MIT Sloan Management Review

Corporate Strategy, Leadership and Organization Studies

Improving the Corporate Disclosure Process

By Robert G. Eccles and Sarah C. Mavrinac

July 15, 1995

IS IT TIME TO REFORM THE FINANCIAL REPORTING REGULATIONS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED IN THE EARLY 1900S? WILL NEW REGULATIONS IMPROVE THE CORPORATE disclosure process? The authors conducted a national survey of corporate managers, financial analysts, and portfolio managers to examine their opinions on disclosure regulation and how companies communicate with the capital markets. Their analysis indicates that, while all three groups think market functioning is imperfect, they do not see a need for increased financial reporting regulation. Rather, the authors” analysis suggests that companies can improve the processes of disclosure and communication by developing a strategy for corporate information disclosure, upgrading the role of the investor relations staff, and voluntarily reporting nonfinancial information. Such improvements would increase management credibility, analysts” understanding of the firm, investors” patience, and, potentially, share value.

Buy article & permissions

During the past several years, the business community has been fascinated by a debate over the functioning of capital markets and the need for market reform. Contributing to the debate are a variety of academics, investors, financial commentators, and government policymakers who, through published reports and research, are challenging the conventional wisdom of market efficiency and laissez-faire economics. Some have focused on the functioning of the capital markets and its effectiveness in resource allocation.1 Others have investigated the related topics of financial reporting regulation and corporate governance.2 Still others are challenging the financial accounting tradition by arguing for new accounting models that use more nonfinancial performance measures to capture the returns to strategic investments in technology infrastructure and core competence.3 The intent of all these reports has been to offer insight into the complex interrelationships among patterns of information flow, capital market efficiency, and the competitive performance of U.S. industrial enterprise.4

It is perhaps not surprising that the studies, reports, and articles have generally created more confusion than clarity. Rather than contributing to a single, shared perspective of market functioning, the studies offer a multitude of theories and definitions of market activity that have served only to aggravate the debate, drawing more distinct political and rhetorical boundaries between supporters and critics.

On one side... To read the complete article, login or sign-up using the form below.

From The Magazine

Fall 2009

Special Report: Sustainability

8 Reasons That Sustainability Will Change Management

Michael S. Hopkins

Transparency, accidental innovation, trust, collaboration — as sustainability affects how the world works, so will it affect how business works in the world.

Intelligence: Management

Debunking Management Myths

Martha E. Mangelsdorf

In this interview, Henry Mintzberg questions some of the conventional wisdom about managerial work.