Author:
Cordery Carolyn J.,Fowler Carolyn J.,Mustafa Khairil
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the factors influencing the non‐adoption of Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) technology.Design/methodology/approachThis exploratory study analyses interview data obtained from key XBRL stakeholders on the relative importance of environmental, organisational and technological context factors to ascertain why adoption has not occurred.FindingsThe research finds three reasons for XBRL non‐adoption. First, the lack of a government “push” for XBRL technology results in organisational ignorance. Second, it appears that organisations do not believe that XBRL will beneficially reduce compliance costs. Third, complexity in developing the structured language (taxonomy) for XBRL use has significant budgetary implications.Research limitations/implicationsAs qualitative research, this study does not claim to be generalisable or objective. However, the rich data were analysed from a diverse group of interviewees experienced and knowledgeable in respect of XBRL development and adoption.Social implicationsGovernments' promises to reduce organisational compliance costs may be a reason for them to invest extensive taxpayers' dollars into XBRL. However, organisations are sceptical they will benefit, requiring government to “push” the technology. Until government servants can forecast the real benefits to argue for increased budgets to develop a comprehensive taxonomy, widespread adoption of XBRL is unlikely to occur.Originality/valueThe non‐adoption of XBRL highlights the difficulties encountered when enthusiastic professionals can see the potential of a business solution, and yet are impotent to execute it. Environmental and technological contextual factors need to “push” organisations, as with XBRL, organisations do not demand, or “pull”, the technology.
Reference38 articles.
1. Accounting Web (2008), “SEC ready to mandate the filing of accounts in XBRL”, available at: www.AccountingWEB.co.uk/ (accessed May 18, 2009).
2. Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behaviour”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179‐211.
3. Baker, N. (2008), “Holland takes a different tack on XBRL”, Compliance Week, February 26 (electronic version).
4. Bonsón, E., Cortijo, V. and Escobar, T. (2009), “A Delphi investigation to explain the voluntary adoption of XBRL”, The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research, Vol. 9, pp. 193‐205.
5. Boyd, G. (2004), “XBRL in New Zealand past, present and future”, Chartered Accountants Journal, Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 9‐11.
Cited by
31 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献