ISSUES IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION American Accounting Association

Vol. 30, No. 4 DOI: 10.2308/iace-51093

2015
pp. 373–381

Challenges in Sustainability and Integrated

Reporting
Lies Bouten and Sophie Hoozée
ABSTRACT: Students are introduced to the concepts of sustainability reporting and the
latest trend, integrated reporting, by playing the role of an active jury member on the
judging panel for the Best Belgian Sustainability Report Award. Through the reporting
practices of Telenet, a Belgian telecommunication company, the case demonstrates the
pivotal role of materiality and completeness in assessing the quality of sustainability
reporting. Moreover, by revealing that an integrated strategy is crucial in the
development of an integrated report and by demonstrating the importance of connecting
financial and sustainability-related performance indicators, the case exposes students to
the challenges that companies may face in developing their integrated reporting. The
case also encourages students to critically reflect on the motivations behind
sustainability reporting. In addition, through the active process of analyzing the disclosed
information, students learn to formulate hands-on recommendations for improvement.
This master’s-level case is appropriate for either general financial reporting courses that
incorporate contemporary reporting trends or more specific accounting courses on
corporate social responsibility (CSR), sustainability, accountability, or ethics.
Keywords: completeness; corporate social responsibility (CSR); integrated reporting;
materiality; social and environmental reporting; sustainability.

THE CASE—INTRODUCTION
or more than a decade, the Belgian Institute of Chartered Accountants (IBR-IRE),1 in

F cooperation with Business & Society Belgium and the multi-stakeholder network, Kauri,
have been granting a yearly award for the Best Belgian Sustainability Report. The submitted
reports can take the form of stand-alone sustainability reports, corporate social responsibility (CSR)

Lies Bouten is an Assistant Professor at IÉSEG School of Management (LEM-CNRS) and Sophie
Hoozée is an Assistant Professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam and Ghent University.

We thank Lori Holder-Webb, Hervé Stolowy, and two anonymous reviewers for their encouraging comments. We also
express our gratitude to Patricia Everaert, Brian Godor, Robyn King, and participants of the 2014 37th EAA Annual
Congress (Tallinn, Estonia, May 21–23) for their feedback on earlier drafts of this case. Finally, thanks are due to our
students who have constantly challenged us in order to make this case a better learning experience.
Supplemental materials can be accessed by clicking the links in Appendix A.

Published Online: March 2015

1
Instituut van de BedrijfsRevisoren-Institut des Réviseurs d’Entreprises.

373
374 Bouten and Hoozée

or social/environmental reports, or integrated reports. You have just been named to the jury and you
are asked to assess the sustainability reporting practices of Belgian companies. This case will walk
you through the process of reviewing the submitted report of Telenet, a telecommunication
company that employs about 2,000 people in Belgium. At the time of publication of this article the
2011 Telenet Annual Report was publicly available on the Telenet website. The report is also
provided as a supplemental file by permission of Telenet.
Telenet provides cable television, high-speed Internet, and telecom services, primarily to
residential customers in Flanders and Brussels. It also provides services for companies in Belgium
and Luxembourg. Telenet’s shares are listed on the Euronext Brussels Stock Exchange and it is part
of the BEL20 stock market index. Since September 2011, Telenet has been a member of the Dow
Jones Sustainability Europe and the Dow Jones Sustainability World indices. As of March 2012,
Telenet has also been included in the FTSE4Good Index.
In line with academic research, the jury acknowledges that organizations can only discharge
accountability duties if their reports are complete, i.e., if they provide a true and fair account of the
sustainability-related policies, practices, and impacts that are material to their stakeholders. Hence,
companies should not only report their intentions, but also their actions and subsequent performance
concerning material sustainability issues (Adams 2004; Adams, Hill, and Roberts 1995; Robertson and
Nicholson 1996; van Staden and Hooks 2007). To define materiality, the jury refers to the AA1000
Framework, according to which material issues ‘‘will influence the decisions, actions and performance
of an organization or its stakeholders’’ (AccountAbility 2008, 12).2 Only when stakeholders have been
consulted or involved can reports cover all aspects that are material from a stakeholder perspective. The
supplemental appendix3 explains how Telenet has determined what issues could be considered as
material and contains information on the construction of the materiality matrix (see Appendix A for a
link to the downloadable supplemental appendix). This matrix plots the issues on a scale from low to
high in terms of their impact on the company (horizontal axis) and their impact on the stakeholders
(vertical axis). As a member of the jury, you need to evaluate whether the sustainability information is
complete, i.e., you not only have to assess whether information is provided on all material items, but
also whether different types of information are provided for each item.
Although stand-alone sustainability reports can contain a wealth of information about the
organization’s social and environmental policies, practices, and impacts, it is difficult for its readers to
systematically link these pieces of information. Nevertheless, such linking is important since actions
and impacts in one area will often lead to actions and impacts in other areas (Hopwood, Unerman, and
Fries 2010). Hence, the idea of connected reporting emerged (de Villiers, Rinaldi, and Unerman
2014), which portrays the main connections between those social, environmental, and economic
actions and outcomes that are material for the reporting organization (Hopwood et al. 2010).
For the 2011 Award, Telenet’s management decided to send in its ‘‘integrated annual report’’
(see page 1 of Telenet’s Annual Report 2011, which is provided as downloadable supplemental
material to this case, see Appendix A). With this report, ‘‘Telenet wants to give a truthful account of
the socioeconomic, ethical and environmental performance results’’ (see page 110 of Telenet’s

2
The purpose of the AA1000 Framework is ‘‘to provide organizations with an internationally accepted, freely available
set of principles to frame and structure the way in which they understand, govern, administer, implement, evaluate and
communicate their accountability’’ (AccountAbility 2008, 8). Next to materiality, two other guiding principles
underpin the AccountAbility approach: inclusivity and responsiveness. Inclusivity is ‘‘the participation of stakeholders
in developing and achieving an accountable and strategic response to sustainability’’ (AccountAbility 2008, 10), and
implies, among other things, the participation of stakeholders in the development of social and environmental
disclosures. Responsiveness implies that an organization responds to ‘‘stakeholder issues that affect its sustainability
performance’’ (AccountAbility 2008, 14).
3
Source: Telenet Sustainability Report 2011, pages 13–14.

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
Challenges in Sustainability and Integrated Reporting 375

Annual Report 2011). The jury agreed to take the report into consideration as (as translated by the
authors):
The future communication of companies will certainly be characterized by the integration
of their financial and nonfinancial (societal and environmental) strategies and the
accompanying results. The integrated report is essential for organizations to make more
sustainable decisions and for investors and other stakeholders to understand how well a
company is performing. Moreover, it generates a more complete picture of the
organization within the boundaries of the materiality criteria.4
A necessary condition for integrated reporting is integrated thinking, which takes into account
the connectivity and interdependencies between social, environmental, and financial actions and
impacts. Hence, an integrated report should not only provide information on both financial and
nonfinancial performance, it should also show the relationship between financial and nonfinancial
performance and how these interrelated dimensions are creating and destroying value for
shareholders and other stakeholders (Owen 2013). In response to the challenge of providing a more
holistic picture within sustainability reports, in 2010, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the
Accounting for Sustainability (A4S) Forum, sponsored by the Prince of Wales, jointly formed the
International Integrated Reporting Committee (IIRC) to develop integrated reporting. This new
reporting practice has been supported by many authoritative sources (KPMG International 2013).
Advocates of integrated reporting (e.g., IIRC 2013) aim to change the condition where financial and
nonfinancial information are accounted for in isolation from each other toward integrated thinking
(Cheng, Green, Conradie, Konishi, and Romi 2014), enabling integrated reporting to become the
corporate reporting norm. In contrast to stand-alone sustainability reporting, integrated reporting,
thus, explicitly links material issues to the organization’s financial performance. In the assessment
of Telenet’s submitted report, the jury also considers integration to be an important criterion.

CASE REQUIREMENTS
You develop your opinion on Telenet’s Annual Report 2011 through the following steps.
1. Consider the appendix. Is the content of the Telenet report consistent with the issues in the
materiality matrix? Make a preliminary assessment of the completeness of Telenet’s report,
i.e., are stakeholders receiving all of the information that is relevant to them?
2. Which types of information should companies provide about material items? Make your
final completeness assessment, i.e., does Telenet’s integrated annual report offer the
information types you believe it should? If not, what information types did you expect it to
provide that it did not?
3. Based on your reading of the strategy (see Telenet’s Annual Report 2011, pages 22–27),
has Telenet integrated the sustainability issues in its corporate strategy? Support your
answer and discuss possible reporting implications.
4. Consider the ‘‘green’’ section of the annual report (see Telenet’s Annual Report 2011, pages
83–88).
a. Suggest several ways in which Telenet could improve its reporting of environmental
indicators, goals, and actions.
b. Suggest how the company could connect this environmental information to financial
value creation.

4
Verslag van de Jury: Award for Best Belgian Sustainability Report. Available at: http://www.
bestbelgiansustainabilityreport.be/sites/default/files/Verslag%20van%20de%20Jury%202012.pdf

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
376 Bouten and Hoozée

5. Based on your reading of the report, what do you think Telenet’s motivation is for their
sustainability-related disclosures?

REFERENCES
AccountAbility. 2008. AA1000 Accountability Principles Standard 2008. Available at: http://www.
accountability.org/images/content/0/7/074/AA1000APS%202008.pdf
Adams, C. A., W. Y. Hill, and C. B. Roberts. 1995. Environmental, Employee and Ethical Reporting in
Europe. ACCA Research Report No. 41. London, U.K.: ACCA.
Adams, C. A. 2004. The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 17 (5): 731–757.
Cheng, M., W. Green, P. Conradie, N. Konishi, and A. Romi. 2014. The international integrated reporting
framework: Key issues and future research opportunities. Journal of International Financial
Management & Accounting 25 (1): 90–119.
de Villiers, C., L. Rinaldi, and J. Unerman. 2014. Integrated reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for
future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 27 (7): 1042–1067.
Hopwood, A. G., J. Unerman, and J. Fries. 2010. Accounting for Sustainability: Practical Insights.
Abingdon, U.K.: Earthscan.
International Integrated Reporting Committee (IIRC). 2013. The International ,IR. Framework.
Available at: http://www.theiirc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13-12-08 -THE-
INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf
KPMG International. 2013. International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2013. Available at:
http://www.kpmg.com/BE/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/corporate-
responsibility-reporting-survey-2013-v2.pdf
Owen, G. 2013. Integrated reporting: A review of developments and their implications for the accounting
curriculum. Accounting Education: An International Journal 22 (4): 340–356.
Robertson, D. C., and N. Nicholson. 1996. Expressions of corporate social responsibility in U.K. firms.
Journal of Business Ethics 15 (10): 1095–1106.
van Staden, C. J., and J. Hooks. 2007. A comprehensive comparison of corporate environmental reporting
and responsiveness. The British Accounting Review 39 (3): 197–210.

APPENDIX A
Appendix: http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/iace-51093.s1
Telenet_Annual_Report_2011: http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/iace-51093.s2

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
Challenges in Sustainability and Integrated Reporting 377

CASE LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE

Case Overview
The case encourages students not only to critically analyze and assess sustainability-related
disclosures, but also focuses on the latest evolution: integrated reporting. This new reporting
practice has emerged in response to the lack of connections between financial and nonfinancial
information in stand-alone sustainability reports (e.g., Cheng et al. 2014; Frias-Aceituno,
Rodriguez-Ariza, and Garcia-Sanchez 2013; Jensen and Berg 2012). The purpose of this case is
to teach students how to assess the quality of sustainability and integrated reporting. Completeness
is an important quality criterion as it is a necessary requirement for fulfilling the accountability aim
of sustainability reporting. In particular, the disclosed information should be material and thus
provide all information that stakeholders and the company consider relevant. Through the case,
students discover the role of stakeholder consultation and the resulting materiality matrix in
determining the content of sustainability-related disclosures. Moreover, the case illustrates that
completeness requires companies to disclose different information types (intentions, actions,
performance indicators, and negative information) for each material item. As such, students are
required to investigate the extent to which disclosed information is relevant for the company’s and
its stakeholders’ decision making (see Owen 2013).
The concept of integrated thinking plays a pivotal role in the development of integrated
reporting. Through analyzing an integrated annual report, case participants discover the challenges
that companies may face when developing such a report. In particular, the case highlights that
integrated reporting is very hard when the company has not integrated sustainability in its corporate
strategy (see, also, Stubbs and Higgins 2014). Careful reading of the strategy section of a
company’s integrated annual report may reveal the extent to which this has been accomplished.
Indeed, a fully integrated sustainability strategy no longer runs parallel to the corporate strategy
(Gond, Grubnic, Herzig, and Moon 2012). In fact, writing an integrated report can support the
development of integrated thinking (Cheng et al. 2014; Stubbs and Higgins 2014). In particular,
Stubbs and Higgins (2014) found that integrated reporting could be a reflection of integrated
thinking or a way to push integrated thinking in the organization. In a similar vein, recent studies on
environmental accounting (e.g., Adams and McNicholas 2007; Bouten and Hoozée 2013; Tilt
2006) have demonstrated that external reporting may act as a catalyst for organizational change.
We acknowledge that the purposes of sustainability and integrated reporting are currently
diverging. More specifically, integrated reporting is evolving toward a more narrow focus on
(financial) value creation for the shareholder (as opposed to all stakeholders) due to the involvement
of the International Integrated Reporting Committee (IIRC) (see, e.g., Brown and Dillard 2014;
Cheng et al. 2014; de Villiers, Rinaldi, and Unerman 2014). We believe, however, that Telenet’s
integrated annual report can be used to assess both its sustainability and integrated reporting
practices for three reasons. First, Telenet wanted to provide a truthful account of its sustainability
information to a wider audience. Second, any report submitted to the jury is assessed based on more
general sustainability criteria. Finally, it should be noted that at the time of the publication of the
report, the current, narrower, definition of integrated reporting, as suggested by the IIRC, did not
exist yet. Case Requirements 3 and 4b emphasize integrated reporting.
We believe that discussing the case requirements also helps students in developing skills of
reflection. In particular, by reflecting on the importance of completeness, materiality, and the
integration of sustainability in the corporate strategy, as well as on the motivations behind
sustainability reporting, students develop a deeper understanding of the challenges that companies
may face in the development of their sustainability and/or integrated reporting. In addition, students
are asked to translate their reflections into hands-on recommendations for the company’s

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
378 Bouten and Hoozée

TABLE 1
Case Alignment Chart
Cognitive Process Categories
According to Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy
(Anderson et al. 2001)
Analyze/
Evaluate/
Learning Objective Remember Understand Apply Create
To describe the criteria that sustainability-related Question 2
disclosures need to fulfill in order to be complete.
To discuss the concept of materiality. Question 1
To identify and clarify the challenges that companies Question 3
may face in developing an integrated report. Question 4
To examine the role of materiality in sustainability Question 1
reporting.
To examine the criteria that sustainability-related Question 2
disclosures need to fulfill in order to be complete.
To demonstrate the importance of an integrated Question 4
strategy for connecting financial and environmental
performance indicators.
To unravel the role of an integrated strategy in Question 3
developing an integrated report.
To reflect on the motivations behind sustainability- Question 5
related disclosures.
We combined the more complex cognitive process categories (analyze, evaluate, and create) into one overarching
category (see Anderson et al. 2001, 234–236).

management. For example, students can suggest that the disclosed information could be more
comprehensive (in terms of performance indicators, targets, and actions) and better structured.

Learning Objectives
After successful completion of this case, students should be able to:
1. discuss the concept of materiality and examine its role in sustainability reporting;
2. describe and examine the criteria that sustainability-related disclosures need to fulfill in
order to be complete;
3. unravel the role of an integrated strategy in developing an integrated report;
4. demonstrate the importance of an integrated strategy for connecting financial and
environmental performance indicators;
5. identify and clarify the challenges that companies may face in developing an integrated
report; and
6. reflect on the motivations behind sustainability-related disclosures.
Table 1 represents the Case Alignment Chart. It matches the different case questions to the
learning objectives and Anderson et al.’s (2001) cognitive process categories: remember,

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
Challenges in Sustainability and Integrated Reporting 379

understand, apply, and analyze/evaluate/create. The table demonstrates that most learning
objectives can be related to higher-order, concept-related—as opposed to fact-related—skill
development. Therefore, we believe that the case is especially suited for master’s-level courses,
such as general financial reporting courses that incorporate contemporary reporting trends, or more
specific accounting courses on sustainability, accountability, or ethics.

Implementation Guidance
The case was tested by two different instructors with students from a business school in France
and a state university in The Netherlands. In France, the case was taught twice to a small group of
students (Implementation Approach 1) during a M.Sc. course entitled Controlling and Auditing
Corporate Social Responsibility. This course was compulsory for students in the Audit and Control
track of the Grande École master’s program. In The Netherlands, the case was used four times in
larger groups (Implementation Approach 2) during a compulsory course on Accounting and
Business Ethics in the M.Sc. in Accounting, Auditing and Control program.

Case Implementation Approach 1 (Instructor 1)

With the first approach, the case was completely solved and discussed in class (average number
of students ¼ 20). More specifically, two consecutive sessions of 75 minutes were devoted to the case
(about 10 minutes to read the case material, 100 minutes to prepare the questions, and 30 minutes for
the in-class discussion of the answers). Telenet’s Annual Report 2011 was distributed at the beginning
of the first session and the students were divided in teams of three to four students. Each team had to
appoint a single note taker in order to keep the students focused and to structure their arguments.
While students were solving the questions, the instructor walked around and provided
assistance where needed in order to better guide the students in the development of their critical
reflection on the integrated report. The assistance mainly consisted of indicating the relevant
sections to read. Once the students had completed all case requirements, they had to turn in their
answers and the instructor launched the in-class discussion. We believe that this approach
encourages student participation during the in-class discussion because by first sharing their
thoughts in small teams, students are emboldened to share their thoughts with the entire class. We
acknowledge that this close follow-up approach is most suited for small groups.
The quality of the answers and the observation of the instructor during the class were combined
in determining the students’ grades. This means that ‘‘passive’’ students could receive a lower grade
than more active members of the same team. The observations of the instructor made it possible to
assess the quality of each individual’s contribution within a specific team. The grade of the written
analysis—expressed as a value with a maximum of 2—was based on the relevance, profoundness,
and internal consistency of the teams’ answers to the case questions. More specifically, for
relatively small, operational shortcomings 0.25 points were deducted, whereas for larger, more
conceptual flaws 0.50 points were deducted. The average score was 1.45/2. The assignment counted
for 10 percent of the overall course grade.

Case Implementation Approach 2 (Instructor 2)

With the second approach, because the group size was larger (average number of students ¼
39), in-class coaching was not possible. We therefore decided to flip or invert the classroom (e.g.,
Bergmann and Sams 2012; Lage, Platt, and Treglia 2000), i.e., students had to solve all case
questions before class. They were asked to report their answers in teams of four to five students.
The case solutions were discussed in class during a 90-minute session. The instructor’s grading was
only based on the written report. The grade—expressed as a value with a maximum of 10—was

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
380 Bouten and Hoozée

TABLE 2
Students’ Answers to the Survey Questions

Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean

French French Dutch Dutch Dutch Dutch
Overall
Group 1 Group 2 Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
Question (n ¼ 19) (n ¼ 20) (n ¼ 38) (n ¼ 39) (n ¼ 38) (n ¼ 40) Mean (SD)
Q1 ¼ LO1 5.32 5.53 5.49 5.31 5.24 5.00 5.29 (1.25)
Q2 ¼ LO2 5.42 5.90 5.16 5.15 4.89 5.30 5.24 (1.27)
Q3 ¼ LO3 5.50 5.60 5.05 5.26 5.24 5.18 5.25 (1.19)
Q4 ¼ LO4 5.58 5.55 5.03 4.77 5.29 5.40 5.21 (1.28)
Q5 ¼ LO5 5.47 5.90 4.95 4.95 5.05 5.35 5.20 (1.20)
Q6 ¼ LO6 5.21 5.48 5.08 5.21 4.42 4.98 5.01 (1.21)
Q7 5.84 6.13 5.81 5.59 5.39 6.03 5.76 (1.15)
Q8 5.53 6.00 5.61 5.49 5.29 5.45 5.52 (1.12)
Q9 5.16 5.25 4.97 4.64 4.68 4.58 4.81 (1.22)
LO is Learning Objective.
Q7: The Telenet case presented a realistic business situation.
Q8: Overall, the Telenet case was a beneficial learning experience.
Q9: The Telenet case was a challenging case.

based on the following weights: Question 1: 1.50; Question 2: 1.50; Question 3: 2.00; Question 4:
3.00; Question 5: 2.00. The average score was 7.58/10. The assignment counted for 15 percent of
the overall course grade. The same score was initially assigned to all team members, but students
also had to complete a peer evaluation form. When all team members consistently indicated that
certain team members had over- or underperformed, the instructor took this information into
account to determine individual team member’s scores.

Evidence of Efficacy
To provide evidence of the desired learning outcomes, we asked the students to assess nine
statements on a seven-point Likert scale (1 ¼ totally disagree; 4 ¼ neutral; 7 ¼ totally agree). Table 2
shows the survey questions, and the answers’ means and standard deviations.
The survey was completed by 194 students (56 percent male; 44 percent female). The main
nationalities were Dutch (41 percent), Greek (14 percent), French (13 percent), Chinese (10
percent), Bulgarian (2 percent), Canadian (2 percent), German (2 percent), and Russian (2 percent).
The results demonstrate that students felt the case presented a realistic business situation (mean Q7
¼ 5.76) that assisted them in (1) discussing the concept of materiality and examining its role in
sustainability reporting (mean Learning Objective 1 [LO1] ¼ 5.29); (2) describing and examining
the criteria that sustainability-related disclosures need to fulfill in order to be complete (mean LO2 ¼
5.24); (3) unraveling the role of an integrated strategy in developing an integrated report (mean
LO3 ¼ 5.25); (4) demonstrating the importance of an integrated strategy for connecting financial
and environmental performance indicators (mean LO4 ¼ 5.21); (5) identifying and clarifying the
challenges that companies may face in developing an integrated report (mean LO5 ¼ 5.20); and (6)
reflecting on the motivations behind sustainability-related disclosures (mean LO6 ¼ 5.01). Finally,
the results demonstrate that the students found the case to be a beneficial (mean Q8 ¼ 5.52) and
achievable (mean Q9 ¼ 4.81) learning experience.

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
Challenges in Sustainability and Integrated Reporting 381

TEACHING NOTES AND STUDENT VERSION OF THE CASE

Teaching Notes and the Student Version of the Case are available only to non-student-member
subscribers to Issues in Accounting Education through the American Accounting Association’s
electronic publications system at http://aaapubs.org/. Non-student-member subscribers should use
their usernames and passwords for entry into the system where the Teaching Notes can be reviewed
and printed. The ‘‘Student Version of the Case’’ is available as a supplemental file that is posted
with the Teaching Notes. Please do not make the Teaching Notes available to students or post them
on websites.
If you are a non-student-member of AAA with a subscription to Issues in Accounting
Education and have any trouble accessing this material, please contact the AAA headquarters office
at info@aaahq.org or (941) 921–7747.

REFERENCES
Adams, C. A., and P. McNicholas. 2007. Making a difference: Sustainability reporting, accountability and
organisational change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 20 (3): 382–402.
Anderson, L. W., D. R. Krathwohl, P. W. Airasian, K. A. Cruikshank, R. E. Mayer, P. R. Pintrich, J. Raths,
and M. C. Wittrock. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Bergmann, J., and A. Sams. 2012. Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day.
Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Bouten, L., and S. Hoozée. 2013. On the interplay between environmental reporting and management
accounting change. Management Accounting Research 24 (4): 333–348.
Brown, J., and J. Dillard. 2014. Integrated reporting: On the need for broadening out and opening up.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 27 (7): 1120–1156.
Cheng, M., W. Green, P. Conradie, N. Konishi, and A. Romi. 2014. The international integrated reporting
framework: Key issues and future research opportunities. Journal of International Financial
Management & Accounting 25 (1): 90–119.
de Villiers, C., L. Rinaldi, and J. Unerman. 2014. Integrated reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for
future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 27 (7): 1042–1067.
Frias-Aceituno, J. V., L. Rodriguez-Ariza, and I. M. Garcia-Sanchez. 2013. The role of the board in the
dissemination of integrated corporate social reporting. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management 20 (4): 219–233.
Gond, J.-P., S. Grubnic, C. Herzig, and J. Moon. 2012. Configuring management control systems:
Theorizing the integration of strategy and sustainability. Management Accounting Research 23 (3):
205–223.
Jensen, J. C., and N. Berg. 2012. Determinants of traditional sustainability reporting versus integrated
reporting. An institutionalist approach. Business Strategy and the Environment 21 (5): 299–316.
Lage, M. J., G. J. Platt, and M. Treglia. 2000. Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive
learning environment. Journal of Economic Education (Winter): 30–43.
Owen, G. 2013. Integrated reporting: A review of developments and their implications for the accounting
curriculum. Accounting Education: An International Journal 22 (4): 340–356.
Stubbs, W., and C. Higgins. 2014. Integrated reporting and internal mechanisms of change. Accounting,
Auditing & Accountability Journal 27 (7): 1068–1089.
Tilt, C. A. 2006. Linking environmental activity and environmental disclosure in an organisational change
framework. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change 2 (1): 4–24.

Issues in Accounting Education

Volume 30, No. 4, 2015
Copyright of Issues in Accounting Education is the property of American Accounting
Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.