CSR reporting and assurance legitimacy: a client–assuror dyad investigation

Abstract

Purpose Drawing on new insights from the experiences and perspectives of a prominent reporting client and its assurance team, the purpose of this paper is to explore the question: what are challenges to the legitimacy of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting and assurance? Design/methodology/approach Using a qualitative research approach, in-depth, semi-structured interviews are conducted with a Fortune 200 firm’s Vice President responsible for CSR oversight (including CSR reporting), and with the report’s assurance team from a Top 20 accounting firm. Questions are informed by existing literature, and analysis focuses on new insights that conform to, or contrast with, prior studies in areas that may challenge the legitimacy of CSR reporting. Findings The study documents that reporting and assurance may often serve the respective commercial and professional interests of the firm and the assuror, rather than providing accountability to the public interest. Specifically, the authors find that legitimacy-challenging instances of managerial capture of CSR reporting may co-exist in a firm with management-as-CSR-champion, in contrast with existing literature. Prior research has assumed these two constructs are not likely to co-exist within a single organization. The interviews suggest that managerial influence is fostered by the lack of reporting standards and the absence of agreement regarding the over-arching purpose of CSR reports and their assurance. Research limitations/implications Going forward, researchers should consider the multifaceted role management can play in CSR reporting and assurance, rather than treating managerial capture and management-as-champion as mutually exclusive. Future research could also examine how standards may balance desired comparability with flexibility in CSR reporting. Practical implications The study will interest report users who may assume that a seemingly supportive management would not play a restrictive role in the reporting and assurance processes. Reporters and assurors will benefit from reading the perspectives provided by professionals engaged in similar work, including the challenges they face, such as the consequences resulting from the lack of standards for CSR reporting and assurance. Originality/value The study is the first to provide a behind-the-scenes view of the report–assuror dyad by interviewing both the reporting firm and the assurance team engaged on the same CSR report.