Abstract

The credibility of sustainability reports has been the subject of scientific research for several years. The problem is often referred to as the so-called credibility gap, which is based on information asymmetries. The situation is further complicated by the limited rationality of human action as improvements to reports do not necessarily translate into credibility gains. Research has proposed and extracted several methods to overcome the issue. Hitherto, most approaches to solve the problem focused on marketing-oriented approaches. This work takes a new approach and explores the extent to which information technology can increase credibility using the potential of big data analytics. We base our research on the relationship of the quality of information and on the perception of objective truth as postulated in the Habermas Theory of Communicative Action. We use the forecast-oriented Partial Least Squares Methodology for the review of hypotheses extracted from literature and expert surveys. The result confirms potential of the criteria of volume and veracity while velocity and variety do not yield comparable potential concerning sustainability reporting.

Highlights

  • In recent years, more and more companies and organizations have been trying to make their activities more sustainable

  • We examine whether it is possible to improve the perception of the objective truth of published sustainability report information by the means of big data analytics

  • We conclude that an improvement of the perceived credibility of sustainability reports is generally possible with help of big data analytics

Read more

Summary

Introduction

More and more companies and organizations have been trying to make their activities more sustainable. To manage and measure own goals, performance, and operational changes, sustainability reports have become a very popular means (GRI 2016, 3). Sustainable actions and their transparency through reporting activities lead to several advantages perceived by external groups of interest such as an improved reputation (Weber 2014, 13f). The same applies to the completeness of measures and their information value (Knebel and Seele 2015, 198ff). This raises the question of the perceived credibility of published data and facts. The problem is referred to as the credibility gap, which is based on information asymmetries as a state of insecurity due to differing efforts and levels of information

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call