IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pkp/ijomas/v14y2025i2p688-702id4281.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market responses on integrated reporting: Does corporate reputation matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Juniarti
  • Cynthia Halim
  • Evelyn Wehantouw

Abstract

This study investigates the market response to the adoption of Integrated Reporting (IR) among companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange and examines whether corporate reputation moderates this relationship. A quantitative approach was used, applying descriptive analysis and hypothesis testing with the Common Effect model. The analysis compared IR adopters and non-adopters using Cumulative Abnormal Return (CAR) as a measure of market response, both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Integrated Reporting (IR) adopters had greater Cumulative Abnormal Return (CAR) values than non-adopters, indicating stronger market responses. This impact persisted before and after COVID-19. Further descriptive analysis showed no significant differences in company reputation, firm size, and leverage between IR adopters and non-adopters. Additionally, corporate reputation did not significantly moderate the relationship between IR adoption and market response. IR adoption positively influences market perception, supporting signaling theory. The market rewards transparent and comprehensive reporting, regardless of prior corporate reputation. IR can be an effective tool for companies seeking better market valuation. Investors should consider IR adoption in their decision-making, and policymakers are encouraged to promote IR to enhance market transparency and efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Juniarti & Cynthia Halim & Evelyn Wehantouw, 2025. "Market responses on integrated reporting: Does corporate reputation matter?," International Journal of Management and Sustainability, Conscientia Beam, vol. 14(2), pages 688-702.
  • Handle: RePEc:pkp:ijomas:v:14:y:2025:i:2:p:688-702:id:4281
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://archive.conscientiabeam.com/index.php/11/article/view/4281/8617
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:pkp:ijomas:v:14:y:2025:i:2:p:688-702:id:4281. 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: Dim Michael (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://archive.conscientiabeam.com/index.php/11/ .

    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.