Integrated Reporting: Problems of Formation
https://doi.org/10.26794/2408-9303-2020-7-4-18-24
Abstract
The modern management system has a complex, sometimes multi-level organizational management structure and puts forward more and more demands on the quality of the financial information provided. The paper describes an integrated reporting that meets the increasing stakeholders demands. The research methodology is classical by itself and based on the use of situational and dialectical approaches to the object having the method of abstraction, formalization and generalization. A deductive analysis of general scientific, geopolitical factors, economic psychology, economic theory and accounting theories, projected onto the Russian specifics of doing business which leads to the formation of nontrivial conclusions. The latter are interesting in the symbiosis of criticism and constructivism because against the lack of objective reasons for the introduction of integrated reporting in Russia, there are questions raised about the need to generate a unified theory that underlies the functioning of accounting systems as well as the economic consciousness development of our society and implementation of business ethics. The scientific and practical significance of the study is to identify the application features of integrating financial reporting practice at the national level.
About the Author
N. A. Mislavskaya
Financial University
Russian Federation
Natal’ya A. Mislavskaya — Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor of the Department of Business Analysis and Auditing
Russian Federation
Natal’ya A. Mislavskaya — Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor of the Department of Business Analysis and Auditing
References
1. Azgal’dov G.G. Kostin A.V. Intellectual property, innovation and qualimetry. Ekonomicheskie strategii = Economic Strategy. 2008;(2):162–168. (In Russ.).
2. Mislavskaya N.A. Professional judgment: The scientific aspect. Audit i finansovyi analiz = Audit and Financial Analysis. 2016;(1):53–57. (In Russ.).
3. Marks K., Engels F. Capital. Moscow: Gospolitizdat; 1960. 907 p. (In Russ.).
4. Mislavskaya N.A. To the issue of the development of accounting science. Auditor. 2016;(5):30–36. (In Russ.).
5. Yakovleva E.I. Socio-axiological analysis of globalization. Nizhny Novgorod: Intelservis; 2005. 116 p. (In Russ.).
6. Dankanich S.A. Income inequality: Types and consequences. Problemy sovremennoi ekonomiki = Problems of Modern Economy. 2011;(3):59–63. (In Russ.).
7. Eprikova T. Cadres decide everything. Ekonomika i zhizn’ = Economy and Life. 2003;(50):3–8. (In Russ.).
8. Sokolov Ya.V. Accounting: From the beginnings to the present day. Moscow: Banki i birzhi, YUNITI; 1996. 599 p.
9. Kopnin P.V. Epistemological and logical foundations of science. Moscow: Mysl’; 1974. 568 p. (In Russ.).
10. Gegel G. Collected works in XIV volumes. Volume XII. Moscow: Poligrafkniga; 1940. 363 p. (In Russ.).
11. Mouck T. The rhetoric of science and the rhetoric of revolt in the “story” of positive accounting theory. Accounting and Auditing & Accountability Journal. 1992;5(4):35–56. DOI: 10.1108/09513579210019512/full/html
12. Sharma N. Theoretical framework for corporate disclosure research. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting. 2013:5(12):183–196. DOI: 10.5296/ajfa.v5i1.3210
13. Mattessich R. Conditional-normative accounting methodology: Incorporating value judgments and means-end relations of an applied science. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 1995;2(4):259–284. DOI: 10.1016/0361–3682(94)00023-O
14. Messner M. Research orientation without regrets. Critical Perspectives on Accounting.2015;26(2):76–83. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2013.05.013
15. Richard J. The dangerous dynamics of modern capitalism (from static to IFRS’ futuristic accounting). Critical Perspectives on Accounting. 2015;(7):9–34. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2014.09.003
Review
For citations:
Mislavskaya N.A. Integrated Reporting: Problems of Formation. Accounting. Analysis. Auditing. 2020;7(4):18-24. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/2408-9303-2020-7-4-18-24
Views:
691
.png)
.png)
Email this article 
