6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
6.3 Limitations and directions for further research
This study is limited to the case company. The results represent answers from the case com-pany, and external stakeholders related to the case company and the XBRL project. Because of this, the results cannot be generalized. Because the thesis studied the first-time implemen-tation and adoption of ESEF reporting and is time sensitive, some of the results may not be lasting and may change over time. Practices and regulation regarding the ESEF reporting will probably evolve in the future. In addition, technological development will continue to change accounting field and new technologies will emerge.
Besides conducting similar study in different jurisdiction to discover differences and similari-ties or in a case company that has selected high level adoption, further research could focus on service providers in Finland, how they have adapted to the new regulation and what chal-lenges they have met. Another future research could be conducted with auditors and how XBRL tool can benefit auditing process and analyzing the data. In addition, because of the in-dicated differences between jurisdictions, quantitative research based on the ESEF reports could be interesting, for example, assessing the differences in using extensions and anchoring.
LIST OF REFERENCES
Alles, M. & Gray, G. (2012) A Relative Cost Framework of Demand for External Assurance of XBRL Filings. Journal of Information Systems 26,1, 103-126.
Alles, M. & Piechocki, M. (2012) Will XBRL improve corporate governance? A framework for enhancing governance decision making using interactive data. International Journal of Ac-counting Information Systems 13, 91–108.
Autor, D. (2015) Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Au-tomation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 29, 3, 3–30.
Autor, D., Levy, F. & Murnane, R. (2003) The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: an Empirical Exploration. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1279-1333.
Bharosa, N., Van Wijk, R., De Winne, N. & Janssen, M. (2015) Challenging the Chain: Governing the Automated Exchange and Processing of Business Information. Logius & Thauris, Delft Uni-versity of Technology, Delft.
Baldwin, A., Brown, C. & Trinkle, B. (2006) XBRL: An Impacts Framework and Research Chal-lenge. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting 3, 1, 97–116.
Beath, C., Becerra-Fernandez, I., Ross, J. & Short, J. (2012) Finding value in the information explosion. MIT Sloan Management Review 53, 4, 18-20.
Beattie, V. & Pratt, K. (2003) Issues concerning web-based business reporting: an analysis of the views of interested parties. The British Accounting Review 35, 155–187.
Bhimani, A. & Willcocks, L. (2014) Digitisation, 'Big Data' and the transformation of accounting information. Accounting and Business Research, 44, 4, 469-490.
Britt, J., Muthusamy, K. & Bir, P. (2017) XBRL and the qualitative characteristics of useful fi-nancial information. Accounting Research Journal 30, 1, 107–126.
Bonson, E. (2001) The Role of XBRL in Europe. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research 1, 2, 101-110.
Boritz, J., & No, W. (2008) The SEC’s XBRL Voluntary Filing Program on EDGAR: A Case for Quality Assurance. Current Issues in Auditing 2, 2, A36–A50.
Boritz, J. & No, W. (2009) Assurance on XBRL-Related Documents: The Case of United Tech-nologies Corporation. Journal of Information Systems 23, 2, 49–78.
Brown, N., Cai, Y., Guo, Y., Kazman, R., Kim, M., Kruchten, P., Lim, E., MacCormack, A., Nord, R., Ozkaya, I., Sangwan, R., Seaman, C., Sullivan, K. & Zazworka, N. (2010). Managing technical debt in software-reliant systems. Proceedings of the FSE/SDP Workshop on Future of Software Engineering Research (FoSER), ACM, 47-52.
Chen, G., Kim, J., Lim, J., & Zhou, J. (2018) XBRL Adoption and Bank Loan Contracting: Early Evidence. The Journal of Information Systems 32, 2, 47-69.
Cohen, E. (2009) XBRL's global ledger framework: Exploring the standardised missing link to ERP integration. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 6, 3, 188–206.
Commission delegated regulation 2018/815/EU supplementing Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards on the specification of a single electronic reporting format. Official Journal of the European Union L 143, 29.5.2019, 1-792. [Accessed 16.2.2021]. Available at: https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-con-tent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019R0815&from=EN.
Creswell, J. W. (2014) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods ap-proaches (4th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Debreceny, R., Farewell, S., Piechocki, M., Felden, C. & Gräning, A. (2010) Does it add up? Early evidence on the data quality of XBRL filings to the SEC. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 29, 3, 296-306.
Debreceny, R. & Gray, G. L. (2001) The production and use of semantically rich accounting reports on the Internet: XML and XBRL. International Journal of Accounting Information Sys-tems 2, 1, 47-74.
Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonization of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are
admitted to trading on a regulated market. Official Journal of the European Union L 390, 31.12.2004, 38-57. [Accessed 16.2.2021]. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcon-tent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32004L0109&from=EN.
Directive 2013/50/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonization of trans-parency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market. Official Journal of the European Union L 294, 6.11.2013, 13-27. [Accessed 16.2.2021]. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcon-tent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013L0050&from=EN.
Doolin, B. & Troshani, I. (2004) XBRL: A research note. Qualitative Research in Accounting &
Management 1, 2, 93-104.
ESMA. (2019) Final Report. [Online] ESEF XBRL Taxonomy Documentation (ESMA). [Accessed on 24.1.2021]. Available at: https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/esma32-60-417_esef_xbrl_taxonomy_documentation_1.0.pdf
ESMA. (2020) Final Report. [Online] European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA). [Ac-cessed on 18.10.2020]. Available at: https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/li-brary/esma32-60-607_final_report_draft_rts_amending_rts_on_esef_2020.pdf
ESMA (2021). IAS Regulation. [Online] European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).
[Accessed 24.1.2021]. Available at: https://www.esma.europa.eu/convergence/ias-regulation EC (2020) Financial reporting. [Online] European Commission (EC). [Accessed 24.1.2021].
Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/company-reporting-and-au-diting/company-reporting/financial-reporting_en
Eierle, B., Ojala, H. & Penttinen, E. (2014) XBRL to enhance external financial reporting: Should we implement or not? Case Company X. Journal of Accounting Education 32, 2, 160-170.
Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014) Qualitative Con-tent Analysis: A Focus on Trustworthiness. SAGE Open 4, 1.
Enofe, A. & Amaria, P. (2011) Extensible Businee Reporting Language XBRL: a New Dimension in Financial Reporting. International Journal of Business, Accounting, and Finance 5, 1, 78-90.
Eriksson, P. & Kovalainen, A. (2008) Qualitative Methods in Business Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Faboyede, O. (2011) E-Business Conflict Resolution: the Role of XBRL, the Next-generation Digital Language of Business Reporting. National Journal of System and Information Technol-ogy 4, 1, 30-51.
Farewell, S. (2006) An introduction to XBRL through the use of research and technical. Journal of Information Systems 20, 1, 161-185.
Felden, C. (2011) Characteristics of XBRL adoption in Germany. Journal of Management Con-trol 22, 2, 161-186.
FIN-FSA (2020a) ESEF – European Single Electronic Format for listed companies starting with financial statements for 2020 [Online]. Financial Supervisory Authority (FIN-FSA). [Accessed on 25.10.2020]. Available at: https://www.finanssivalvonta.fi/en/capital-markets/issuers-and-investors/esef-xbrl/
FIN-FSA (2020b) IFRS enforcement [Online]. Financial Supervisory Authority (FIN-FSA). [Ac-cessed on 24.1.2021]. Available at: https://www.finanssivalvonta.fi/en/capital-markets/issu-ers-and-investors/ifrs/
FIN-FSA (2020c) FIN-FSA will not act upon non-compliance with the requirement to publish ESEF financial statements in 2021. [Online]. Financial Supervisory Authority (FIN-FSA). [Ac-cessed on 2.5.2021]. Available at: https://www.finanssivalvonta.fi/en/publications-and-press- releases/news-releases/2020/fin-fsa-will-not-act-upon-non-compliance-with-the-require-ment-to-publish-esef-financial-statements-in-2021/
Fossey, E., Harvey, C., Mcdermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002) Understanding and Evaluating Qualitative Research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 36, 6, 717-732.
Frey, C. & Osborne, M. (2017) The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to com-puterisation? Technological Forecasting & Social Change 114, 254–280.
Furneaux, B., & Wade, M. (2017) Impediments to Information Systems Replacement: A Calcu-lus of Discontinuance. Journal of Management Information Systems 34, 3, 902-932.
Galarza, M. (2017) The Changing Nature of Accounting. Strategic Finance 98, 8, 50–54.
Garbellotto, G. (2009a) How to Make Your Data Interactive. Strategic Finance 90, 9, 56-57.
Garbellotto, G. (2009b) XBRL Implementation Strategies: The Bolt-on Approach. Strategic Fi-nance 90, 11, 56-57.
Garner, D., Henderson, D., Sheetz, S. & Trinkle, B. (2013) The Different Levels of XBRL Adop-tion. Management Accounting Quarterly 14, 2, 1-10.
Gillham, B. (2000) Case Study Research Methods. London: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.
Gostimir, D. (2015) XBRL Standard for Financial Reporting in Croatia: Current State and Per-spectives. Business Systems Research 6, 1, 31-40.
Güney, A. (2014) Role of technology in accounting and e-accounting. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152, 852 – 855.
Hirsjärvi, S., Remes, P. & Sajavaara, P. (2007) Tutki ja kirjoita. Keuruu: Otavan kirjapaino Oy.
Hoffman, C. & Rodriguez, M. (2013) Digitizing Financial Reports – Issues and Insights: A View-point. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research 13, 73 – 98.
Hsieh, T., Wang, Z. & Abdolmohammadi, M. (2019) Factors Associated with Companies’
Choices of XBRL Implementation Strategies: Evidence from the U.S. Market. Journal of Infor-mation Systems 33, 3, 75-91.
Humphrey, C. & Scapens, R. (1996) Methodological themes. Theories and case studies of or-ganizational accounting practices: limitation or liberation? Accounting, Auditing and Account-ability 9, 4, 86–106.
IFRS (2018) Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting. [Online]. IFRS Foundation. [Ac-cessed on 24.1.2021].
https://www.ifrs.org/-/media/project/conceptual-framework/fact- sheet-project-summary-and-feedback-statement/conceptual-framework-project-sum-mary.pdf
Janvrin, D. & Mascha, M. (2010) The Process of Creating XBRL Instance Documents: A Research Framework. Review of Business Information Systems 14, 2, 11-34.
Janvrin, D. & No, W. (2012) XBRL implementation: A field investigation to identify research opportunities. Journal of Information Systems 26, 1, 169-197.
Jones, A. & Willis, M. (2003) The challenge of XBRL: Business reporting for the investor. Ba-lance Sheet 11, 3, 29-37.
Kaarlejärvi, S. & Salminen, T. (2018) Älykäs taloushallinto: Automaation aika. E-kirja Alma Tal-entin Verkkokirjahylly-palvelussa.
Kaya, D., & Pronobis, P. (2016) The benefits of structured data across the information supply chain: Initial evidence on XBRL adoption and loan contracting of private firms. Journal of Ac-counting and Public Policy 35, 4, 417-436.
Kirk, J. & Miller, M. (1986) Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Inc.
Knudsen, D. (2020) Elusive boundaries, power relations, and knowledge production: A system-atic review of the literature on digitalization in accounting. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 36.
Kruchten, P., Nord, R., & Ozkaya, I. (2012) Technical Debt: From Metaphor to Theory and Prac-tice. IEEE Software 29, 6, 18-21.
Kruskopf, S., Lobbas, C., Meinander, H., Söderling, K., Martikainen M. & Lehner O.M. (2019) Digital Accounting: Opportunities, Threats and the Human Factor. ACRN Oxford Journal of Fi-nance and Risk Perspectives, 8, Special Issue Digital Accounting, 1–15.
Lehner, O., Leitner-Hanetseder, S. & Eisl, C. (2019) Editorial: The Whatness of Digital Account-ing: Status Quo and Ways to Move Forward. ACRN Oxford Journal of Finance and Risk Perspec-tives, 8(2019) Special Issue Digital Accounting, I–X.
Liu, C., Luo, X. & Wang, F. (2017) An Empirical Investigation on the Impact of XBRL Adoption on Information Asymmetry: Evidence from Europe. Decision Support Systems 93, 42-50.
Li, Z., Avgeriou, P., & Liang, P. (2015) A systematic mapping study on technical debt and its management. The Journal of Systems and Software 101, 193-220.
Locke, J., Rowbottom, N., & Troshani, I. (2018) Sites of translation in digital reporting. Account-ing, Auditing & Accountability Journal 31, 7, 2006-2030.
Lowe, A., Locke, J. & Lymer, A. (2012) The SEC’s retail investor 2.0: Interactive data and the rise of calculative accountability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 23, 183– 200.
Moffitt, K., Rozario, A. & Vasarhelyi, M. (2018) Robotic Process Automation for Auditing. Jour-nal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting 15, 1, 1-10.
Nel, G. & Steenkamp, L. (2008) An exploratory study of chartered accountants' awareness and understanding of XBRL. Meditari Accountancy Research 16, 1, 79-93.
Perdana, A., Robb, A. & Rohde, F. (2015) An Integrative Review and Synthesis of XBRL Research in Academic Journals. Journal of Information Systems 29, 1, 115- 153.
Phillips, M., Bahmanziari, T. and Colvard, R. 2008. Six steps to XBRL. Journal of Accountancy 205, 2, 34–37.
Pinsker, R. & Li, S. (2008) Costs and benefits of XBRL adoption: early evidence. Communica-tions of the ACM 51, 47-50.
Plumlee, R. & Plumlee, M. (2008) Assurance on XBRL for Financial Reporting. Accounting Ho-rizons 22, 3, 353-68.
Pope, P. & McLeay, S. (2011) The European IFRS Experiment: objectives, research challenges and some early evidence. Accounting and Business Research, 41, 3, 233-266.
Prasad, A. & Green, P. (2015) Governing cloud computing services: Reconsideration of IT gov-ernance structures. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 19, 45-58.
Rolland, K., Mathiassen, L., & Rai, A. (2018) Managing Digital Platforms in User Organizations:
The Interactions Between Digital Options and Digital Debt. Information Systems Research 29, 2, 419-443.
Rom, A. & Rohde, C. (2007) Management accounting and integrated information systems: A literature review. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 8, 1, 40-68.
Roohani, S., Furusho, Y. & Koizumi, M. (2009) XBRL: Improving transparency and monitoring functions of corporate governance. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 6, 4, 355–369.
Srivastava, R. & Kogan, A. (2010) Assurance on XBRL instance document: A conceptual frame-work of assertions. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 11, 261–273.
Steenkamp, L. & Nel, G. (2012) The Adoption of XBRL in South Africa: An Empirical Study. The Electronic Library 30, 3, 409-25.
Stoecker, R. (1991) Evaluating and rethinking the case study. Sociological Review 39, 1, 88-112.
Troshani, I. & Doolin, B. (2007) Innovation diffusion: a stakeholder and social network view.
European Journal of Innovation Management 10, 2, 176-200.
Troshani, I., Janssen, M., Lymer, A. & Parker, L. (2018) Digital transformation of business-to-government reporting: An institutional work perspective. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 31, 17–36.
Troshani, I., Locke, J. & Rowbottom, N. (2019) Transformation of accounting through digital standardization. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 32, 1, 133-162.
Troshani, I. & Rao, S. (2007) Drivers and Inhibitors to XBRL adoption: A Qualitative Approach to Build a Theory in Under-Researched Areas. International Journal of EBusiness Research (IJEBR) 3, 4, 98-111.
Tuomi, J. & Sarajärvi, A. (2018) Laadullinen tutkimus ja sisällönanalyysi. Uudistettu laitos. Hel-sinki: Kustannusosakeyhtiö Tammi.
Via, N., & Garbellotto, G. (2015) Internal reporting with XBRL global ledger: enhance internal decision making with better integrated, more detailed, and timelier reports. Strategic Finance 97, 4, 46-54.
Zhu, Z., Hsu, K., & Lillie, J. (2001) Outsourcing – a strategic move: the process and the ingredi-ents for success. Management Decision 39, 5, 373-378.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Semi-structured theme interview for case company Introductions
Basic information
Theme 1: XBRL implementation strategy and process XBRL project
• When was the planning for the XBRL tool started?
• What goals were set for the XBRL project?
• How was the resourcing planned for the project? (Timeline/costs/staffing)
• How was the project team built? (units/internal/external)
• How were the requirements for the XBRL tool determined?
• What were the criteria for deciding the implementation strategy? (outsourcing/in-house)
Implementation process
• How was implementation planned?
• What kind of support was offered and received from the service supplier?
• What were considered as the main challenges or risks for implementation?
• How was the plan rolled out?
• How was training organized?
Results
• How was the existing system and the new implemented tool linked?
• How were the goals set for the project achieved?
• How has external financial reporting process changed?
• What were the most challenging steps in the process?
• What was the strategy to utilize XBRL after implementation?
Theme 2: ESEF reporting
• Before ESEF reporting was introduced, what kind of information and training did you get regarding the ESEF requirements?
• How was the tagging process planned?
• How was the tagging strategy determined?
• How were the tags reviewed?
• Which of the primary financial statement tags were the most complex to review and why?
• What have been the biggest challenges with the ESEF reporting?
• If you acquired assurance for the ESEF tags, what are the main benefits of the assurance?
• Did you publish the ESEF report file as official? Why/why not?
• How has the publishing of the annual financial report changed?
Something else important regarding the topic?
Appendix 2. Semi-structured interview for service provider Introductions
Basic information ESEF reporting
• How did you prepare for the ESEF requirements?
• How was the tagging process planned?
• How do you document the tagging process?
• How was the tagging process implemented?
• How did you determine the correct tag for the figures?
• Which of the primary financial statements were the most complex to tag and why?
• What was the most difficult step in the process?
• How do you update the taxonomy, if needed?
Something else important regarding the topic?
Appendix 3. Semi-structured interview for assurance provider Introductions
Basic information ESEF reporting
• How did you prepare for the ESEF requirements?
• How was the tagging assurance process planned?
• How do you document the tagging assurance process?
• How did you determine if a figure is correctly/incorrectly tagged?
• What is the most important aspect in the tagging process from auditor’s point of view?
• Which of the primary financial statements were the most complex to review?
• What was the most difficult step in the assurance process?
Something else important regarding the topic?
Appendix 4. List of meetings