Background: On the 21st of April 2021, the EU Commission declared the adoption of Directive (EU) 2022/2464. This directive will significantly increase reporting requirements for companies within its scope. To this date, these sustainability standards are the most comprehensive yet and they aim to foster sustainability reporting quality. However, the concept of quality is multidimensional and empirical evidence related to SRQ and mandatory reporting standards are ambiguous. However, this new directive has not yet been researched thoroughly. Considering it will disrupt the way companies conduct their sustainability reporting, it would foster a research contribution to explore the effects the directive will have on SRQ.  Purpose: This thesis seeks to measure the compliance with, and quality of, the cross- cutting and topical standards derived from Directive (EU) 2022/2464 in large Swedish companies.  Method: The applied research method is quantitative with a deductive approach, where a hypothesis was generated based on existing literature on sustainability reporting quality. Data was collected from annual and sustainability reports of 45 companies. To measure CSRD compliance and the quality index, content analysis has been used. This facilitates transposition of qualitative information to quantitative data. The data was analysed using the statistical program SPSS.  Results: The results from the study show a significant positive relationship between compliance with CSRD and all the dependent variables of measuring the quality of sustainability reporting. Furthermore, the study shows that the average degree of compliance with CSRD requirements is currently 34% in the population, where the highest achieved score was 58% and the lowest achieved score was 7%.

<p>Functional<strong> </strong>magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a popular technique to study brain function and neural networks. Functional MRI studies are often characterized by small sample sizes and rarely consider statistical power when setting a sample size. This could lead to data dredging, and hence false positive findings. With the widespread use of fMRI studies in clinical disorders, the vulnerability of participants points to an ethical imperative for reliable results so as to uphold promises typically made to participants that the study results will help understand their conditions. While important, power-based sample size calculations can be challenging. The majority of fMRI studies are observational, i.e., are not designed to randomize participants to test efficacy and safety of any therapeutic intervention. My PhD thesis therefore addresses two objectives: firstly, to identify potential obstacles to implementing sample size calculations, and secondly to provide solutions to these obstacles in observational clinical fMRI studies. This thesis contains three projects.</p> <p>Implementing a power-based sample size calculation requires specifications of effect sizes and variances. Typically in health research, these input parameters for the calculation are estimated from results of previous studies, however these often seem to be lacking in the fMRI literature. Project 1 addresses the first objective through a systematic review of 100 fMRI studies with clinical participants, examining how often observed input parameters were reported in the results section so as to help design a new well-powered study. Results confirmed that both input estimates and sample size calculations were rarely reported. The omission of observed inputs in the results section is an impediment to carrying out sample size calculations for future studies.</p> <p>Uncertainty in input parameters is typically dealt with using sensitivity analysis; however this can result in a wide range of candidate sample sizes, leading to difficulty in setting a sample size. Project 2 suggests a cost-efficiency approach as a short-term strategy to deal with the uncertainty in input data and, through an example, illustrates how it narrowed the range to choose a sample size on the basis of maximizing return on investment.</p> <p>Routine reporting of the input estimates can thus facilitate sample size calculations for future studies. Moreover, increasing the overall quality of reporting in fMRI studies helps reduce bias in reported input estimates and hence helps ensure a rigorous sample size calculation in the long run. Project 3 is a systematic review of overall reporting quality of observational clinical fMRI studies, highlighting under-reported areas for improvement and suggesting creating a shortened version of the checklist which contains essential details adapted from the guidelines proposed by Poldrack et al. (2008) to accommodate strict word limits for reporting observational clinical fMRI studies.</p> <p>In conclusion, this PhD thesis facilitates future sample size and power calculations in the fMRI literature by identifying impediments, by providing a short-term solution to overcome the impediments using a cost-efficiency approach in conjunction with conventional methods, and by suggesting a long-term strategy to ensure a rigorous sample size calculation through improving the overall quality of reporting.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

本研究以財報重編為財報品質之代理變數，探討自由現金流量是否對內部股權結構與財報品質的關係具有調節效果，期望藉助對於自由現金流量調節效果之了解，以利報表閱讀者更適當地解讀財報訊息，瞭解財報之品質。 實證結果顯示，自由現金流量對內部股權結構與財報品質間確實具有顯著的調節效果，尤其是董、監持股率與董事兼任經理人這兩項因素對於財報品質之關係，很受到自由現金流量之影響。自由現金流量本身與財報重編呈顯著負相關，自由現金流量愈高，財報重編的可能性愈低。但自由現金流量所引發的代理問題，反而可能對董、監持股率、董事兼任經理人與財報品質間的關係產生負面的調節效果，即財報重編的可能性顯著提高。但自由現金流量對於經理人持股率與財報品質間的關係不具有顯著的調節效果。 / This study examines whether free cash flow has the moderating effect on the relation between ownership structure and financial reporting quality, using financial restatements as a proxy for financial reporting quality. This study tries to interpret earnings information more appropriately through more understanding on the moderating effect of free cash flow. The study shows that free cash flow exactly has the moderating effect on the relation between ownership structure and financial reporting quality, especially for stocks holding ratio by directors and supervisors and CEO duality. Firms having more free cash flow are less likely to restate statements. However, free cash flow might trigger agency problem, which might having negative moderating effects, causing higher possibilities to restate statements. Otherwise, the finding of this study shows that there is no significantly moderating effect on the relation between managerial ownership and financial reporting quality.

Society is increasingly calling for organisations to demonstrate corporate social responsibility (CSR). To fulfil this demand, organisations need to be accountable, democratic and transparent to their stakeholders. This can be achieved using a number of tools including communication about the environmental, social and economic impacts of an organisation’s actions and activities. Yet despite the importance of communicating environmental information, and society’s heightened environmental awareness, organisations are still demonstrating an insufficient commitment to environmental reporting, continuing their reluctance to be open and accountable about their environmental impacts. This suggests organisations currently have little understanding of why they should report, what they should report and/or how they should report. For environmental reporting progress to be achieved it is important that we have knowledge of how various factors influence voluntary environmental reporting engagement. This research, in contributing to and extending the body of environmental reporting knowledge, aims to provide an understanding of the Why, What and How of voluntary environmental reporting by specifically examining: why organisations should, and why organisations do, voluntarily report environmental information; what environmental information organisations should, and what environmental information organisations do, voluntarily report; and how organisations should, and how organisations do, voluntarily report environmental information. In using a combination of research methodologies this research extends prior CSR reporting studies – closing the gap between voluntary environmental reporting practice and theory, providing better insights into the underlying reasons and motivations for voluntary environmental reporting, and providing improved knowledge of the considerations made by companies as part of the voluntary environmental reporting process. In doing so, this research presents a more recent examination of voluntary environmental reporting in the annual reports of New Zealand and Australian publicly listed companies. Aspects of voluntary environmental reporting that have not been extensively examined before, particularly in Australasia, are examined. These include a focus on content-quality (as opposed to reporting quantity), an investigation of the effect of public pressure (using a combination of three proxy measures), and, through the use of qualitative research, an expansion of the insights obtained from quantitative data. This research finds that New Zealand and Australian publicly listed companies continue to have an insufficient and incorrect understanding of why they should report, what they should report and/or how they should voluntarily report environmental information. This deficient understanding results in voluntary environmental reporting in their annual reports which is inadequate – the reporting lacks meaning and purpose (i.e. has form but little or no substance), and reflects managers’ incorrect perceptions about the environmental impact of their company’s actions and activities. As a result voluntary environmental reporting in the annual reports of New Zealand and Australian publicly listed companies fails to “… give an understanding, which is not misleading, …” of the environmental consequences of an organisation’s actions and activities (adapted from Alexander & Jermakowicz, 2006, p. 132), providing little accountability to stakeholders, and serving neither external stakeholders nor those reporting well. As the demand for organisations to demonstrate accountability to stakeholders continues to increase over time it is important to develop informed environmental reporting guidance and undertake further examinations of the Why, What and How of environmental reporting.

The aim of the study is to analyze how Swedish large fashion companies' sustainability reports quality has been changed 2016-2019. The study wants to create a deeper understanding of the legislative change initiated by the EU that Sweden introduced in 2017. Quality is declared to consist of the three categories of credibility, content and communication. The study's issue was: “How has the quality of fashion companies' sustainability reports been affected when they became statutory to be produced?”. The sample consisted of 14 companies. Some of the companies prepared joint sustainability reports which led to the number of sustainability reports that the study analyzed being 10 reports per year 2016–2019. An additional report was added for 2019 when a company chose to prepare a report separately from the parent company. A qualitative content analysis was used as a method to study the selected 41 sustainability reports. The theories and concepts used in the study for analysis were triple bottom line, institutional theory, stakeholder theory, signal theory and GRI. The results showed that companies' quality of sustainability reports have changed both in accordance with the EU Directive 2014/95/EU, but largely due to surrounding factors. The study has provided a deeper understanding of companies' sustainability reporting and shown that there is no unambiguous change in quality when sustainability reporting for larger companies became mandatory by law.

For many years, international financial reporting – and in particular the notes reporting – has been criticized in practice and academia for failing to provide information that is appropriate for its intended users. This criticism points to deficits with regard to the content and presentation and, thus, to the overall quality of the notes reporting. However, this criticism is predominantly anecdotal in nature as there is, as yet, scarcely any valid scientific evidence that supports these claims. This work addresses this research gap by elaborating what (notes) reporting quality is, what dimensions it consists of (conceptualization), how these dimensions can be measured (operationalization) and how they are empirically manifested (empirical evidence). For the latent construct of (notes) reporting quality, a formative measuring instrument to be used in an integrative content analysis is developed with which both dimensions of (notes) reporting quality – a content dimension (e.g., relevance) and a formal dimension (e.g., diction/readability) – can be measured and analyzed. This measuring instrument is validated both theoretically (argumentative reflection) and empirically (testing of hypotheses derivable from the underlying theories). The subsequent analysis of the notes reporting quality of a representative sample of German firms reveals that the above-mentioned criticism is well founded. Furthermore, the results point out both what specific deficits exist and where. The results of this work – the conceptualization, the operationalization and the empirical evidence – together form a starting point for developing, in the context of the (notes) reporting and its quality, valid insights/knowledge in research, ‘best practice’ solutions in practice and conceptually sound and target-oriented solutions in regulation.

Der internationalen Finanzberichterstattung – und darin insbesondere der Anhangberichterstattung – wird seit vielen Jahren in Praxis und Wissenschaft eine fehlende adressatengerechte Informationsbereitstellung vorgeworfen. Die Kritik deutet auf Defizite hinsichtlich Inhalt und Darstellung und somit insgesamt der Qualität der Anhangberichterstattung hin. Diese Kritik ist jedoch überwiegend anekdotischer Natur, valide wissenschaftliche Evidenz fehlt bislang. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird diese Forschungslücke adressiert. Für das latente Konstrukt Berichterstattungsqualität wird dafür zunächst ein formatives Messinstrument entwickelt, mit dem sowohl die inhaltliche (u. a. Relevanz) als auch die formale Dimension (u. a. Lesbarkeit) von Berichterstattungsqualität gemessen und analysiert werden kann. Dieses Messinstrument wird sowohl theoretisch (argumentative Reflektion) als auch empirisch (Prüfung von aus den zugrundeliegenden Theorien ableitbaren Relationen) validiert. Die anschließende Erhebung von Berichterstattungsqualität einer repräsentativen Stichprobe deutscher Unternehmen mittels einer integrativen Inhaltsanalyse verdeutlicht, dass die o. g. Kritik begründet ist und zeigt auf, worin konkret Defizite bestehen. Die vorliegende Arbeit leistet damit einen Beitrag zur konzeptionellen und empirischen Rechnungslegungsforschung.:Teil 1: Einführung Teil 2: Grundlagen Teil 3: Konzeptionierung von Berichterstattungsqualität Teil 4: Empirische Analyse von Berichterstattungsqualität im Anhang bzgl. immaterieller Vermögenswerte Teil 5: Fazit

Abstracts in English, Southern Sotho and Swahili / The broad aim of this explanatory sequential mixed-methods study was to extend the extant literature by developing a weighted polychotomous accountability index (PAI) that, in turn, was used to measure and evaluate the extent and quality of integrated annual reports (IARs) prepared by the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) listed companies for the period 2013 to 2016. The study was motivated by a paucity of research on whether corporate accountability, through corporate reporting, has improved (extent and quality) under integrated reporting (<IR>) through improved integrated reporting quality (IRQ) scores. The study was conducted in two phases. The first phase was for developing the PAI through the Delphi Inquiry method. In the same phase, through qualitative and quantitative content analysis, the PAI was used to measure and evaluate the extent and quality of IARs for the JSE Top 100 companies over the four-year period (2013–2016). The second phase, in the form of semi-structured interviews, aimed at investigating the factors that contributed to the change in IRQ scores over that period. Eight respondents (preparers of IARs), representing five companies, were interviewed. Through the Delphi Inquiry method, the PAI was developed (major contribution of the study), which has eight categories, 44 constructs, a total possible score of 152 and a total weight of 100%. Furthermore, the PAI has a six-point ordinal scoring system from 0 to 5. For the IRQ scores, mean annual IRQ scores were computed as 52.45% for 2013, 58.48% for 2014, 64.72% for 2015 and 68.29% for 2016. As for the JSE sectors, the highest IRQ scores were 66.45%, 71.05%, 75% and 81.25% for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 respectively. From an industry perspective, the results showed highest IRQ scores of 66.45%, 72.37%, 70.72% and 62.42% for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 respectively. The steady increase in the mean IRQ scores for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 shows that there is significant improvement in the extent and quality of IARs produced by the JSE listed companies. This improvement in the IRQs is due to different reasons, which include: preparers taking <IR> seriously, teamwork, benchmarking, training, experience, addressing stakeholder needs and understanding the principles before implementing <IR>. Moreover, some companies fail to produce quality IARs due to a number of factors that include: an inadequate understanding of <IR> by some preparers of IARs; some entities not seeing value in preparing quality IARs hence they present poor quality IARs; partial buy-in, especially by the executive management; a paucity of skills and resources; outsourcing that was identified as bringing with it poor quality work and some entities preferring to chase prestigious awards at the expense of the company’s actual <IR> philosophy, hampering the quality of IARs in the process. Different conclusions were reached. It was noted that some <IR> concepts and principles should be more synchronised so that they are not in conflict with each other. Rules should be introduced so that <IR> may be a blend of principles and rules as this could minimise preparer judgement. The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) must align its terminology with that of other guideline bodies, such as rating agencies, to give more meaning to <IR>. The IIRC needs to improve <IR> in order to suit companies in the service industry. Integrated reporting has to be more compatible with the digital world and not necessarily paper based. More research must be done about what users need to see in IARs to enhance the relevance of the IAR to different stakeholders. Furthermore, the IIRC must proactively educate decision-makers for an improved buy-in of <IR>. Pertaining to transformation, de facto and de jure transformation remain merely theoretical without substantial changes on the ground. Government and the JSE should consider the nature of current disincentives since these seem not to sufficiently challenge the current status quo. Finally, more training on capitals and business models should be conducted in order to improve the quality of reporting since these two constructs are perceived to be complex and hence difficult to implement, especially through quantification. / Maikaelelo a a anameng a thutopatlisiso eno e e tlhalosang ya mekgwa e e tswakantsweng ya tatelano e ne e le go atolosa dikwalo tse di gona ka go dira tshupane ya maikarabelo ya polychotomous (PAI) e morago e neng ya dirisediwa go lekanyetsa le go sekaseka bogolo le boleng jwa dipegelo tsa ngwaga le ngwaga tse di golaganeng (diIAR) tse di rulaganngwang ke ditlamo tse di kwadisitsweng kwa Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) mo pakeng ya 2013 go fitlha 2016. Thutopatlisiso e rotloeditswe ke tlhaelo ya dipatlisiso tse di malebana le gore a maikarabelo a ditlamo, ka dipegelo tsa ditlamo, a tokafetse (bogolo le boleng) ka fa tlase ga dipegelo tse di golaganeng (<IR>) ka maduo a a tokafatseng a boleng jwa dipegelo tse di golaganeng (IRQ). Thutopatlisiso e dirilwe ka magato a le mabedi. Legato la ntlha e ne e le la go dira PAI ka mokgwa wa Delphi Inquiry. Mo legatong leo, ka tshekatsheko ya diteng go dirisiwa mokgwa o o lebelelang dipalopalo le o o lebelelang mabaka, go dirisitswe PAI go lekanyetsa le go sekaseka bogolo le boleng wa diIAR tsa ditlamo tse di kwa Godimo tse 100 tsa JSE mo pakeng ya dingwaga tse nne (2013–2016). Legato la bobedi, le le neng le le mo sebopegong sa dipotsolotso tse di batlileng di rulagana, le ne le ikaeletse go batlisisa dintlha tse di tshwaetseng mo diphetogong tsa maduo a IRQ mo pakeng eo. Go botsoloditswe batsibogi ba le robedi (barulaganyi ba diIAR), ba ba emetseng ditlamo di le tlhano. Ka mokgwa wa Delphi Inquiry, go tlhamilwe PAI (tshwaelo e kgolo ya thutopatlisiso), e e nang le dikarolo tse robedi, ka megopolo e le 44, maduo otlhe a a kgonagalang a 152 le boima jotlhe jwa 100%. Mo godimo ga moo, PAI e na le thulaganyo ya maduo ya dintlha tse thataro go tswa go 0 go ya go 5. Malebana le maduo a IRQ, palogare ya maduo a ngwaga le ngwaga a IRQ, e tlhakanyeditswe go nna 52.45% ka 2013, 58.48% ka 2014, 64.72% ka 2015 le 68.29% ka 2016. Malebana le maphata a JSE gona, maduo a a kwa godimodimo a IRQ e ne e le 66.45%, 71.05%, 75% le 81.25% ka 2013, 2014, 2015 le 2016 ka tatelano eo. Go ya ka indaseteri, dipoelo di bontshitse maduo a a kwa godimodimo a IRQ a 66.45%, 72.37%, 70.72% le 62.42% ka 2013, 2014, 2015 le 2016 ka tatelano eo. Koketsego ka iketlo ya palogare ya maduo a IRQ a 2013, 2014, 2015 le 2016 e bontsha gore go na le tokafalo e e bonalang mo bogolong le boleng jwa diIAR tse di tlhagisiwang ke ditlamo tse di kwadisitsweng mo JSE. Tokafalo eno ya diIRQ ke ka ntlha ya mabaka a a farologaneng, a a akaretsang: barulaganyi ba tsotelela <IR> thata, tirisanommogo ya setlhopha, go itshwantsha le ba bangwe, katiso, maitemogelo, go samagana le ditlhokego tsa baamegi le go tlhaloganya dintlhatheo pele ga go diragatsa <IR>. Mo godimo ga moo, ditlamo dingwe di palelwa ke go tlhagisa diIAR tsa boleng ka ntlha ya dintlha di le mmalwa tse di akaretsang: go tlhaloganya go go sa lekanang ga <IR> ke barulaganyi bangwe ba diIAR; ditheo dingwe di sa bone boleng jwa go baakanya diIAR tsa boleng mme seo se dira gore di tlhagise diIAR tsa boleng jo bo kwa tlase; tshegetso e e sa lekanang, bogolo segolo ya botsamaisikhuduthamaga; tlhaelo ya bokgoni le ditlamelo; theko ya ditirelo kwa ntle, e leng se se supilweng se tla ka boleng jo bo kwa tlase jwa tiro le ditheo dingwe di tlhopha go lelekisa dikgele tsa mabono mme di ikgatholosa filosofi ya nnete ya <IR> ya setlamo, mme ka go rialo di ama boleng jwa diIAR. Go fitlheletswe diphitlhelelo tse di farologaneng. Go lemogilwe gore megopolo mengwe le dintlhatheo tsa <IR> di tshwanetse go rulaganngwa ka tsamaisano gore di se ke tsa ganetsana. Go tshwanetse ga itsisewe melanwana gore <IR> e nne motswako wa dintlhatheo le melawana gonne seno se ka fokotsa go atlhola ga barulaganyi. Lekgotla la Boditšhabatšha la Dipegelo tse di Golaganeng (IIRC) le tshwanetse go lepalepanya mareo a lona le a ditheo tse dingwe tse di kaelang, go tshwana le ditheo tse di lekanyetsang, gore <IR> e nne le bokao jo bo oketsegileng. Lekgotla la IIRC le tshwanetse go tokafatsa <IR> gore e siamele ditlamo tse di mo indasetering ya ditirelo. Dipegelo tse di golaganeng di tshwanetse go tsamaelana le lefatshe la dijitale mme e seng fela gore e nne tse di mo dipampiring. Go tshwanetse ga dirwa dipatlisiso tse dingwe malebana le gore badirisi ba tlhoka go bona eng mo diIAR go tokafatsa bomaleba jwa IAR mo baameging ba ba farologaneng. Go feta foo, lekgotla la IIRC le tshwanetse go ruta batsayaditshwetso gore go nne le tshegetso e e tokafetseng ya <IR>. Malebana le diphetogo, diphetogo tse di gona le tsa tshwanelo e sala go nna tiori fela mme go se na diphetogo tse di bonalang. Puso le JSE ba tshwanetse go lebelela dintlha tsa ga jaana tse di kgobang marapo ka ntlha ya fa go sa bonale fa di gwetlha seemo sa ga jaana mo go lekaneng. Kwa bokhutlong, go tshwanetse ga dirwa katiso e nngwe ya letlotlo le dikao tsa kgwebo go tokafatsa boleng jwa go dira dipegelo ka ntlha ya fa megopolo eno e mebedi e lebega e le marara mme ka jalo go se bonolo go e diragatsa, bogolo segolo ka dipalo. / Ndivho khulwane ya ṱhalutshedzo iyi ya ngona yo ṱanganelanaho ya thevhekano ho vha u engedza maṅwalwa a zwino nga u bveledza indekisi ya vhuḓifhinduleli yo khethekanywaho (PAI) ine ya dovha ya, shumiswa u kala na u ela vhuphara na ndeme ya mivhigo ya ṅwaha nga ṅwaha yo ṱanganelanaho (dzi IAR) yo lugiswaho nga vha khamphani dzo ṅwaliswaho kha Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) lwa tshifhinga tsha vhukati ha 2013 u swika 2016. Ngudo dzo ṱuṱuwedzwa nga u shaea ha ṱhoḓisiso dza nga ha uri vhuḓifhinduleli, u mona na u vhiga ha tshiofisi ho no khwiṋisea na (vhuphara na ndeme) nga fhasi ha u vhiga ho ṱanganelanaho (<IR>) nga kha zwikoro zwa ndeme ya u vhiga ho ṱanganelanaho (IRQ). Ngudo dzo itwa fhethu huvhili nga maga mavhili. Ḽiga ḽa u thoma ḽo vha ḽi ḽa u bveledza PAI nga kha ngona dza Ṱhoḓisiso dza Delphi. Kha ḽiga ḽeneḽo, nga kha musaukanyo wa vhungomu wo sedzaho ndeme na tshivhalo, PAI yo shumiswa u kala na u ela vhuphara na ndeme ya dzi IAR kha khamphani dza 100 dza nṱha dza JSE kha tshifhinga tsha miṅwaha miṋa (2013–2016). Ḽiga ḽa vhuvhili nga tshivhumbeo tsha inthaviwu dzo dzudzanywaho zwiṱuku dzi sengulusaho zwivhumbi zwi dzhenelelaho kha tshanduko ya zwikoro zwa IRQ lwa tshifhinga. Vhafhinduli vha malo (vhadzudzanyi vha dzi IAR), vho imelaho khamphani ṱhanu vho vhudziswa. Nga kha Ngona ya Ṱhoḓisiso dza Delphi, ho bveledzwa PAI (zwidzheneleli zwihulwane kha ngudo), dzi re na khethekanyo dza malo, miṱalukanyo ya 44, ṱhanganyelo dza zwikoro zwine zwa nga vha hone zwa 152 na ṱhanganyelo ya tshileme ya 100%. Zwiṅwe hafhu, PAI dzi na sisiṱeme ya zwikoro ya odinaḽa zwa phoindi dza rathi u bva kha 0 u swika kha 5. U itela zwikoro zwa IRO, zwikoro zwa vhukati zwa ṅwaha nga ṅwaha zwo rekanywa zwa vha 52.45% nga 2013, 58.48% nga 2014, 64.72% nga 2015 na 68.29% for 2016. Kha sekithara dza JSE, zwikoro zwa nṱhesa zwa IRQ zwo vha zwi 66.45%, 71.05%, 75% na 81.25% nga 2013, 2014, 2015 na 2016 nga u tevhekana. U ya nga kuvhonele kwa nḓowetshumo, mvelelo dzo sumbedza zwikoro zwa nṱhesa zwa IRQ zwa 66.45%, 72.37%, 70.72% na 62.42% nga 2013, 2014, 2015 na 2016 nga u tevhekana. U gonya zwiṱuku kha zwikoro zwa vhukati zwa IRQ zwa 2013, 2014, 2015 na 2016 zwi sumbedza uri hu na u khwiṋisea hu hulwane kha vhuphara na ndeme ya dzi IAR dzo bveledzwaho vha khamphani dzi re kha JSE. U khwiṋisea uhu ha dzi IRQ ndi nga ṅwambo wa zwiitisi, zwine zwa katela vhadzudzanyi vha dzhielaho <IR> nṱha, u shuma sa thimu, u vhambedza, vhugudisi, tshenzhelo, u livhana na ṱhoḓea dza vhadzheneleli na u pfesesa milayo phanḓa ha musi i tshi shumiswa <IR>. Nṱhani ha izwo, dziṅwe khamphani dzi a kundelwa u bveledzwa dzi IAR nga ṅwambo zwa zwiitisi zwo vhalaho , zwi katelaho u sa pfesea lwo lingaho ha <IR> nga vhaṅwe vhadzudzanyi vha dzi IAR, zwiṅwe zwiimiswa zwi sa vhoni ndeme ya u ita dzi IAR dza ndeme zwa sia vha tshi bvledza dzi IAR dza ndeme i sa takadzi, u zwi ṱanganedza hu si nga mbilu dzoṱhe nga maanḓa vha vhalanguli vhahulwane; u shaea ha zwikili na zwiko; u ṱunḓa tshumelo nnḓa zwine zwo topolwa sa zwi ḓisaho mushumo wa ndeme i sa takadzi na zwiṅwe zwiimiswa zwi tshi funa u gidimisana na pfufho dza maimo hu sa dzhielwi nṱha fiḽosofi ya vhukuma ya <IR> dza khamphani, zwine zwa thivhela ndeme ya dzi IAR kha kuitele kwa zwithu. Ho swikelelwa khunyeledzo dzo fhambanaho. Ho vhonala uri miṅwe miṱalukanyo ya <IR> na milayo i tea u dzudzanywa u itela uri i sa vhe na khuḓano. Milayo i tea u ḓivhadzwa u itela uri <IR> dzi vha ṱhanganyelo ya milayo na maitele saizwi zwi tshi nga fhungudza khaṱhulo dza vhadzudzanyi. Khoro ya Dzitshakatshaka yo Ṱanganelanaho ya u Vhiga (IIRC) i tea u dzudzanya mathemo ayo na ayo a zwiimiswa nyendedzi, zwi nga ho sa mazhendedzi a u fhima, u ṋea ṱhalutshedzo ya khwiṋe kha <IR>. Vha IIRC vha tea u khwiṋisa <IR> u itela uri dzi elane na nḓowetshumo dza tshumelo. U vhiga ho ṱanganelanaho hu tea u elana vhukuma na ḽifhasi ḽa didzhithala nahone hu sa ḓisendeke nga bammbiri. Hu tea u itwa ṱhoḓisiso nga ha zwine vhashumisi vha vhona kha dzi IAR u khwaṱhisedza u tea ha IAR dza vhashumisani vho fhambanaho. Dziṅwe hafhu, IIRC i tea u funza vhadzhii vha tsheo lwo khwaṱhaho u itela u khwiṋisa u ḓidzhenisa kha <IR>. Zwi tshi elana na tshanduko, tshanduko ya de facto na ya de jure i sokou dzula i ya thyori hu si na tshanduko dzi vhonalaho ngeno fhasi. Muvhuso na JSE vha tea dzhiela nṱha lushaka lwa sa vha hone ha zwiṱuṱuwedzi saizwi izwi zwi tshi tou nga zwi ṋekedza khaedu lwo linganaho tshiimo tsha zwithu tsha zwino. Tsha u fhedzisela, vhugudisi kha zwiedza zwa pfuma na bindu vhu tea u itwa u itela u khwiṋisa ndeme ya u vhiga saizwi izwo zwifhaṱo zwivhili zwi tshi vhonala sa zwi konḓaho nahone zwi konḓaho u shumisa, nga maanḓa nga kha u vhekanya ndeme / Financial Accounting / D. Phil. (Accounting Sciences)