Publications

Working Papers

Stakeholder responses to CSR information: Evidence from employees

solo-authored

Abstract: While there is ample evidence that investors use CSR disclosure, evidence for non-investor stakeholders is rare. Focusing on employees as a specific stakeholder group, I use a sample of Fortune’s “100 best companies to work for” list firms between 2005 and 2017 to provide evidence on employees’ long and short-term responses to positive, employee-specific CSR disclosure. Measuring the short-term response using abnormal Google search volume, I find a significant increase in searches following the list publication. However, this increased employee does not lead to a long-term response, as indicated by the insignificant increase of applications to the list firms. In contrast, firms seem to increase their CSR activities in employee-related matters, as they pay fewer non-financial misconduct fines after being featured on the list. Overall, I find that employees pay attention to tailored CSR information but fail to act upon it, whereas firms change their CSR activities when anticipating increased stakeholder attention.

The analysis of material contracts: Use of SEC contractual data in accounting research

with Victor Sehn and Matthias Uckert 

Abstract: Material contracts offer direct insights into firms' decision-making. Despite their extensive information content, prior literature makes notably less use of material contracts compared to other firm disclosures. This paper seeks to address this gap by promoting the use of material contracts as a valuable data source in accounting research. To that end, we conduct a full-scale analysis of the material contracts filed as exhibits with the SEC between 2001 and 2024. The paper provides empirical evidence on the strategic contract filing behavior, the filers' characteristics and the contracts' information content. We highlight challenges and limitations of material contracts as a data source and outline potential future research questions. Our sample and the corresponding code are provided in an open-source database, easing the access and processability of contracts for accounting researchers. 

Walking the Climate Talk? The Use of Environmental Clauses in Corporate Contracts

with Victor Sehn

Abstract: In recent years, the number of firms announcing net-zero emission pledges has significantly increased. As these pledges constitute long-term forecasts of corporate environmental performance, stakeholders face the challenge of assessing their credibility and distinguishing between credible commitments and cheap talk. This paper analyzes firms’ use of environmental contract clauses and assesses whether these clauses are indicative of firms’ “walking their talk”. Analyzing material contracts between 2013 and 2023, we find a steady rise in environmental clauses, with a sharp increase in incentive clauses towards the end of the sample, which the firms also mention in their contract-related communication. Environmental contract clauses, if made in combination with climate pledges, are associated with a decrease in future emissions, suggesting that these clauses can be a useful indicator to identify credible climate commitments.

Standard Setters’ Awareness, Acquisition, and Integration of Real Effects Arguments in Financial Reporting

with Thorsten Sellhorn and Katharina Weiß

Abstract: Accounting standards prescribe how business activities are reflected in financial reports, but may also induce ‘real effects.’ This study examines how real effects arguments – claims that accounting standards trigger behavioral responses in the real economy – enter and progress through the accounting standard-setting process. We focus on the IASB’s development of IFRS 16 Leases, a setting in which constituents explicitly warned that lease capitalization could trigger real effects with broader economic implications. Drawing on the information processing framework of Blankespoor et al. (2020), we trace real effects arguments from comment letters (awareness) through staff papers (acquisition), Board meeting discussions, and the documents accompanying the final standard (integration). Using this comprehensive set of publicly available IASB materials and semi-automated content analysis, we document three main patterns. First, real effects arguments are primarily raised by preparers, especially lessees and lessors, and are more prevalent where firms are larger, more exposed to the new standard, and repeat commentators. Second, staff acquisition is selective and depends on argument content and framing. Market-wide and transition cost concerns are less frequently elevated, particularly in early phases, while cautiously framed arguments or those invoking the Conceptual Framework are more likely to be acquired. Third, although most acquired arguments reach Board discussion, only a subset is reflected in final standard setting documents, often to address mitigation strategies or to dismiss concerns viewed as economically immaterial. Overall, the evidence highlights stage-specific filtering that shapes which real effects arguments become influential in standard-setting rationales and visible in ultimate outcomes.

Politics of sustainability reporting: Evidence from NGO involvement

with Simone Euler and Cathrin Hausmann 

Abstract: NGOs have become an increasingly important actor in the development of sustainability disclosure rules, and public consultations from 2016 to 2023 reveal how they engage in this process. But their participation remains far lower than that of corporate preparers, creating an imbalance in who provides input to emerging standards. Therefore, we analyze NGO involvement and their preferred reporting obligations using EU, EFRAG, and ISSB consultations, NGO statements, and interviews. We find that NGOs participate selectively but consistently advocate for broad, high-ambition disclosure requirements, especially for high-risk sectors and high-impact topics. Their positions often diverge from corporate preparers yet align with financial preparers. While some demands initially informed the CSRD, subsequent political changes, particularly the Commission’s Omnibus amendments, diluted key provisions and reduced NGOs’ willingness to invest their technical expertise in the standard-setting process.

Ann-Kristin Großkopf

a.n.grosskopf@uva.nl