BORSA İSTANBUL’DAKİ ŞİRKETLERİN FAALİYET RAPORLARININ OKUNABİLİRLİĞİ: FİNANSAL PERFORMANS KAPSAMINDA BİR KARŞILAŞTIRMA

Year 2022, , 262 - 274, 31.12.2022

Emin Zeytinoğlu , Nasıf Özkan

https://doi.org/10.46737/emid.1178097

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Borsa İstanbul 100 endeksinde bulunan şirketlerin yayımladığı faaliyet raporlarının okunabilirliğini ölçerek farklı finansal performansa sahip şirketler arasında okunabilirlik düzeyi açısından anlamlı bir farkın olup olmadığını değerlendirmektir. Bu kapsamda 2020 ve 2021 yıllarına ait faaliyet raporlarının okunabilirliği Ateşman Okunabilirlik İndeksi yardımı ile incelenmiştir. Çalışmada ek olarak finansal performansı yüksek şirketler ile finansal performansı düşük şirketlerin okunabilirlik puanları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık olup olmadığı bağımsız örneklem t testi yoluyla analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda her iki yıl için de faaliyet raporlarının genel olarak zor okunabilirlik derecesine sahip olduğu ve okunabilirlik puanı açısından performansı düşük şirketler ile yüksek şirketler arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık tespit edilmiştir. Çalışmada ek olarak gizleme hipotezinin varlığını destekleyecek bir kanıta da ulaşılamamıştır. Yapılan araştırma kapsamında hem faaliyet raporlarının okunabilirlik düzeyleri tespit edilerek hem de gizleme hipotezinin varlığı incelenerek literatüre katkıda bulunulmuştur.

Keywords

Okunabilirlik, Faaliyet Raporu, Gizleme Hipotezi, Finansal Performans

READABILITY OF ANNUAL REPORTS OF COMPANIES LISTED IN BORSA ISTANBUL: A COMPARISON WITHIN THE FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK

Abstract

This study is intended to measure the readability of annual reports published by companies in the Borsa Istanbul 100 Index and evaluate whether there is a significant difference in readability between companies varying in financial performance. To this end, the readability of the annual reports from the years 2020 and 2021 was examined using Ateşman’s Readability Index. The study also used the independent sample t-test to analyze whether or not there is a statistically significant difference in the readability scores between companies with high financial performance and those with low financial performance. As the result, it was found that the annual reports were generally hard to read in both years and there was a statistically significant difference in the readability score between low and high-performance companies. Nor was any evidence found to support the presence of the obfuscation hypothesis. The study contributes to the literature both by identifying the annual report readability scores and exploring the presence of the obfuscation hypothesis.

Keywords

Readability, Annual Report, Obfuscation Hypothesis, Financial Performance

References

• Abu Bakar, A. S. ve Ameer, R. (2011). “Readability of corporate social responsibility communication in Malaysia”. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(1): 50-60.
• Ateşman, E. (1997). “Türkçe’de okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi”. A.Ü. Tömer Dil Dergisi, 58(2): 71-74.
• Aymen, A., Sourour, B. S. ve Badreddine, M. (2018). “The effect of annual report readability on financial analysts behavior”. Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting, 5(1): 26-37.
• Baker, E. H. ve Kare, D. D. (1992). “Relationship between annual report readability and corporate financial performance”. Management Research News, 15(1): 1-4.
• Barnett, A. ve Leoffler, K. (1979). “Readability of accounting and auditing messages”. Journal of Business Communication, 16(3), 49-59.
• Clatworthy, M. ve Jones, M. J. (2001). “The effect of thematic structure on the variability of annual report readability”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 14(3): 311-326.
• Courtis, J. K. (1986). “An investigation into annual report readability and corporate risk-return relationships”. Accounting and Business Research, 16(64): 285-294.
• Courtis, J. K. (1995). “Readability of annual reports: Western versus Asian evidence”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2): 4-17.
• Courtis, J. K. (1998). “Annual report readability variability: Tests of the obfuscation hypothesis”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 11(4): 459-472.
• Crossley, S. A., Skalicky, S., Dascalu, M., McNamara, D. S. ve Kyle, K. (2017). “Predicting text comprehension, processing, and familiarity in adult readers: New approaches to readability formulas”. Discourse Processes, 54(5-6): 340-359.
• De Souza, J. A., Rissatti, J. C., Rover, S. ve Borba, J. A. (2019). “The linguistic complexities of narrative accounting disclosure on financial statements: An analysis based on readability characteristics”. Research in International Business and Finance, 48: 59-74.
• Hassan, M. K. (2008). “The development of accounting regulations in Egypt”. Managerial Auditing Journal, 23(5): 467-484.
• Hesarzadeh, R., Bazrafshan, A. ve Rajabalizadeh, J. (2020). “Financial reporting readability: Managerial choices versus firm fundamentals”. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting / Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 49(4): 452-482.
• Hossain, F. F. ve Siddiquee, M. (2008). “Readability of management reviews in the annual reports of listed companies of Bangladesh”. SSRN Electronic Journal.
• Hrasky, S. ve Smith, B. (2008). “Concise corporate reporting: Communication or symbolism?” Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 13(4): 418-432.
• Hrasky, M., Manson, C. ve Wills, D. (2009). “The textual complexities of annual reports narratives: a comparison of high and low performance companies”. New Zealand Journal of Applied Business Research, 7(2): 31-45.
• Jones, M. J. (1988). “A longitudinal study of the readability of the chairman's narratives in the corporate reports of a UK company”. Accounting and Business Research, 18(72): 297-305.
• Jones, M. ve Smith, M. (2014). “Traditional and alternative methods of measuring the understandability of accounting narratives”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(1): 183-208.
• Lei, Q., Lin, B. ve Wei, M. (2013). “Types of agency cost, corporate governance and liquidity”. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32(3): 147-172.
• Li, F. (2008). “Annual report readability, current earnings, and earnings persistence”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 45(2-3): 221-247.
• Linsley, P. M. ve Lawrence, M. J. (2007). “Risk reporting by the largest UK companies: Readability and lack of obfuscation”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(4): 620-627.
• Moreno, A. ve Casasola, A. (2016). “A readability evolution of narratives in annual reports: a longitudinal study of two Spanish companies”. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 30(2): 202-235.
• Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. United Kingdom: McGraw-Hill Education.
• Pasko, O., Minta, S., Rudenko, S. ve Hordiyenko, M. (2020). “Do poor and good performing companies report differently? The readability and impression management in corporate narrative documents: Evidence from Northern Europe”. Business: Theory and Practice, 21(2): 835-849.
• Rutherford, B. A. (2003). “Obfuscation, textual complexity and the role of regulated narrative accounting disclosure in corporate governance”. Journal of Management and Governance, 7: 187-210.
• Schroeder, N. ve Gibson, C. (1992). “Are summary annual reports successful?”. Accounting Horizons, 6(2): 28-37.
• Smith, B. N. (2005). “Characteristics of firms that issue concise financial reports in Australia”. Financial Reporting, Regulation & Governance, 4(1): 1-41.
• Smith, M., Jamil, A., Chik Johari, Y. ve Ahmar Ahmad, S. (2006). “The chairman's statement in Malaysian companies: a test of obfuscation hypothesis”. Asian Review of Accounting, 14(1/2): 49-65.
• Smith, M. ve Taffler, R. (1992). “The chairman's statement and corporate financial performance”. Accounting & Finance, 32(2): 75-90.
• Stellner, B. (2022). “Readability of annual reports on the Vienna stock exchange: A test of management obfuscation hypothesis”. Central European Business Review.
• Subramanian, R., Insley, R. G. ve Blackwell, R. D. (1993). “Performance and readability: A comparison of annual reports of profitable and unprofitable corporations”. Journal of Business Communication, 30(1): 49-61.
• Thoms, C., Degenhart, A. ve Wohlgemuth, K. (2020). “Is bad news difficult to read? A readability analysis of differently connoted passages in the annual reports of the 30 DAX companies”. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 34(2): 157-187.