This study examines how the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) works to build legitimacy and secure stakeholder support. Responding to recent calls for greater attention to communication in standard setting - with emphasis on the role of individuals within organisations - it analyses the use of rhetorical devices (logos, pathos, ethos) in speeches by the IASB Chair in an effort to sustain moral, pragmatic, and cognitive legitimacy and align institutional goals with societal expectations. We observe that rhetorical appeals are strategically deployed. The speeches show a consistent rhetorical style across time and regions, with variation by audience. When content is classified by legitimacy domains (input, throughput, output), rhetorical intensity peaks in the throughput phase, where transparency and procedural integrity are emphasised. The paper offers empirical evidence on how the IASB uses rhetorical strategies to be perceived as a legitimate global accounting standard setter.
ESG has failed sustainability. While it succeeded in mainstreaming non-financial data into investment decisions, its conceptual vagueness, measurement incoherence, and structural subordination to investor interests produced a reporting regime that distracts from the need for structural change while legitimizing the status quo. The conflation of ESG with sustainability is not semantic sloppiness - it reflects a deeper ideological capture, institutionalized at global scale by the ISSB, whose standards are financial risk disclosure dressed in sustainability's clothes. Double materiality represents a conceptual advance by requiring organizations to assess both how sustainability issues affect them financially and how their activities impact society and the environment. However, it remains insufficient without sustainability context. Without reference to ecological thresholds, social foundations, and system limits, even impact materiality risks reproducing the performative logic it seeks to replace. We argue for a context-based materiality grounded in rightsholder accountability, participatory processes, and planetary boundaries - what makes double materiality transformative.
The introduction of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) presents significant changes for companies that were previously not subject to such mandates. Drawing on a case study of a German-based company, with interview respondents involved in the CSRD implementation, we explore the institutional pressures faced and the associated challenges and opportunities. The company identifies a range of opportunities, such as product improvements, reputation and financial opportunities. The challenges include data measurement, collection and reporting, time pressure and limited human resources. Building on institutional theory and Oliver's (1991) framework of strategic responses to institutional pressures, we analyze how multiple predictive dimensions interact in shaping the company's response. In addition to regulatory demands, strong customer and market expectations intensify institutional pressures. Rather than resisting CSRD requirements, the company responds pragmatically. This case study adds to the literature on how formal regulation and informal pressure influence organizational change, even before a mandate is enforced.
We investigate the effect of audit partner gender on audit quality and audit pricing in UK charities, a setting that is fundamentally different from the for-profit sector. Employing an extensive dataset of UK charities from 2009 to 2019, we demonstrate that charities are more likely to receive a qualified audit opinion and less likely to report zero fundraising expense when women audit partners are engaged, suggesting higher audit quality. Furthermore, we show that charities pay higher audit fees to women audit partners than to their male counterparts, consistent with the higher quality of audit service they deliver. Checks for endogeneity and self-selection bias confirm the robustness of our main findings.
