Publications Database
Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!
The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:
- Faculty Member’s Name;
- Area of Expertise;
- Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
- Journal Name; and
- Date Range.
At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.
If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.
Search Results
Cho, C.H., Krasodomska, J., Ratliff-Miller, P. and Godawska, J. (2021). "Internationalization and CSR Reporting: Evidence from U.S. Companies and their Polish Subsidiaries", Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(7), 135-162.
Abstract
Purpose
Design/methodology/approach
Findings
Originality/value
Cho, C.H., Bohr, K., Choi, T.J., Partridge, K. Shah, J.M. and Swierszcz, A. (2020). "Advancing Sustainability Reporting in Canada: 2019 Report on Progress.", Accounting Perspectives, 19(3), 181-204.
Abstract
This study examines the progress Canada's largest companies are making in their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures. Given the introduction of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) as well as the issuance of the Task Force on Climate‐Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations, our research reflects the uptake of these guidance documents by both mature and new reporters. Our analysis suggests that challenges persist—processes and progress often fail to reach investors as they are “lost in translation” when issued through third‐party ESG information providers, and reporters are also pressured to respond to a myriad of requests for information from rating and reporting agencies. Nevertheless, we note that Canada has new reporting sectors that must mature to survive the scrutiny of the markets and also hope that stock markets will respond to the recent announcement by the 181 CEOs of the U.S. Business Roundtable, who committed to lead their companies for the benefit of all stakeholders—customers, employees, suppliers, communities, and shareholders. Overall, we believe that our research will provide food for thought for companies interested in continuous improvement.Blanc, R., Branco, M.C., Cho, C.H. and Sopt, J. (2019). "Disclosure Responses to a Corruption Scandal: The Case of Siemens AG", Journal of Business Ethics, 156(2),545-561.
Abstract
In the current study, we examine the changes in disclosure practices on compliance and the fight against corruption at Siemens AG, a large German multinational corporation, over the period 2000–2011 during which a major corruption scandal was revealed. More specifically, we conduct a content analysis of the company’s annual reports and sustainability reports during that period to investigate the changes of Siemens’ corruption and compliance disclosure using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Through the lens of legitimacy theory, stakeholder analysis, and organizational façades, we find evidence that Siemens changed its compliance and corruption disclosure practices to repair its legitimacy in the wake of the 2006 corruption scandal. We analyze these strategies more closely by using the rational, progressive, and reputation façades framework (Abrahamson and Baumard in The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Decision Making, pp 437–452, 2008). Our primary findings suggest that the annual reports show peaks of disclosure amounts on corruption and compliance disclosures earlier than sustainability reports, which can be partly explained by analyzing the disclosures made about—and to—the different stakeholder groups. We find that the annual report focuses more on internal stakeholders such as employees, while the sustainability report focuses more on external stakeholders such as suppliers. We also find that the company uses the façades differently depending on which report is being analyzed.Cho, C.H., Laine, N., Roberts, R. and Rodrigue, M. (2018). "The Frontstage and Backstage of Corporate Sustainability Reporting: Evidence from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Bill", Journal of Business Ethics, 152(3), 865-883.
Abstract
While proponents of sustainability reporting believe in its potential to help corporations be accountable and transparent about their social and environmental impacts, there has been growing criticism asserting that such reporting schemes are utilized primarily as impression management tools. Drawing on Erving Goffman’s (1959) self-presentation theory and its frontstage/backstage analogy, we contrast the frontstage sustainability discourse of a sample of large U.S. oil and gas firms to their backstage corporate political activities in the context of the passage of the American-Made Energy and Good Jobs Act, also known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) Bill. The ANWR Bill was designed to allow oil exploration within the most sensitive environmental areas in the Refuge and this bill was vigorously debated in the United States Congress in 2005 and 2006. Our results suggest that the firms’ sustainability discourse on environmental stewardship and responsibility contrasts sharply with their less visible but proactive political strategies targeted to facilitate the passage of the ANWR Bill. This study thus contributes to the social and environmental accounting and accountability literature by highlighting the relevance of Goffman’s frontstage/backstage analogy in uncovering and documenting further the deceptive nature of the discourse contained in stand-alone sustainability reports. In addition, it seeks to contribute to the overall understanding of the multifaceted nature of sustainability reporting by placing it in relation to corporate political activities.Cho, C.H., Michelon, G. and Patten, D.M. (2012). "Enhancement and Obfuscation Through the Use of Graphs in Sustainability Reports: An International Comparison", Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 3(1), 74-88.