财务报表附注披露的分析【外文翻译】

财务报表附注披露的分析【外文翻译】 外文文献翻译译文 原文: Manufacturing Corporate Identities: An Analysis of Financial Statement Footnote Disclosures Financial reporting of organizational performance is facilitated primarily through financial statements and the related supplemental disclosures found in the annual report or Form 10-K. Standardized financial statements, such as the income statement, balance sheet and statement of cash flows, are mostly uniform in format and thus provide for inter-firm comparisons of various financial metrics. This ―boilerplate‖ format provides for simple ―net income‖ or ―current assets‖ comparisons between firms given the uniformity of the content contained within each financial statement; however, there are supplemental disclosures contained within these reports that should provide additional information to illuminate and thereby enhance the financial statement content. We previously studied a McDonald-ized or scripted boilerplate discourse in place for corporate financial reporting that extended beyond the financial statement format (Hillon & Smith, 2004). Due to the lack of specific requirements on management discussion and analysis and financial disclosure footnote formatting, the prevailing theory on organizational identity suggests that firms should use financial narratives to differentiate themselves from their competitors thereby manufacturing their corporate identity. Given this, we expected to find a wide array of supplemental reporting content that was also as unique and differentiable as the firms themselves. To test this we obtained a random sample from the S&P 500 Index of firms and examined the frequency distributions of the number of footnotes and related page number totals contained in each of the supplemental financial footnote disclosures from each firm within our sample. We found a clustering tendency, which is suggestive of a homogeneous rather than heterogeneous firm identity. We next performed a content analysis of the supplemental footnote disclosures. When we categorized the footnotes by actual title using the firm with the fewest number of footnotes as the minimum, over 70% of the sample firms had identical or similar footnote titles. We then analyzed the related footnote content and found an even stronger relationship with over 90% of the firms reporting the same or similar content. The implications of our preliminary findings are important in light of corporate identity as they are more supportive of a homogeneous reporting regiment rather than a heterogeneous firm identity. We conclude with these implications and the need for further research in this area. The origins of research into organizational identity can be traced back much further than the field of organization studies itself. For instance, the looking-glass self was a phrase coined by one of the luminaries in the field of sociology (Cooley, 1909) to describe the construction of identity as a reflexive socialization process. We look into the mirror of society to see how others view and judge our behavior, and over time, a distinctive identity is shaped and constructed (Tischler, 2002). Corporate identities can also be viewed as the products of reflexive social interaction, as annual reports, financial disclosures, and feedback from both shareholders and regulating entities constitute a process that is analogous to looking into a mirror to both assess and influence the perceptions of society. Glynn, Barr, & Dacin (2000, p. 730-731) have observed that ―because an identity is self- reflexive, it influences how the organization’s strategic issues are defined and resolved.‖ However, the major difficulty in assessing the social influences on identity construction is the necessity of identifying the salient contextual factors that enable separation of an organization from its environment, as well as categorization of components within the organization. This continual search for novel dimensions of comparison implies that social identities never completely coalesce around static values and terminal meaning. Also, the concepts of status and legitimacy are presumed to be transient. Hence, motivated by an imbalance in social status, an organization that compares unfavorably in strategic competencies to its competitors may attempt to showcase other more favorable attributes to enhance its identity (Chattopadhyay, Tluchowska, & George, 2004). Hogg&Terry (2002, p. 125) suggested that benchmarking with a set of differentially prestigious organizations is ―one way in which organizations may deliberately manipulate the inter-group social comparative context.‖ Financial data in both quantitative and qualitative form is the lingua franca of benchmarking studies, thus, within a social identity theory frame; one would expect to find salient differences in form and content of all such identity defining prototypes. For our study, this implies that creative responses to ameliorate the perceived inequalities among corporations should appear, at least from time to time, in the identity construction tools available to each organization. Thus, we should expect to occasionally see distinctive form and content in the financial metrics and narratives of corporate disclosures. At the very least, we should expect to see some form of stratification based on prestige or attempts at social mobility. Previous research has suggested a need for further exploration of this phenomenon, as Hillon and Smith’s (2004) financial socialization pilot study found more of a McDonaldized or scripted ―boilerplate‖ discourse in place for corporate financial reporting. Due to the lack of specific requirements on management discussion and analysis and financial footnote disclosure formatting, the prevailing theory on organizational identity suggests that firms should use these financial narratives and metrics to differentiate themselves from their competitors. The capital markets need financial information to differentiate firms and thereby avoid the problem of adverse selection. According to Scott (2003, p. 11- 12): to understand how financial accounting can help to control the adverse selection problem, it is desirable to have an appreciation of how investors make decisions. This is because knowledge of investor decision processes is essential if the accountant is to know what information they need. The accounting reaction to securities market efficiency has been full disclosure, that is, the supplying of large amounts of information to help investors make their own predictions of future firm performance. The form of the disclosure does not matter – it can be in notes, or in supplementary disclosures such as reserve recognition accounting and management discussion and analysis, in addition to the financial statements proper. From another perspective, the FASB issued a pronouncement addressing the usefulness of financial disclosures in Statement of Financial Accounting Concept (SFAC) Number 2. This authoritative pronouncement essentially defined the relevance of financial information in assisting the financial statement users to form their own understanding of financial events relative to their expectations. In addition to present events, the financial information can also assist the user in forming predictions of events such as future profitability. SFAC 2 (1996, p. 1035) stated in part: Relevant accounting information is capable of making a difference in a decision by helping users to form predictions about outcomes of past, present, and future events or to confirm or correct prior expectations. Information can make a difference to decisions by improving decision makers’ capacities to predict or by providing feedback on earlier expectations. Usually, information does both at once, because knowledge about the outcomes of actions already taken will generally improve decision makers’ abilities to predict the results of similar future actions. Without knowledge of the past, the basis for a prediction will usually be lacking. Without an interest in the future, knowledge of the past is sterile. From an organizational perspective, Scott (1981, p. 89) noted that ―interaction with the environment is essential for open system functioning.‖ Information is an essential link between the firm and the environment in which it operates and the financial information disseminated by a firm is extremely important to outside investors and financial decision-makers, the primary constituents of the capital markets. Authoritative literature in accounting and management presupposes that the financial information disclosed by management will be understood and appropriately utilized by the capital markets (Jones & Shoemaker, 1994), regardless of the accounting methods applied. However, as the gatekeeper to essentially perfect information about the firm, management controls access to sensitive proprietary information. Accordingly, management selectively offers information disclosures to the capital markets, rather than all firm information, in order to shape its corporate identity. The FASB stated in SFAC 1 (1996, p. 1018) that: ―the usefulness of financial information as an aid to investors, creditors, and others in forming expectations about a business enterprise may be enhanced by management’s explanations of the information. Management knows more about the enterprise and its affairs than investors, creditors, and other ―outsiders‖. Given that it has this superior information management may choose to selectively communicate financial information to those outside of the firm by means of financial disclosures. Thus, management must balance the needs for disseminating information in the interest of securities market efficiency against its own needs for continually shaping and constructing its social identity. The FAS addressed this responsibility for balance reporting by management in SFAC1 (1996, p. 1014) as follows: Financial reporting should provide information that is useful to present and potential investors and creditors and other users in making rational investment, credit, and similar decisions. The information should be comprehensible to those who have a reasonable understanding of business and economic activities and are willing to study the information with reasonable diligence. In light of management’s dual purposes for information dissemination, we cannot overemphasize the necessity for users of their financial disclosures to exercise due diligence in attaining a balanced understanding of the information content to thus make judicious investment decisions. Failure to fully observe and comprehend all of the disclosed financial information does not adversely impact the quality of the financial information. However, such a partial view into Cooley’s (1909 looking-glass of reflexive identity would likely distort the reflected image, contrary to the firm’s intent. Thus, in anticipation of potential image distortion, we would expect firms to overemphasize, rather than underplay, their salient and distinctive features through al channels at their disposal. Supplemental financial disclosures were intended by the FASB to aid in clarifying the unique business circumstances that arise in the life of every firm. Information reifies the corporate identity, and thus, we would expect supplemental financial disclosures to enable investors to further differentiate among firms. To test this assertion, we turned our attention to a practical assessment of the management’s use of financial information as a versatile too of corporate identity construction. Methods We took a random sample of 30 companies from the Standard and Poor 500 Index and then obtained the latest year end annual report or Form 10k for each firm selected. Next, we analyzed the form and content of the footnote disclosures for the financial statements contained therein with both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Supplemental footnote disclosures provide needed illumination of the basic set of required financial statements contained in each annual report or Form 10k. These minimum expectations for statement disclosures quite rationally should lead to a uniform ―boilerplate‖ financial statement format, as ―organizational fields establish norms that create cognitive expectations for other organizations to follow‖ (Glynn, Barr, & Dacin, 2000, p. 730). However, the same line of reasoning should not apply to the form and content of supplemental footnotes that purport to illuminate firm-specific elements of the financial statements. Hence, one should very reasonably not expect to find them presented in a uniform or ―boiler plate‖ format. Next, to facilitate a quantitative content analysis, we began by counting the number of footnote disclosures as well as the related number of pages from each company report from our sample set. These supplemental footnote disclosures provide needed illumination of the basic set of required financial statements contained in each annual report or Form 10-K. While we concede the necessity of a uniform ―boiler plate‖ financial statement format our concern was that the supplemental footnotes that provide additional specific information in order to illuminate the financial statements were not themselves a uniform or ―boiler plate‖ format. We then observed the frequency distributions of the total number of footnotes and the total number of pages containing the footnote disclosures for each firm. After counting the total number of footnotes and related number of total pages contained in each company report and assessing the sample through descriptive statistics, our next step was to classify and categorize the footnote disclosures by title and then content. We designated the firm with the fewest number of footnotes as our minimum value disclosure and then compared the other firms in the sample by footnote title and then by content to that minimum value firm. Similarities and differences were then observed for both footnote title used as well as for actual footnote content. For purposes of categorization, our table for the footnote titles consisted of a matrix with the actual titles used in the minimum number of notes firm with four categories of footnote titles classified as either: (a) Same, (b) Similar, (c) Different, or (d) Not Found For a footnote title to be classified as ―Same‖ the title would have to be identical. For example, the footnote title Income Taxes was found in the minimum footnote firm. Thus, for any firm to be categorized as ―Same,‖ the title would have to be labeled identically as Income Taxes. A footnote title of Provision for Income Taxes would be classified as ―Similar,‖ as the title includes income Taxes, but is not strictly identical. If references to income taxes were included in a footnote section under a title such as Deferred Obligations, then the classification would be ―Different.‖ Finally, if there were no provision for income taxes in the disclosure notes and thus, no related footnote title, then ―Not Found‖ would be the appropriate classification. We then reviewed the footnote titles matrix for any related content of the footnote disclosures The purpose of this exhaustive review was to further clarify the categorization of the footnotes by incorporating the content. For example, Firm A may have had lease activity disclosed in the footnotes under the title of ―Leases‖. Firm B may have also had leasing activities but disclosed the content in a footnote titled―Commitments‖. By only considering the footnote titles Firm A would be categorized as having lease related disclosures whereas Firm B would not be categorized with leasing activities. This potential obfuscation is thus mitigated when content is considered for purposes of categorization. Accordingly, both firms would be properly categorized as―Similar‖ in the footnote content matrix and thereby elucidate the similarities among firms that may not be apparent by only considering the footnote titles. A presentation and discussion of the descriptive statistics for our analysis follows in the next section. Conclusion Our initial findings are suggestive of a homogeneous rather than heterogeneous regiment of supplemental financial disclosures. In concluding that firms apparently use their supplemental financial disclosures to decrease distinctiveness among peers, we end this study with a better empirical understanding of the complex phenomenon of corporate identity construction. However, the theoretical assumptions of differentiation from previous research may need to be reconsidered in light of our preliminary findings and thus may require that we now consider other sources to provide a more meaningful theoretical basis for future research. Echoing Albert & Whetten (1985), Pratt & Foreman (2000) explored how organizations manage the multiple competing and often conflicting identities within the collective by assessing their self-identified central, distinctive, and enduring attributes. One of the strategic benefits of a diversity of identities noted in their study is that a minimal set of identities serves to increase the organization’s repertoire of responses to a complex environment. In essence, a corporate identity is the superficial reflection of the organization’s underlying requisite variety. We attempted to extend this line of reasoning by positing that the firm’s financial disclosures should also constitute just such a superficial representation of the underlying distinctive competencies. The strategic competitive advantage of an organization must in some way distinguish it from its competitors, therefore we quite reasonably expected to see specific and unique features in the form and content of the annual reports-established tools of social identity construction-for the S&P 500 firms in our random sample. Ironically, a strategic focus on core competencies to create a distinctive competitive advantage can work against adaptive capacity by reducing variety within the organization (Glynn, Barr, & Dacin, 2000). Hence, a possible explanation for the apparent propensity of firms to manufacture standardized corporate identities through their financial disclosures is that many organizations are pursuing variety-reducing strategies to differentiate themselves. In contrast to this strategic orientation, Glynn & Abzug (2002, p. 267) followed an institutional theory frame in arguing that symbolic isomorphism or ―the resemblance of an organization’s symbolic attributes to those of other organizations within its institutional field‖ conveys legitimacy. Our theoretical contribution beyond those of the two previous research citations was to show that both strategic and symbolic isomorphism were not confined by industry, inter-organizational, or institutional fields, as our sample was randomly drawn from the entire S&P 500. Therefore, our findings suggest that these theoretical explanations may be insufficient for exploring identity construction. A more expansive secondary socialization (Berger & Luckmann, 1966) model of organizational identity, as indicated by previous research (Hillon & Smith, 2004), may be necessary in order to capture and comprehend a more profound perspective on identity construction through financial narratives and other disclosures of organizational performance. Such an approach could feasibly provide broader theoretical support for the clash of objectives observed in firms pursuing variety-reducing strategies while simultaneously attempting to create distinctive corporate identities. While we initially attempted to analyze the process of corporate identity construction through supplemental footnote disclosures, we now realize that we have only taken a first step toward revealing the true nature of an apparently homogeneous ―boilerplate‖ supplemental disclosure regiment. Additional research to examine the Management Discussion and Analysis (MDA) section of the annual reports may be needed to provide further insight into this identity de-constructing affinity for standardized reporting and information disclosure. Source: Smith, William L Vol.4 Issue 1/2 p120-129, 10p 译文: 制造企业特性:财务报表附注披露的分析 有效执行的财务报告主要是通过财务报表和年度报告或10 - K表格找到的相关补充披露来简化。 标准 excel标准偏差excel标准偏差函数exl标准差函数国标检验抽样标准表免费下载红头文件格式标准下载 化的财务报表，如损益表、资产负债表和现金流量表，大多是统一 格式 pdf格式笔记格式下载页码格式下载公文格式下载简报格式下载 同时提供公司内各种财务指标间的比较。这种“标准”格式为财务报表内容一致的公司提供简单的“净收入”或“流动资产”的比较，但是包含在这些报告的补充披露，应提供更多信息，以阐明并增强财务报表的内容。 我们以前研究了麦当劳式或以其为脚本的 样本 保单样本pdf木马病毒样本下载上虞风机样本下载直线导轨样本下载电脑病毒样本下载 论文，以取代超出财务报表格式(希尔顿与史密斯，2004)的公司财务报告。由于缺乏关于管理层讨论和分析的明确要求和附注格式的财务披露，关于组织认同的普遍理论表明，公司应使用财务叙事法以将其与自己的竞争对手加以区分，从而产生自己的企业形象。鉴于此，我们期望找到一种补充报告内容广泛的阵列，与公司本身来讲，内容也将是独一无二和不同寻常的。为了检验这一点，我们获得了一个多家公司标准普尔500指数的随机样本，并且从样本中检查了每家公司附注页码在补充财务附注披露相关页码总数中的分配比率。我们发现了一个聚类趋势，这暗示着他们是同质企业，而非异质企业。接下来我们对补充附注披露做了一个内容分析。当我们通过实际使用最低数量最少脚注的公司名称分类，超过70%的抽样公司有相同或相似的脚注标题。然后，我们分析了相关的附注内容，发现一个更大的联系，90%以上的公司在报告着相同或相似的内容。我们对于企业身份的初步调查结果意义重大，因为这一发现更加支持了他们是同质的报告群而非异质企业身份的结论。我们从这些暗示中得出了结论，还需要对这个领域作进一步的研究。 对企业认同的研究起源可以追溯到比对企业本身的研究领域更远。例如，镜子本身是一位社会学家(库利，1909年)创造的词汇，用以描述身份构成是社会进程的反映。我们从社会这面镜子中看到，别人如何看待和判断我们的行为，随着时间的推移，就形成和构建了一个独特的身份(Tischler，2002)。公司身份也可以被视为社会互动的反映产物，因为年度报告、财务披露以及来自于股东和监管机构的反馈组成了一个过程，这个过程类似于通过镜子影响与评估社会的看法。 格林、巴尔与达西(2000年，第730至731页)已经观察到:―因为身份是自 我反射的，所以它会影响企业的关键事务的确定和解决。‖然而，评估社会对身份建构影响的最大困难在于，必须辨明企业内能区分企业本身与环境以及组成类别的显著的背景因素。对于比照的新颖角度的不断研究表明，社会身份从来不会与静态价值和终极意义完全融合。而且，人们认为地位和合法性的概念是短暂的。因此，由于社会地位的失衡所导致，在关键竞争力上不能与其竞争对手相比的企业，可能会尝试展示其他更有利的属性，以提高自己的身份。(Chattopadhyay，Tluchowska，与乔治，2004)。 霍格与特里(2002年，第125页)认为，一套不同声望的企业的标杆管理法是“企业可能故意操控团体间社会比较背景的一种方式。”在一个社会身份的理论框架中，数量和质量表格中的财务数据是标杆管理法研究的通用语言;人们会期望从所有这些界定原型身份的形式和内容中发现显著差异。对于我们的研究而言，这意味着，应该出现创造性的回应以减轻企业间已经注意到的不平等，至少不时地使每个企业能够获得身份建构方法。因此，我们会期待偶尔会看到公司披露的财务和叙述中独特的形式和内容。至少，我们会期望看到某种基于名望的分层形式或者社会流动性上的尝试。 此前的研究已经表明了对这一现象进行更进一步探索的需要，因为希尔顿?史密斯(2004)的金融社会化试点研究发现了更多，麦当劳式的或者以其为脚本的样本论文披露取代了公司财务报告。由于缺乏关于管理层讨论和分析的明确要求和附注格式的财务披露，关于组织认同的普遍理论表明，公司应使用财务叙事法以将其与自己的竞争对手加以区分，从而产生自己的企业形象。资本市场需要财务信息以区分企业从而避免逆向选择问题。据斯科特(2003年，第11到12页):想了解财务会计如何能帮助控制逆向选择问题，人们需要理解投资者是如何作出决定的。这是因为投资者决策过程的知识是必不可少的，如果会计师想知道他们需要什么信息的话。证券市场效益的会计反应已经得到了充分披露，也就是说，大量的信息提供给了投资者，帮助他们对未来的公司表现作出自己的预测。披露的形式并不重要——可以是注释，或是辅助披露譬如储备确认结算和管理层讨论与分析，另外财务报表是恰当的。 从另一个角度来看，财务会计准则委员会在《财务会计概念公告二》中发表了一份声明，以说明财务披露的作用。这部权威性声明实质上明确了财务信息是 有关联性的，有助于财务报表使用者对预期金融事件的理解。除了目前的事件，财务信息也有助于使用者对事件譬如未来盈利能力进行预测。《财务会计概念公告二》(1996，第1035页)部分表述:通过帮助用户预测过去、现在和未来事件的结果，或者确认和改正之前的预期，相关的会计信息能够导致决定的不同。通过提高决策者的预测能力或提供先前预期的反馈，信息可以导致不同的决定。通常，信息一次能够做到，因为已经采取行动的结果知识将普遍提高决策者预测今后类似行动的能力。如果没有过去的知识，预测的基础通常是缺乏的。而如果没有对未来的兴趣，过去的知识是无用的。 从组织的角度来看，斯科特(1981年，第89页)指出:―与环境的相互作用是开放式系统运作的关键。‖信息是企业与其经营环境的必要联系，企业传播的财务信息对于外部投资者、金融决策者和资本市场的主要组成是极为重要的。会计与管理的权威文献假设，不论采用何种会计处理方法，资本市场都能理解和恰当地利用管理层披露的财务信息(琼斯?舒梅克，1994)。然而，管理层像门卫一样控制了敏感财产信息的入口，对企业信息进行实质上的完善。相应地，管理层有选择地向资本市场提供信息披露，而不是所有的企业信息，以塑造其企业形象。 美国财务会计标准委员会在《财务会计概念公告一》提到(1996年，第1018页):―通过管理层阐释信息，财务信息对于帮助投资者、债权人以及其他人形成对商业企业的预期作用可能增强。管理层要比投资者、债权人以及其他―外人‖更了解企业及其事务。 考虑到其优越的信息，管理层可能有选择地通过财务披露将财务信息向公司外部传达。因此，管理层必须平衡按照证券市场的需要传播信息与不断地塑造和构建其社会身份这两者间的需求，在《财务会计概念公告一》(1996年，1014页)中，财务会计准则提到了管理层平衡报告的责任，内容如下: 财务报告应该向现有及潜在的投资者、债权人以及其他用户提供有用的信息，使他们能够作出理智的投资、借贷以及其他类似决定，而对于那些对商业和经济活动有合理理解并愿意以合理注意研究信息的人，这些信息应该是可以理解的。 鉴于管理层关于信息传播的双重目的，我们不能强求他们的财务披露用户， 在获取信息的平衡理解方面必须施以合理的注意，并且心甘情愿地由此作出明智的投资决定。 未能完整观察和理解所有被披露的财务信息，并不能对财务信息的质量产生负面影响。然而，这一源于库利斯(1909年)反映身份的―镜子‖的不完全的观点，将很可能扭曲反映的形象，这与公司的意图相悖。因此，预计到可能出现的形象失真，我们希望公司通过其披露渠道，大力强化其显著而与众不同的特征，而非轻描淡写。财务会计准则委员会扩展了补充性财务信息披露，目的在于明晰每家企业生命中产生的独一无二的商业环境。信息具化了企业形象，因此我们希望，补充财务披露能使投资者进一步区分不同的公司。为了验证这一说法，我们把注意力转向管理层将财务信息作为公司身份建构的多功能工具的现实评估。 方法 我们提取了一个来自30家标准普尔500指数成分股公司的随机样本，然后获取了每家样本公司最近一年年末的年报或10K报表。接下来，我们分析了其中包含定量和定性的方法的财务报表附注披露的格式和内容。补充性的附注披露为每份年度报告或10k中包含的财务报表提供了基本的阐释，这些对报表披露的最低期望会相当理性地产生一个统一的― 模板 个人简介word模板免费下载关于员工迟到处罚通告模板康奈尔office模板下载康奈尔 笔记本 模板 下载软件方案模板免费下载 ‖财务报表格式，如―组织领域制定规范以创设可认知的预期使其他组织遵循‖(格林、巴尔与达希，2000年，第730页)。然而，同样的推理思路不应适用于补充附注的格式和内容，因为补充附注旨在阐释财务报表中的企业特有元素。因此，人们会很理智地不去期望会在一个统一或模板格式中发现附注披露。接下来，要使定量内容分析变得容易，我们开始计算样本公司报告中附注披露的数目以及相关页数，这些补充性的附注披露为每份年度报告或10k中包含的财务报表提供了基本的阐释。虽然我们承认财务报表格式的统一模板是必要的，但是我们担心的是，提供额外具体信息以阐释财务报表的补充附注本身并不是一个统一的或―模板‖式的格式。然后，我们观察了每家企业附注披露中，附注总数占总页数的分配比率。 在计算了各公司报告中附注总数和总页数的相关数目，并通过描述性的统计数据评估样本后，我们下一个步是对附注披露先按标题再按内容进行分门别类。我们指定附注最少的公司作为我们的最小值披露，然后先按附注标题再按内容将样本中其他公司与其作比较。 随后在使用的附注标题和实际的附注内容中发现了共性和差异。出于分类的目的，我们的附注标题表格由一个矩阵组成，这个矩阵根据最少附注公司的现有标题将附注标题分为四类:(a) 相同，(b) 相似，(c) 不同，或(d) 未发现。一个附注标题要被分类为―相同‖，标题就必须是相同的。例如，在最少附注公司中发现了附注标题―所得税‖。因此，对于任何被归类为―相同‖的公司，标题就必须同样标有―所得税‖。而一个―所得税备提‖的附注标题将被就要被分类为―相似‖，因为标题包含所得税，但并非严格同一。如果提到的所得税是包含在一个标题比如―递延义务‖下的附注部分，那么就分到―不同‖项下。最后，如果在披露叙述中没有所得税备提，那么分到―未发现‖项下就是适当的。随后，我们根据附注披露的相关内容检查一下附注标题矩阵。 详尽检查的目的是结合内容对附注分类作进一步明晰。例如，A公司可能已经在―租赁‖标题项下的附注中披露了租赁行为，B公司可能也有租赁行为，但将内容披露在了标为―债务‖的附注中。如果仅考虑附注标题，A公司就会被分类为有与披露相关的租赁行为，而B公司就不会按照租赁行为分类。因而当以内容为分类目的而加以考虑时，就会减轻这种可能的混淆。相应地，两家公司在辅助内容矩阵中将会被恰当地归类为―相似‖，从而阐明他们之间的相似性，这种相似性在只考虑附注标题的情况下可能并不明显。对我们分析的描述性统计的介绍和讨论将会在下一部分。 结论 我们的初步调查结果暗示了补充性财务信息披露是一个同质群而非异质群。由此得出结论，公司明显在利用其补充性财务信息披露以减少其竞争对手的特性，在对公司身份建构中的复杂现象有了更加实证上理解的基础上，我们结束了这项研究。不过，就我们初步的发现来讲，不同于之前研究的理论假设可能需要重新考量，并且可能要求我们现在考虑用其他资料对将来的研究提供一个更有意义的理论基础。艾克因、艾伯特和Whetten(1985年)，普拉特与福尔曼(2000)探讨了，企业如何通过评估自我中心、特色和持久的属性来管理多边竞争以及经常性的身份冲突。在他们的研究中指出，身份多样性的战略好处之一是以一套最少的身份来增加企业对于复杂环境的保留反应。从本质上讲，企业形象是组织潜在的多样性要求的表面反映。我们试图扩展这个推理思路为，公司的财务披露也 应该只是其潜在的独特的能力的表象。一个组织的战略竞争优势，必须在某些方面将其与竞争对手区分开，因此，我们完全有理由期望看到年度报告形式和内容上特别的和独一无二的特性，这些特性是我们随机样本中标准普尔指数500公司制定的社会身份建构工具。具有讽刺意味的是，集中于核心竞争力以创造一个与众不同的竞争优势的战略与减少组织中的多样性的适应能力相悖。(格林、巴尔和达希，2000年)。 因此，企业具有通过其财务披露制造标准化企业身份的明显倾向，对这一倾向的可能解释是，许多组织正在寻求减少多样性的策略使自己与众不同。与该战略定位相反的是，格林和Abzug(2002年，第267页)遵循了一个传统理论，来讨论是象征性的同构还是―一个组织对于 制度 关于办公室下班关闭电源制度矿山事故隐患举报和奖励制度制度下载人事管理制度doc盘点制度下载 领域内其他组织的象征性特性的相似性‖表明了正统性。我们超越了先前两个引用的研究的理论贡献在于表明，战略和象征性的同构不限于工业、组织间或制度领域，因为我们的样本是从整个标准普尔500指数中随机抽取的。 因此，我们的研究结果表明，这些理论解释对于探索身份建构可能是不够的。正如之前研究表明的那样(希尔顿与史密斯，2004年)，一个范围更广的的中等社会化(伯杰和卢克曼，1966)组织身份模型可能是必要的，以便通过组织运行的财务叙述和其他披露来捕捉和理解关于身份建构的更深刻的观点。对于企业间在进行减少多样性战略同时试图创造与众不同的企业形象过程中出现的目标冲突，这种做法可以切实地提供更广泛的理论支持。 尽管我们最初试图通过补充附注披露来分析企业形象建构的过程，但是我们现在意识到，在揭示一个明显同质的―模板‖补充披露群的本质中，我们只进行了第一步。需要进一步的研究来审查年度报告中―管理层讨论与分析‖这部分，以使我们进一步洞察形象建构与标准化报告和信息披露的密切关系。 出处:Smith, William L Vol.4 Issue 1/2 p120-129, 10p