SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1

Sustainability Reporting and Corporate Reputation in Turkey

Türkiye'de Sürdürülebilirlik Raporlaması ve Kurumsal İtibar

Seçil DEREN VAN HET HOF
Sibel HOŞTUT
Pages
303–312
Publication Date
2021-03-27
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Although it is difficult to create any direct link between reporting quality and reputation in the Turkish context, it is possible to argue that highly reputed corporations provide higher quality sustainability reports.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this quantitative research s to measure the quality of sustainability reports of reputable companies in Turkey to understand the dynamics of the relation between report quality and reputation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of 68 reports from 25 corporations published between 2015-2017 formed the sample of the research.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Although it is difficult to create any direct link between reporting quality and reputation in the Turkish context, it is possible to argue that highly reputed corporations provide higher quality sustainability reports.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015-2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk · Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk · Kurumsal İtibar

Abstract

The purpose of this quantitative research s to measure the quality of sustainability reports of reputable companies in Turkey to understand the dynamics of the relation between report quality and reputation. A total of 68 reports from 25 corporations published between 2015-2017 formed the sample of the research. To measure the quality of the reports content analysis was applied. This research portrayed the qualities of sustainability reports of the corporations with the highest reputation scores in the Turkish business context. The most preferred report title is “Sustainability Report”, but a limited number of “Integrated Report” and “Corporate Social Responsibility Report” were also found. The findings show that sectoral differences play an important role in sustainability reporting. All these corporations were not all Turkish corporations, but also multinationals. This comparison uncovers the fact that the practices of multinational companies are not a driving force for Turkish corporations. Social performance reporting appears to be a practice exclusively pertaining to listed corporations. Although it is difficult to create any direct link between reporting quality and reputation in the Turkish context, it is possible to argue that highly reputed corporations provide higher quality sustainability reports.

Özet

Yapılan nicel çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye'deki itibarlı şirketlerin sürdürülebilirlik raporlarının kalitesini ölçerek raporun kalitesi ile kurumsal itibar arasındaki ilişkinin dinamiklerini açıklamaktır. Araştırmanın örneklemini 2015-2017 yılları arasında 25 şirketin yayımladığı toplam 68 sürdürülebilirlik raporu oluşturmaktadır. Raporların kalitesini ölçmek için uygulanan içerik analizi tekniği ile Türkiye'nin iş bağlamında itibar puanı en yüksek olan şirketlerin sürdürülebilirlik raporlarının nitelikleri ifade edilmiştir. Raporlarda en çok tercih edilen rapor başlığı “Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu” olmuştur, ancak sınırlı sayıda da olsa “Entegre Rapor” ve “Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Raporu” adlandırmaları da mevcuttur. Bulgular, sürdürülebilirlik raporlamasında sektörel farklılıkların önemli bir rol oynadığını göstermektedir. Araştırmaya dahil edilen şirketler salt Türk şirketleri değil, aynı zamanda çok uluslu şirketlerdir. Şirketlerarası yapılan karşılaştırmada, çokuluslu şirketlerin uygulamalarının Türk şirketleri için bir itici güç olmadığı gerçeğini ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Sosyal performans raporlaması, özellikle borsa şirketlerine ait bir uygulamadır. Ancak Türkiye bağlamında raporlama kalitesi ile itibar arasında doğrudan bir bağlantı kurmak zor olsa da, yüksek itibarlı şirketlerin daha kaliteli sürdürülebilirlik raporları sunduğunu iddia etmek mümkündür.

🔖

Cite This Article

HOF, S. D. V. H., HOŞTUT, S. (2021). Sustainability Reporting and Corporate Reputation in Turkey. Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1, 303–312. https://ajindex.com/articles/202941

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. AA1000. (2018). Accountability Principles 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.accountability.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/AA1000_ACCOUNTABILITY_PRINCIPLES_2018_Single_Pages.pdf
  2. Aktaş Yamanoğlu, M. (2010). CSR Initiatives of Private Sector Companies in Turkey: Main Approaches, Issues and Motivations. İletişim Araştırmaları, 8(1), 95-110.
  3. Akyıldız, F. (2012). Comparative Corporate Social Responsibility in the United Kingdom and Turkey. In Aras, G. and Crowther, D. (Ed.), Business Strategy and Sustainability (Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility) (pp. 115-153). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-0523(2012)0000003018
  4. Ararat, M., ve Göcenoğlu, C. (2005). Drivers for Sustainable Corporate Responsibility, Case of Turkey. Retrieved from: file:///C:/Users/TR/Downloads/Drivers_for_Sustainable_Corporate_Responsibility_C%20(2).pdf Baviera-Puig, A., Gómez-Navarro, T., García-Melón, M., ve García-Martínez, G. (2015). Assessing the Communication Quality of CSR Reports: A Case Study on Four Spanish Food Companies. Sustainability, 7(8), 1-22.
  5. Berelson, B.R. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. New York: Free Press.
  6. Brown, S., ve Hillegeist, S.A. (2007). How disclosure quality affects the level of information asymmetry. Review of Accounting Studies, 12(2–3), 443–477.
  7. Buchholz, R. A., ve Rosenthal, S. B. (2005). Toward a Contemporary Conceptual Framework for Stakeholder Theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 58, 137-148.
  8. CBM. (2005). Corporate Governance Principles Capital Markets Board of Turkey. Retrieved from: http://www.cmb.gov.tr/Sayfa/Dosya/84
  9. Chen, S., ve Bouvain, P. (2009). Is corporate responsibility converging? A comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 299-317.
  10. Chrisman, J., Chua, J. H., Kellermanns, F., ve Chang E. (2007). Are Family Managers Agents or Stewards? An Exploratory Study in Privately Held Family Firms. Journal of Business Research, 60(11), 1030-1038.
  11. Clarkson, P.M, Li, Y., Richardson, G.D., ve Vasvari, F.P. (2008). Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis. Accounting. Organizations and Society, 33(4/5), 303–327.
  12. Clarkson, M.B.E. (1995). A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92-117.
  13. Connelly, B.L., Certo, S.T., Ireland, R.D., ve Reutzel, C.R. (2011a). Signal