentiated strategies.
4.4 Reporting
Whereas ESG matching focuses on how companies need to adapt due to changes in external
reporting requirements, this section is concerned with the nature of these changes themselves. It
was commonly appreciated by the interviewees that existing non-financial external reporting
requirements, such as CSR reports and sustainability reports, must be adhered to. As stressed
by one executive, however, companies also face external pressure from their investors, which
obliges them to apply comprehensive corporate reporting systems and processes:
There certainly are investors who require us to fulfil particular non-financial criteria, for instance,
sustainability-related ones, who will not invest in our company if we do not stick to these
requirements (Company G, CFO).
A similar view was taken by another interviewee, who stated:
Non-financial information matters primarily for public perception, unless internal guidelines
prescribe non-financial investment criteria such as CO2 emission limits (Company E, CFO).
Although all participants agreed on the need to meet external reporting requirements,
a particular aspect that remains to be considered is the nature of targets defined and
reported publicly:
The question is: do we set absolute or relative non-financial targets? (Company J, Head
of Controlling).
This distinction is relevant from both internal and external perspectives. Absolute targets The dynamics
increase the degree of pressure imposed by external communication because they evoke of financial and
expectations among stakeholders that might not be fulfilled as satisfactorily as relative targets. non-financial
information
5. Discussion and conclusion
The literature on IR has repeatedly claimed that integrated information, which was
originally developed for external reporting, can also be useful for (internal) SDs (Burke
and Clark, 2016; Mio et al., 2016; Feng et al., 2017). The integration of financial information
and non-financial ESG information provides higher information quality for SD makers
and results in decisions that enhance the long-term performance of firms ( Jensen and
Berg, 2012). Linking both types of information will help decision-makers understand the
combined financial and ESG implications of strategies and thus foster integrated thinking
(Feng et al., 2017).
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
Recent experimental research has shown that the provision of integrated financial
information and non-financial ESG information changes the decision-making behavior
of individual decision-makers and leads to SDs with higher sustainable value creation
(Esch et al., 2019). This was shown in an experimental setting with simplified scenarios of
SDs. However, research thus far has not considered how SD makers in a real-world setting
use financial information and non-financial ESG information throughout the different
phases of an SDMP. Following a call for research on the internal benefits of IR and
integrated thinking (Churet and Eccles, 2014), in the present paper we aimed to answer two
related research questions:
RQ1. How and to what extent is non-financial ESG information considered alongside
financial information in each phase of an SDMP?
RQ2. What are the dynamics of these two types of information?
Regarding the first question, we found that both financial information and non-financial
ESG information are perceived as crucial resources for SDMPs. We also found that the
dynamics of financial information and non-financial ESG information is complex, as the
relative importance of information varies throughout the decision process (see Figure 2).
While non-financial information takes precedence in the first phase of the decision process,
its importance significantly decreases in the execution period. At this stage, financial
information is considered almost exclusively. In the third and fourth phases of the decision
process, the importance of non-financial information increases again as companies ensure
that contingent effects associated with the decision are in line with externally communicated
objectives. Accordingly, the importance of financial information diminishes at this stage of
the process. This analysis also shows that solely focusing on the interplay between financial
and non-financial information is delimiting in scope. The challenges of SD making discussed
earlier show that the interplay between quantitative and qualitative information and the
interplay between internal and external data are also important. Both need to be considered
and are constituents of integrated information, which plays a vital role in practice. Our
findings provide empirical support for the repeated claim that integrated financial
information and non-financial ESG information can also be useful for internal decision-
making (Burke and Clark, 2016; Mio et al., 2016; Vaz et al., 2016; Feng et al., 2017).
Another important finding in this context is that the use of financial information and
non-financial ESG information was reported by all types of firms, i.e., firms that have
already implemented IR, firms that are currently implementing IR and firms that have not
yet implemented IR. Likewise, both types of information are used in all phases of the SDMP
although to varying degrees (see Figure 2). This finding challenges the commonly held
assumption that the implementation of IR promotes the development of integrated thinking
JSMA (Feng et al., 2017). It rather supports the assumption of a reversed causality. As recently
portrayed by Al-Htaybat and von Alberti-Alhtaybat (2018), integrated thinking can also be
a precursor of IR.
Considering the second research question, our results reveal a differentiated picture of
the dynamics of financial information and non-financial ESG information in the SDMP. This
complements previous research which investigated the role and consequences of the use of
integrated information in other management functions such as management control
systems (Mio et al., 2016). From our interview material, a categorization emerged along the
dimensions of the data’s source (internal or external), its nature (quantitative or qualitative),
and the type of data (financial or non-financial). When asked about non-financial ESG
information, executives tended to speak also about qualitative information in general, and
vice versa. Figure 3 provides an overview of the three identified dimensions.
Our research reveals that the principle of integrated thinking incorporates not only ESG
information but also important aspects such as non-financial determining factors, which, in
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
1st Dimension
Refers the interplay between external and
internal information
2nd Dimension
Integrated Information
Refers the interplay between qualitative and
quantitative information
References
Al-Htaybat, K. and von Alberti-Alhtaybat, L. (2018), “Integrated thinking leading to integrated
reporting: case study insights from a global player”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 1435-1460.
Atkins, J. and Maroun, W. (2015), “Integrated reporting in South Africa in 2012 – perspectives
from South African institutional investors”, Meditari Accountancy Research, Vol. 23 No. 2,
pp. 197-221.
Briem, C. and Wald, A. (2018), “Implementing third-party assurance in integrated reporting. companies’
motivation and auditors’ role”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 31 No. 5,
pp. 1461-1485.
Bryman, A. (2016), Social Research Methods, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Burke, J. and Clark, C.E. (2016), “The business case for integrated reporting: insights from leading
practitioners, regulators, and academics”, Business Horizons, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 273-283.
Calabrese, A., Costa, R., Levialdi, N. and Menichini, T. (2019), “Integrating sustainability into strategic
decision-making: a fuzzy AHP method for the selection of relevant sustainability issues”,
Technological Forecating & Social Change, Vol. 139, pp. 155-168.
JSMA Cheng, M.M., Green, W.J. and Ko, J.C.W. (2014), “The impact of strategic relevance and assurance of
sustainability indicators on investors’ decisions”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory,
Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 131-162.
Choo, C.W. (1996), “The knowing organization: how organizations use information to construct
meaning, create knowledge and make decisions”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 329-340.
Churet, C. and Eccles, R.G. (2014), “Integrated reporting, quality of management, and financial
performance”, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 56-64.
Citroen, C.L. (2011), “The role of information in strategic decision-making”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 493-501.
Clifford, N., Cope, M., Gillespie, T. and French, S. (2016), Key Methods in Geography, Sage Publidations,
London.
Cohen, J., Holder-Webb, L., Nath, L. and Wood, D. (2011), “Retail investors’ perceptions of the
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
Krzus, M.P. (2011), “Integrated reporting: if not now, when?”, Zeitschrift fuer Internationale
Rechnungslegung, Vol. 6 No. 6, pp. 271-276.
Kvale, S. (1996), Interviews. An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Mantere, S. (2008), “Role expectations and middle manager strategic agency”, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 294-316.
Meadow, C.T. and Yuan, W. (1997), “Measuring the impact of information: defining the concepts”,
Information Processing & Management, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 697-714.
Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D. and Theoret, A. (1976), “The structure of ‘unstructured’ decision
processes”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 246-275.
Mio, C., Marco, F. and Pauluzzo, R. (2016), “Internal application of IR principles: generali’s internal
integrated reporting”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 139, December, pp. 204-218.
Oliver, J., Vesty, G. and Brooks, A. (2016), “Conceptualising integrated thinking in practice”,
Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 228-248.
Opdenakker, R. (2006), “Advantages and disadvantages of four interview techniques in qualitative
research”, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 1-13.
Papadakis, V.M., Lioukas, S. and Chambers, D. (1998), “Strategic decision-making processes: the role of
management and context”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 115-147.
Parrot, K.W. and Tierney, B.X. (2012), “Integrated reporting, stakeholder engagement, and balanced
investing at American electric power”, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol. 24 No. 2,
pp. 27-37.
Patton, M.Q. (2002), Qualitative Interviewing. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Rinaldi, L., Unerman, J. and de Villiers, C. (2018), “Evaluating the integrated reporting journey: insights,
gaps and agendas for future research”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 31
No. 5, pp. 1294-1318.
Schwenk, C.R. (1995), “Strategic decision-making”, Journal of Management, Vol. 21 No. 3,
pp. 471-493.
Shepherd, N.G. and Rudd, J.M. (2014), “The influence of context on the strategic decision-making
process: a review of the literature”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 16 No. 3,
pp. 340-364.
Simnett, R. and Huggins, A.L. (2015), “Integrated reporting and assurance: where can research add
value?”, Sustainability Accounting Management and Policy Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 29-53.
Spiggle, S. (1994), “Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 491-503.
JSMA Steyn, M. (2014), “Senior executives’ perspectives of integrated reporting regulatory regimes as
a mechanism for advancing sustainability in South African listed companies”, Southern African
Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 142-174.
Vaz, N., Fernandez‐Feijoo, B. and Ruiz, S. (2016), “Integrated reporting: an international overview”,
Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 577-591.
Vecchiato, R. (2019), “Scenario planning, cognition, and strategic investment decisions in a turbulent
environment”, Long Range Planning, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2019.01.002
Further reading
Miller, D. (1987), “Strategy making and structure: analysis and implications for performance”, Academy
of Management Journal, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 7-32.
Zhao, S., Papanastassiou, M., Bassiakos, Y., Sinani, E. and Pearce, R. (2018), “Unfolding the
intra-organizational perception gap in decision-making”, in Castellani, D., Narula, R.,
Downloaded by SYDDANSK UNIVERSITET At 10:13 20 May 2019 (PT)
Nguyen, Q.T.K., Surdu, I. and Walker, J.T. (Eds), Contemporary Issues in International
Business. Institutions, Strategy and Performance, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 171-189.
Appendix
Interview guide:
(1) Company information and background: organization, strategy, individual position, etc.
(2) Which types of (strategic) decision are made based on which data?
(3) Which role does (management) reporting play for these decisions?
(4) Please characterize a typical strategic decision-making process in your company.
(5) For which decisions do you consider integrated information (financial vs non-financial ESG)?
Follow-up: if not, do you think this will change in the future and how?
(6) For which type of decision is it useful to consider integrated information?
(7) Which type of non-financial information is crucial for you? Follow-up: ESG information
in particular?
(8) Do you think that certain types of decisions will gain importance in the future? Which ones?
(9) Within this context: how will the reporting format and contend (e.g. the integration of financial
and non-financial information) change?
(10) How will the integration of information affect strategic management?
Corresponding author
Mike Schulze can be contacted at: m.schulze@ems.de
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com