IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/acctfi/v66y2026i2p2000-2022.html

XBRL Filing in the Indonesian Capital Market: An Exploration of Firms' Responses

Author

Listed:
  • Fitri Amalia
  • Ogan Yigitbasioglu
  • Stuart Tooley

Abstract

This study investigates how Indonesian firms responded to the regulatory requirement to adopt XBRL for corporate reporting. The findings highlight two dominant organisational responses: acquiescence and compromise. Firms that consistently and fully engaged in XBRL filing were seen as acquiescing to the regulatory mandate, whereas those with inconsistent engagement compromised the requirement, an outcome attributed to the lack of enforcement and organisational dynamics. Driven by concerns over legitimacy, regulation and market expectations, firms that acquiesced had supportive infrastructures and processes for XBRL. In contrast, those that compromised faced significant challenges, such as human resource constraints and reporting complexity, which led to alternative procedures that negatively impacted timeliness and accessibility. By exploring both normative influences and the willingness and ability of Indonesian firms to respond to the institutional environment, the study enhances our understanding of firms' responses to XBRL mandates.

Suggested Citation

  • Fitri Amalia & Ogan Yigitbasioglu & Stuart Tooley, 2026. "XBRL Filing in the Indonesian Capital Market: An Exploration of Firms' Responses," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 66(2), pages 2000-2022, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:66:y:2026:i:2:p:2000-2022
    DOI: 10.1111/acfi.70159
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.70159
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/acfi.70159?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carolyn J. Cordery & Carolyn J. Fowler & Khairil Mustafa, 2011. "A solution looking for a problem: factors associated with the non‐adoption of XBRL," Pacific Accounting Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 23(1), pages 69-88, May.
    2. Trevor Hopper & Maria Major, 2007. "Extending Institutional Analysis through Theoretical Triangulation: Regulation and Activity-Based Costing in Portuguese Telecommunications," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 59-97.
    3. Debreceny, Roger & Farewell, Stephanie & Piechocki, Maciej & Felden, Carsten & Gräning, André, 2010. "Does it add up? Early evidence on the data quality of XBRL filings to the SEC," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 296-306, June.
    4. Troshani, Indrit & Janssen, Marijn & Lymer, Andy & Parker, Lee D., 2018. "Digital transformation of business-to-government reporting: An institutional work perspective," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 17-36.
    5. Azleen Ilias & Erlane K Ghani & Nasrudin Baidi & Rahida Abdul Rahman, 2020. "XBRL Adoption: An Examination on the Malaysian Business Reporting System (MBRS)," Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, Conscientia Beam, vol. 8(2), pages 202-214.
    6. Sven Modell, 2014. "The societal relevance of management accounting: An introduction to the special issue," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 83-103, April.
    7. Laffont,Jean-Jacques, 2005. "Regulation and Development," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521549486.
    8. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521840187 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Lounsbury, Michael, 2008. "Institutional rationality and practice variation: New directions in the institutional analysis of practice," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(4-5), pages 349-361.
    10. Nicholas Berente & Youngjin Yoo, 2012. "Institutional Contradictions and Loose Coupling: Postimplementation of NASA's Enterprise Information System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 376-396, June.
    11. Wafa Sassi & Hakim Ben Othman & Khaled Hussainey, 2024. "The determinants of eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) adoption: a cross-country study," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(2), pages 175-192, June.
    12. Paul Attewell, 1992. "Technology Diffusion and Organizational Learning: The Case of Business Computing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 1-19, February.
    13. Indrit Troshani & Lee D. Parker & Andy Lymer, 2015. "Institutionalising XBRL for financial reporting: resorting to regulation," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 196-228, February.
    14. Dunne, Theresa & Helliar, Christine & Lymer, Andy & Mousa, Rania, 2013. "Stakeholder engagement in internet financial reporting: The diffusion of XBRL in the UK," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 167-182.
    15. Elaine H Ferneley & Polly Sobreperez, 2006. "Resist, comply or workaround? An examination of different facets of user engagement with information systems," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 345-356, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Indrit Troshani & Nick Rowbottom, 2021. "Digital Corporate Reporting: Research Developments and Implications," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 31(3), pages 213-232, September.
    2. Valentinetti, Diego & Flores Muñoz, Francisco, 2021. "Internet of things: Emerging impacts on digital reporting," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 549-562.
    3. Emmanuel Oseifuah & Carl Hope Korkpoe & Comfort Akorfa Anipa, 2025. "The last frontier - going transparent with XBRL reporting for Sub-Saharan African listed firms," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 14(5), pages 241-249, July.
    4. Troshani, Indrit & Janssen, Marijn & Lymer, Andy & Parker, Lee D., 2018. "Digital transformation of business-to-government reporting: An institutional work perspective," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 17-36.
    5. Hoque, Zahirul, 2014. "20 years of studies on the balanced scorecard: Trends, accomplishments, gaps and opportunities for future research," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 33-59.
    6. Binh Bui & Carolyn Fowler, 2022. "Carbon controls in a New Zealand electricity utility: An application of theoretical triangulation," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(4), pages 4423-4451, December.
    7. Clerkin, Brendan & Quinn, Martin & Connolly, Ciaran, 2024. "Decoupled accounting in a non-profit context: An explanation for stable management accounting?," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Arjaliès, Diane-Laure, 2011. "Exploring the role of objects in the transformation of logics: a practice perspective," HEC Research Papers Series 952, HEC Paris.
    9. Modell, Sven & Vinnari, Eija & Lukka, Kari, 2017. "On the virtues and vices of combining theories: The case of institutional and actor-network theories in accounting research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 62-78.
    10. Sean Hansen & A. James Baroody, 2020. "Electronic Health Records and the Logics of Care: Complementarity and Conflict in the U.S. Healthcare System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 57-75, March.
    11. Inês Cruz & Maria Major & Robert W. Scapens, 2009. "Institutionalization and practice variation in the management control of a global/local setting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(1), pages 91-117, January.
    12. Goddard, Andrew & Assad, Mussa & Issa, Siasa & Malagila, John & Mkasiwa, Tausi A., 2016. "The two publics and institutional theory – A study of public sector accounting in Tanzania," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 8-25.
    13. Covaleski, Mark A. & Dirsmith, Mark W. & Weiss, Jane M., 2013. "The social construction, challenge and transformation of a budgetary regime: The endogenization of welfare regulation by institutional entrepreneurs," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 333-364.
    14. Cecilia Langella & Niccol? Persiani, 2022. "Il sistema delle procedure amministrativo-contabili della GSA: il caso di Regione Lombardia e Regione Veneto," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(122), pages 59-84.
    15. Sven Modell & Fredrika Wiesel, 2008. "Marketization and Performance Measurement in Swedish Central Government: A Comparative Institutionalist Study," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 44(3), pages 251-283, September.
    16. Diane-Laure Arjaliès, 2011. "Exploring the role of objects in the transformation of logics: a practice perspective," Working Papers hal-00633462, HAL.
    17. Albu, Cătălin Nicolae & Albu, Nadia & Alexander, David, 2014. "When global accounting standards meet the local context—Insights from an emerging economy," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 489-510.
    18. Elaine Stewart & Ciaran Connolly, 2021. "Recent UK Central Government Accounting Reforms: Claimed Benefits and Experienced Outcomes," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 57(3), pages 557-592, September.
    19. Martijn van der Steen, 2011. "The emergence and change of management accounting routines," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 24(4), pages 502-547, May.
    20. Mostafa Jazayeri & Danture Wickramsinghe & Tharusha Gooneratne, 2011. "Convergence versus divergence of performance measurement systems," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(3), pages 292-314, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:acctfi:v:66:y:2026:i:2:p:2000-2022. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaanzea.html .

    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.