IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-06-2015-2088.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transparency fallacy

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Gold
  • Pasi Heikkurinen

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to focus on the research question of how stakeholder claims for transparency work as a means to support responsibility in the international supply chain. Design/methodology/approach - This theoretical study analyses the relationship between stakeholder claims for corporate transparency and responsible business in the global context, and develops a conceptual model for further theoretical and empirical work. Findings - The study finds that the call for corporate transparency is insufficient as a means to increase responsibility within international supply chains. The erroneous belief that stakeholder claims for transparency will lead to responsible behaviour is identified as the “transparency fallacy”. The fallacy emerges from the denial of opacity in organisations and the blindness to the conditions of international supply chains (including complexity, distance, and resistance) that work against attempts to increase transparency. Research limitations/implications - Acknowledging the limits of the transparency mechanism in both management theory and practice is necessary in order to advance responsible business in the international arena. Being conceptual in nature, the generic limitations of the type of research apply. Practical implications - While acknowledging opacity, corporate managers and stakeholders should focus on changing the supply chain conditions to support responsible behaviour. This includes reducing complexity, distance, and resistance in the supply network. Originality/value - This study contests the commonly assumed link between corporate transparency and responsibility, and sheds light on the limits and unintended consequences of stakeholder attempts to impose transparency on business organisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Gold & Pasi Heikkurinen, 2018. "Transparency fallacy," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(1), pages 318-337, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-06-2015-2088
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-06-2015-2088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2015-2088/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2015-2088/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2015-2088?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    2. Michelon, Giovanna & Rodrigue, Michelle & Trevisan, Elisabetta, 2020. "The marketization of a social movement: Activists, shareholders and CSR disclosure," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Beat Reber & Agnes Gold & Stefan Gold, 2022. "ESG Disclosure and Idiosyncratic Risk in Initial Public Offerings," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 867-886, September.
    4. Lyndie Bayne & Juliana Ng & Marvin Wee, 2022. "Supply chain disclosure: stakeholder preferences versus current practice in Australia," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(3), pages 3875-3911, September.
    5. Damberg, Sarah V. & Hartmann, Julia & Heese, H. Sebastian, 2022. "Does bad press help or hinder sustainable supply chain management? An empirical investigation of US-based corporations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    6. Raphaëlle Stewart & Peter Fantke & Anders Bjørn & Mikołaj Owsianiak & Christine Molin & Michael Zwicky Hauschild & Alexis Laurent, 2018. "Life cycle assessment in corporate sustainability reporting: Global, regional, sectoral, and company‐level trends," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1751-1764, December.
    7. Stefan Gold & Thomas Chesney & Tim Gruchmann & Alexander Trautrims, 2020. "Diffusion of labor standards through supplier–subcontractor networks: An agent‐based model," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(6), pages 1274-1286, December.
    8. Naemi Schäfer, 2023. "Making transparency transparent: a systematic literature review to define and frame supply chain transparency in the context of sustainability," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 579-604, June.
    9. Muhammad Azizul Islam & Chris J. Van Staden, 2022. "Modern Slavery Disclosure Regulation and Global Supply Chains: Insights from Stakeholder Narratives on the UK Modern Slavery Act," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(2), pages 455-479, October.
    10. Frank Ebinger & Bramwel Omondi, 2020. "Leveraging Digital Approaches for Transparency in Sustainable Supply Chains: A Conceptual Paper," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-16, July.
    11. Ieva Meidute-Kavaliauskiene & Bülent Yıldız & Şemsettin Çiğdem & Renata Činčikaitė, 2021. "An Integrated Impact of Blockchain on Supply Chain Applications," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-18, June.
    12. Guo, Jianan & Islam, Muhammad Azizul & Jain, Ameeta & van Staden, Chris J., 2022. "Civil liberties and social and environmental information transparency: A global investigation of financial institutions," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    13. Ieva Meidute-Kavaliauskiene & Amir Karbassi Yazdi & Amir Mehdiabadi, 2022. "Integration of Blockchain Technology and Prioritization of Deployment Barriers in the Blood Supply Chain," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-06-2015-2088. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.