Social Disclosure Studies: Reviews and Categorisations
Ullmann (1985) contributed some important new insights to CSR research. He writes about
methodological and theoretical problems that are still valid. Ullmann criticises research that
was previously performed and new research directions are proposed. Ullmann reviews articles
and classifies them based upon models of relationships between (1) social performance and
social disclosure, (2) social performance and economic performance and between (3) social
disclosure and economic performance. A large problem faced by these studies is the
conceptualization and operationalisation of key issues, in which there is no consensus on
methodology and results between the studies. For the relation between economic and social
disclosure, a distinction between “Friedman-type” investors and ethical investors needs to be
made. The first will reward social performance negatively, the latter positively. In efficient
markets, stock prices, as a possible performance indicator for economic performance, must
also reflect all disclosed information on social issues. Other variables used in research are
accounting variables. Ullmann states that it is not clear, whether models that are used in
financial disclosure studies can be used for social disclosure analysis. The ambiguous results
of the reviewed research assume that the models have not been applied consistently. Another
research direction is needed. The nature of the relationships between social disclosures and
economic and social performance need to be studied taking into consideration company
strategy, focusing on how companies deal with stakeholder demands. A contingency model is
proposed using stakeholder power and strategic behaviour variables. The contingency
approach means that, linked to strategic behaviour types, relations between economic and
social performances and social disclosure need to be researched. The model suggests that
differentiation is needed between voluntary and non-voluntary disclosures.
Gray, Kouhy and Lavers (1995) have provided a much cited4
categorisation of corporate
social and environmental disclosure studies. Other authors have not questioned this
categorisation. Gray, Kouhy and Lavers talk about three broad groups of theories concerning
organisation-information flows. They do not explain the choice for the categories. The
following categories are identified by them: