نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری حسابداری، دانشکده اقتصاد و مدیریت، دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران

2 دانشیار حسابداری، دانشکده اقتصاد و مدیریت، دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران

10.22054/qjma.2025.82479.2623

چکیده

هدف این پژوهش بررسی وجود انگیزه‌های مرتبط با فرضیه‌های خیریه، علامت‌‌دهی و ‌سرمایه‌گذاریِ مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی و همچنین نقش کیفیت گزارشگری مالی در ایجاد این انگیزه‍ها در صورت وجود است. این پژوهش از لحاظ هدف کاربردی بوده و از نظر اجرا و بررسی رابطه بین متغیرها در شاخه پژوهش‌های توصیفی-همبستگی قرار دارد. بر اساس شرایط و محدودیت‌های اعمال شده، نمونه آماری غربال شده متشکل از 101 شرکت پذیرفته شده در بورس تهران در طی سال‌های 1393 الی 1402 بوده و با استفاده از الگوهای رگرسیونی چند متغیره مورد آزمون قرار گرفته‌ است. نتایج بیانگر آن است که مشارکت شرکت‍ها در فعالیت‍های مسئولیت‍پذیری اجتماعی با انگیزه‍هایی به‍غیر از اهداف خیریه انجام شده و کیفیت گزارشگری مالی تأثیر مثبت و معناداری بر ‌مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی بهینه که انگیزه‍های سرمایه‌گذاری را در خود جای داده است داشته و تأثیر منفی و معناداری نیز بر انحراف از ‌مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی بهینه که انگیزه‍های علامت‌دهی را در خود جای داده است دارد. به طور کلی بر اساس نتایج می‌توان بیان نمود که شرکت‌های دارای کیفیت گزارشگری مالی بالاتر، کمتر احتمال دارد که از طریق ‌مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی علامت‌های فرصت‌طلبانه ارسال کنند و در نتیجه، ‌مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی در این شرکت‌ها بهینه‌تر و یا به عبارت دیگر به منظور اهداف سرمایه‌گذاری، کسب سود و افزایش ارزش شرکت انجام می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Quality of Financial Reporting as a Motivation for Charity, Signaling, and Investment Activities of Social Responsibility

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hayder Hussein Nassr 1
  • Hamzeh Didar 2
  • Gholamreza Mansourfar 2

1 PhD student of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Management, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

2 Associate Professor of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Management, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

چکیده [English]

The aim of this study is to examine the presence of motivations related to the charity, signaling, and socially responsible investment (SRI) hypotheses, as well as the role of financial reporting quality in fostering these motivations, if present. This research is applied in nature and falls within the descriptive-correlational category, as it explores the relationships between variables. Based on specific criteria and limitations, the screened sample consists of 101 companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange during the years 2014 to 2023, which were analyzed using multivariate regression models. The findings indicate that companies' participation in corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities is driven by motivations beyond charitable purposes. Furthermore, financial reporting quality has a positive and significant impact on optimal CSR—those activities driven by investment-related motivations—while it has a negative and significant impact on deviations from optimal CSR, which are driven by signaling motivations. Overall, the results suggest that companies with higher financial reporting quality are less likely to engage in opportunistic signaling through CSR activities. Consequently, CSR in these companies is more aligned with optimal goals, such as investment, profit generation, and enhancing firm value.

Introduction

Several theoretical frameworks explain how financial reporting quality influences corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. Legitimacy theory suggests that companies with agency problems may disclose CSR information to rebuild trust. Signaling theory argues that high-quality financial reporting uses CSR to signal transparency and financial health. Stakeholder theory emphasizes that high-quality financial reporting motivates companies to consider stakeholder interests. Agency theory suggests that low-quality reporting may lead companies to use CSR to hide weaknesses. Lys et al. (2015) propose three hypotheses: (1) the charity hypothesis (CSR for societal benefit), (2) the investment hypothesis (CSR to improve performance), and (3) the signaling hypothesis (CSR driven by future prospects or opportunism). This study aims to examine the impact of financial reporting quality on these hypotheses.
Research hypotheses

CSR activities do not have a significant impact on the company's financial performance.
Financial reporting quality has a positive impact on CSR activities motivated by investment purposes.
Financial reporting quality has a significant impact on CSR activities driven by signaling motives.
Literature Review

Financial reporting quality can create different incentives for companies to engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities, with varying motivations depending on the level of reporting quality. According to Lys et al. (2015), these motivations can be categorized into three hypotheses: the charity, investment, and signaling hypotheses.
Charity Hypothesis: High-quality financial reporting can lead to CSR activities driven by genuine philanthropic motivations, whereas companies with low-quality reporting might use CSR as a tool to mask managerial or informational weaknesses. The charitable motivation is typically seen as non-strategic in companies with high-quality reporting, but in companies with lower-quality reporting, CSR may serve as a means to manipulate stakeholders' perceptions without a true commitment to society.
Investment Hypothesis: Under this hypothesis, CSR activities are viewed as investments aimed at improving financial performance. Companies with high-quality financial reporting treat CSR as a strategic tool to enhance performance, believing it can reduce capital costs, improve reputation, and strengthen relationships with stakeholders.
Signaling Hypothesis: CSR activities are used as signals to the market and stakeholders. Companies with high-quality financial reporting use CSR to send positive signals regarding their commitment to social and environmental causes, while companies with poor reporting may use CSR as a misleading signal to compensate for weak financial transparency.

Methodology

This applied, retrospective study focuses on analyzing relationships between various variables using past data. It is descriptive-correlational in nature. A library research method was used to develop the theoretical framework and review the literature. Primary data were collected from sources such as the Rahavard Novin software database, financial statements, company notes, and board of directors' reports. The research population includes companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, with data collected from 2014 to 2023. Based on specific criteria, 101 companies were selected for hypothesis testing during this period.

Results and Discussion

The results of the first hypothesis showed that CSR positively impacts company performance, indicating that motivations beyond charity should be explored in Iranian companies. Financial reporting quality was found to drive CSR activities, supporting the second and third hypotheses related to investment and signaling motives.
The second hypothesis confirmed that financial reporting quality positively impacts optimal CSR, with companies using CSR to increase value and profit. This finding is consistent with signaling and stakeholder theories, as companies with high-quality reporting are more motivated to engage in CSR for investment purposes.
The third hypothesis showed that financial reporting quality negatively impacts deviations from optimal CSR, suggesting that high-quality reporting reduces opportunistic motives and leads to more genuine CSR efforts. These findings confirm that financial reporting quality promotes investment-driven motivations and reduces opportunistic behavior.

Conclusion

Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that companies can improve their performance by engaging in CSR activities, and these activities are driven by motivations beyond philanthropic goals. In this context, financial reporting quality has a positive and significant impact on optimal CSR. This indicates that companies with higher financial reporting quality engage in CSR activities with investment and profit-seeking objectives. Additionally, financial reporting quality has a negative and significant impact on deviations from optimal CSR. This result suggests that companies with higher financial reporting quality are less likely to send opportunistic signals through CSR. As a result, CSR in these companies is more aligned with optimal goals—namely, investment purposes, profit generation, and enhancing company value.
Acknowledgments
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all the esteemed professors who assisted the authors in preparing this article.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Financial reporting quality
  • charity hypothesis
  • signaling hypothesis
  • investment hypothesis
  • social responsibility
  1. جبار عبد علی العتبی، ساره؛ زواری رضایی، اکبر؛ چالاکی، پری؛ پیری، پرویز. (1402). اثر تجدید ارائه صورت های مالی بر کیفیت و افشای فعالیت های داوطلبانه گزارشگری مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت های بورسی. دوفصلنامه علمی حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری، 8(16) 40-60.‎ http:/‌/‌aapc.khu.ac.ir/‌article-1-1185-fa.html
  2. حساس یگانه، یحیی؛ سلیمی، محمد جواد. (1390). مدلی برای رتبه بندی حاکمیت شرکتی در ایران. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 8(30)، 1-35. https:/‌/‌dor.isc.ac/‌dor/‌20.1001.1.28210166.1389.8.30.1.4
  3. دارابی، رویا و سجادی نژاد، سید طیبه. (1401)، اثر حاکمیت شرکتی بر کیفیت گزارشگری مالی در طول دوران همه گیری کووید 19: نشریه علمی رویکردهای پژوهشی نوین مدیریت و حسابداری، 22(6)، 154-165. https:/‌/‌majournal.ir/‌index.php/‌ma/‌article/‌view/‌1582
  4. زارع، ایمان . (1401). کیفیت گزارشگری مالی با رویکرد تئوریک و مبتنی بر چارچوب مفهومی جامع: از منظر تئوری ساخت‌یابی تعدیل شده. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 19(76)، 189-219. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.22054/‌qjma.2023.71278.2422
  5. صفرزاده، محمدحسین، آسیایی، محمدرضا، رضایی فر، زهرا. (1403). رابطه بین ویژگی‌های مدیر مالی و کیفیت گزارشگری مالی. پژوهش های تجربی حسابداری، 14(1)، 89-114. Doi: 10.22051/‌jera.2024.45331.3173
  6. عبدی، مصطفی، کردستانی، غلامرضا، رضازاده، جواد. (1399). گزارشگری پایداری: رتبه‌بندی محرک‌ها و شاخص‌ها. پژوهش های تجربی حسابداری، 10(2)، 71-114. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.22051/‌jera.2019.25698.2404
  7. فراس هادی مکصوصی، کرار، منصورفر، غلامرضا و دیدار، حمزه. (1401). رقابت در صنعت و گزارشگری مسئولیت اجتماعی. نشریه پژوهش های حسابداری مالی، 14(4)، 59-82. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.22108/‌far.2023.137828.1975
  8. فرجی، امید، جنتی دریاکناری، فاطمه؛ منصوری، کفسان؛ یونسی مطیع، فاطمه. (1399). ‌مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی و ارزش شرکت: نقش تعدیلگر مدیریت سود. مدیریت سرمایه اجتماعی 7، 25-58.    https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.22059/‌jscm.2019.276161.1792
  9. کاشانی پور، محمد، جندقی، غلامرضا، رحمانی، محمد. (1397). بررسی رابطه بین کیفیت گزارشگری مالی با افشا اطلاعات پایداری شرکت های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. پژوهش های تجربی حسابداری، 8(3)، 11-31. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.22051/‌jera.2017.11186.1388
  10. مشایخ، شهناز، طهماسبی آشتیانی، مهسا. (1403). رابطه حساسیت و توجه سرمایه‌گذار نسبت به گزارشگری مسئولیت اجتماعی و اثر تعاملی عملکرد شرکت بر آن. پژوهش های تجربی حسابداری، 14(1)، 63-88. https:/‌/‌jera.alzahra.ac.ir/‌article_7625.html?lang=fa
  11. نظریان، راحله؛ امیری هنزاء، فاطمه. (1402). تأثیر نقش میانجیگری شهرت شرکت بر رابطه مابین افشای مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی و عملکرد شرکت. نشریه علمی رویکردهای پژوهشی نوین در مدیریت و حسابداری، 7(24)، 1319-1336. https:/‌/‌majournal.ir/‌index.php/‌ma/‌article/‌view/‌1897
  12. Acharyya, M., & Agarwala, T. (2020). Relationship between csr motivations and corporate social performance: a study in the power industry in india. Employee Relations, 44(3), 663-685. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1108/‌ER-01-2019-0091
  13. Andreou, P. C., Karasamani, I., Louca, C., & Ehrlich, D. )2017(. The impact of managerial ability on crisis-period corporate investment. Journal of Business Research, 79, 107–122. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jbusres.2017.05.022
  14. Bae, K. H., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C., & Zheng, Y. (2019). Does corporate social responsibility reduce the costs of high leverage? Evidence from capital structure and product market interactions. Journal of Banking and Finance100, 135-150. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jbankfin.2018.11.007
  15. Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 71–86. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1007/‌s10551-010-0496-z
  16. Carroll, A. & Shabana, K. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: a review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85-105. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1111/‌j.1468-2370.2009.00275.x
  17. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.2307/‌257850
  18. Clarkson P., Li Y., Richardson G., & Tsang A. (2019). Causes and consequences of voluntary assurance of CSR reports: International evidence involving Dow Jones Sustainability Index Inclusion and Firm Valuation. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 32, 2451-2474. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌AAAJ-03-2018-3424
  19. Cochran, P., Wood, R. 1984. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 42–56. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.5465/‌255956
  20. Deng, X., Kang, J.-K., & Low, B. S. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value maximization: Evidence from mergers. Journal of Financial Economics, 110(1), 87–109. https:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.2139/‌ssrn.2067416
  21. Desjardine M. R., Marti E., & Durand R. (2021). Why activist hedge funds target socially responsible firms: The reaction costs of signaling corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Journal, 64, 851-872. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.5465/‌amj.2019.0238
  22. Edmans, A. (2011). Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial Economics, 101(3), 621–640. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jfineco.2011.03.021
  23. Francis, J., R. Lafond, Olsson, P., & Schipper, K. (2004). Information Uncertainty and Post-Earnings-Announcement-Drift. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 11(1–1), 111– 11. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1111/‌j.1468-5957.2007.02030.x
  24. Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Perspective. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1017/‌CBO9781139192675
  25. Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1995). Accounting and Accountability: Changes and Challenges in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting. Prentice Hall. https:/‌/‌durham-repository.worktribe.com/‌output/‌1123501
  26. Griffin, J., & Mahon, J. )1997(. The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: twenty-five years of incomparable research. Bus.Soc. 36, 5–31. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1177/‌000765039703600102
  27. Habel, J., Schons, L., Alavi, S., & Wieseke, J. (2016). Warm glow or extra charge? the ambivalent effect of corporate social responsibility activities on customers’ perceived price fairness. Journal of Marketing, 80(1), 84-105. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1509/‌jm.14.0389
  28. Hahn, R. & Kühnen, M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59, 5-21. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jclepro.2013.07.005
  29. Javed, M., Rashid, M. A., Hussain, G., & Ali, H. Y. (2019). The effects of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation and firm financial performance: Moderating role of responsible leadership. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management27(3), 1395-1409. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.1892
  30. Johnson, R., & Greening, D., (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 564–576. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.2307/‌256977
  31. Karpoff, J., Lott, J., & Wehrly, E. (2005). The reputational penalties for environmental violations: empirical evidence. The Journal of Law and Economics, 48, 653–675. https:/‌/‌ssrn.com/‌abstract=747824
  32. Kim, Y., Park, M. S., & Wier, B. (2012). Is Earnings Quality Associated with Corporate Social Responsibility? The Accounting Review, 87(3), 761-796. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.2308/‌accr-10209
  33. Lindorff, M., & Peck, J. (2010). Exploring Australian financial leaders' views of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Management & Organization, 16(1), 48-65. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1017/‌S1833367200002261
  34. Lopatta, K., Canitz, F., & Tideman, S. A. (2024). Abnormal CSR and financial performance. European Accounting Review33(1), 49-75. https:/‌/‌ssrn.com/‌abstract=4119559
  35. Lys, T., Naughton, J. P., & Wang, C. (2015). Signaling through corporate accountability reporting. Journal of accounting and economics60(1), 56-72. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jacceco.2015.03.001
  36.  Masulis, R. W., & Reza, S. W. (2014). Agency problems of corporate philanthropy. Review of Financial Studies, 28(2), 592-636. https:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.2139/‌ssrn.2234221
  37. Mentor, M. (2016). The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Financial Performance. Honors Undergraduate Theses, 47. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.56472/‌25835238/‌IRJEMS-V3I1P106
  38. Mishra, D. R., Sadok, E. G., Omran G., & Chuk C. Y. K. (2011). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect the Cost of Capital? Journal of Banking and Finance, 35(9), 2388-2406. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌SAMPJ-10-2019-0364
  39. Orlitzky, M., & Benjamin, J. (2001). Corporate social performance and firm risk: a metanalytic review. Business & Society, 40, 369–396. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1177/‌000765030104000402
  40. Pareek, R. & Sahu, T. (2021). How far the ownership structure is relevant for csr performance? an empirical investigation. Corporate Governance, 22(1), 128-147. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1108/‌CG-10-2020-0461
  41. Preston, L., & O'Bannon, D. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relation: a typology and analysis. Business and Society, 36, 419–429. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1177/‌000765039703600406
  42. Romito, S., & Vurro, C. (2021). Non‐financial disclosure and information asymmetry: A stakeholder view on US listed firms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28, 595-605. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.2071
  43. Sameer, I. (2021). Impact of corporate social responsibility on organization’s financial performance: evidence from Maldives public limited companies. Future Business Journal, 7(1), 29. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1186/‌s43093-021-00075-8
  44. Spencer, B., & Taylor, G. )1987(. A within and between analysis of the relation between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Akron Bus. Econ. Rev. 18, 7–18. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1177/‌000765039903800105
  45. Wu, M. (2006). Corporate social performance, corporate financial performance, and firm size: a meta-analysis. Journal of American Academy of Business, 8, 163–171. http:/‌/‌dx.doi.org/‌10.1177/‌0170840603024003910