15.7.2013
THE ESSENCE OF A HYBRID GENRE – WHAT
CAUSES VARIATION IN CORPORATE
DISCLOSURE POLICIES
LSP 2013, Wien
Merja Koskela, University of Vaasa
Marja-Liisa Kuronen, Aalto University,
School of Business, Helsinki
Finland
RESEARCH ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION
Koskela, Merja
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
Professor, Ph. D.
Faculty of Philosophy
Dept of Communication Studies
Kuronen, Marja-Liisa
Senior Lecturer, D. Sc. (Econ.)
School of Business
Dept of Communication
2
1
15.7.2013
DISCLOSURE POLICY DOCUMENT
A genre by which listed companies declare their
principles for informing stakeholders about
the financial situation, results, organizational
changes, and other significant areas of their
business.
 It is a genre because it has




Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

a socially recognizable communicative purpose
shared contents
an established name
some shared features of structure

See e.g. Martin 2002.
3
HISTORY OF DISCLOSURE POLICY
DOCUMENTS
Globally about 72% of listed companies had a DP
2011 (The Bank of New York Mellon 2011)
 Introduced in Finland 2008
 Background:





Enron scandal 2001,Parmalat scandal 2003
Sarbanes–Oxley Act (Public Company Accounting
Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002; Sox;
SarbOx)
MiFiD (Markets in Financial Instruments Directive,
2004/39/EY) 2004
Implementation in Finnish legislation 2007
FSA (Financial Supervisory Authority)
recommendations and norms 2008
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

4
2
15.7.2013
AIM
To explore the types of variation this type of
regulated genre exhibits and to discuss the
reasons behind the variation
 Why focus on variation:

Variation is an inherent feature of all genres (Bhatia
2004: 53)



Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

”When drafting a disclosure policy it is important to take
into consideration the company itself, its business and the
type of industry.” (Virtanen 2011)
Reflects the genre system in which the genre
functions (Bhatia 2004)
It reveals important features of the social practice the
genre enacts
5
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Research questions
What kind of variation exists in Corporate
Disclosure Policies?
2.
What might cause variation in Policies?
3.
What are the social practices embedded in
Disclosure Policies?
What is the essence of (Corporate) Disclosure
Policy?
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
1.
6
3
15.7.2013
DATA

Data


7
11 Corporate Disclosure Policies of companies listed
in NASDAQ OMX Helsinki
the length of policies ranges from 1/3 page to 1 + 9 pages
A random sample among 100 companies with the
best financial standing (Balance Consulting list
of 2 000 companies)
 Companies representing various industries

METHODS



the context of the genre (e.g. Fairclough 2003; Bhatia 2004, 2010)
the immediate context (on the web, embedded in a
wider entity of information)
Content analysis


8
Genre analysis from 3 perspectives – 3 steps:
 Context analysis
deductive content analysis, based on previous
knowledge, i.e. the recommended content by FSA (e.g.
Silverman 2011)
Rhetorical and text analysis (Bhatia 2010: 34;
Bhatia 2004; Askehave & Swales 2001)
4
15.7.2013
GENRE ANALYSIS – THREE STEPS
Step I: Context analysis
 Step II: Content analysis
 Step III: Rhetorical and text analysis

Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
9
INVESTOR
RELATIONS
(IR) –
PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
10
NIRI 2003
5
15.7.2013
VARIATION OF THE IMMEDIATE
CONTEXT
Under the section of ”Investors” on the web, under
the title of
Investors  Corporate Governance (CG)  DP (4/11)
B.
Investors  Investor Relations / Investor Services  DP
(5/11)
Investors  DP (2/11)
C.
So what?



Some assosiate DP with business reporting and accounting
(CG), general normative and standardized world of business
(A).
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
A.
Some consider DP also a tool to serve various stakeholders
(IR and PR: transparency, voluntary communication) (B).
Some equate DP with the core of IR, as one of the aspects
affecting the fair valuation of the company (C) .
11
EXAMPLE
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
12
http://www.upm.com
6
15.7.2013
EXAMPLE
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
13
http://www.orion.fi/en/
GENRE ANALYSIS – THREE STEPS
Step I: Context analysis
 Step II: Content analysis
 Step III: Rhetorical and text analysis

Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
14
7
15.7.2013
RECOMMENDED CONTENT OF DP (FSA)
1.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
15
2.
Those responsible for IR
The way the company’s future outlook is
discussed
The type of guidance given to the market
The circumstances under which a profit
warning must be issued
How the company interprets what is ‘material
information’ (that must be disclosed)
How the company acts in company –
investor/analyst encounters
Other principles the company sees important to
mention.
RESULTS OF THE CONTENT ANALYSIS
Frequency
IR responsible persons and goals
11/11
Investor meetings procedures and
principles
8/11
Guidance principles
6/11
4/11
Internal procedures; profit warnings
Forward looking statements
9/11
Definition of material information
9/11
Other principles
Highly heterogeneous class, except
the performative ”we obey the law”
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
Content
16
8
15.7.2013
GENRE ANALYSIS – THREE STEPS
Step I: Context analysis
 Step II: Content analysis
 Step III: Rhetorical and text analysis

Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
17
TYPES OF INTERTEXTS

Different intertexts are most prominent
according to company
 Shared intertexts (e.g. the rules of the
NASDAQ OMX Helsinki, Finnish Securities
Markets Act)
 Company-specific intertexts (e.g.”relevant
competition laws” (Stora Enso), ”internal
guidelines” (Neste Oil))
 Differing levels of detail
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

All policies include intertexts representing legal
discourse, accounting/finance discourse,
management discourse, communication discourse
and stock exchange discourse.
18
9
15.7.2013
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
19
SOCIAL PRACTICES
 Which
enact?




Performative declaration: the company obeys the law
Informing the stakeholders of relevant information
concerning the fair valuation of the company stock
Advising the employees of what is required of
communication in a listed company
Clarifying internal responsibilities for those involved,
and informing those that might be affected in the spirit
of educating the organization
Promoting and legitimating the company or the IR
function of the company
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

social practices does the policy
20
10
15.7.2013
EXAMPLES

Informing the stakeholders of relevant
information concerning the fair valuation of the
company stock

Interested parties may sign up for an email distribution
list on the company website to automatically receive
Finnair's press and stock exchange releases. (Finnair)
Promoting and legitimating the company or/and
the IR function of the company

The goal of Tikkurila's investor relations activity is to
support the creation of fair valuation of Tikkurila's
share and other securities through timely
communication of relevant, understandable, reliable
and comparable information, enhancing investors' and
analysts‘ interest in Tikkurila, building investor loyalty
and attracting new investors and analyst coverage.
(Tikkurila)
Koskela & Kuronen 2/013, LSP 2013, Wien

21
EXAMPLES

Advising the employees of what is required of
communication in a listed company

“The Investor Relations team formulates key
financial communications and investor relations
messages, and ensures their accuracy and
consistency. ... The IR team meets approximately
three times before each release of financial results.”
(Stora Enso)
“To ensure the fulfilment of the company’s disclosure
obligations a committee has been established to
monitor and set guidelines for external disclosure.”
(UPM)
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

22
11
15.7.2013
EXAMPLES


“If a crisis occurs, Corporate Management shall be
informed promptly. Depending on the magnitude and
type of the crisis, the Board or CEO will nominate a
Crisis Management Team to handle the situation and
communication.” (Wärtsilä)
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
Clarifying internal responsibilities for those
involved, and informing those that might be
affected in the spirit of educating the organization
23
RESULTS
What kind of variation exists in (Corporate)
Disclosure Policies?
2.
What might cause variation in Policies?
3.
What are the social practices embedded in
Policies?
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
1.
What is the essence of (Corporate) Disclosure
Policy?
24
12
15.7.2013
TYPES OF VARIATION
Immediate context of DP
 Length of the document (from 1/3 of a page, to 9
pages)
 Number of texts in charge of declaring the policy
 Level of detail (from genral to very specific) –
following the recommendation, or not
 Borrowing of generic resourses



structure,
style,
purpose
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

25
CAUSES OF VARIATION - SUMMARY
1.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The competing (?) communicative purposes
of the genre  a hybrid genre
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
2.
Varying or multiple intended audiences
Varying function – internal and external use
Varying organizational (and social) practices
Varying interpretation of the generic, and
professional, the context – Corporate
Governance vs. Investor Relations Services
Fairly short history of the genre
Flexibility-potential of the normative basis
26
13
15.7.2013
WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF THE
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE POLICY?

A CCO’s voice – WHY DP
Published Disclosure Policy creates a backbone to
internal communications guidelines, which
complement the Policy.

On the other hand, published basic definitions
confirmed by the Board of Directors is a strong
mandate to business units concerning
communications practices.

To my mind, at a general level, it is in every respect
good to increase transparency of communications
of listed companies – both externally and internally.
DP is one tool to serve this end.”
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

27
(Suurmunne, January 1, 2013)
THANKS – QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
ARE WELCOME!
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien
28
14
15.7.2013
REFERENCES






Bhatia, V K (2010) Interdiscursivity in professional communication
Discourse & Communication, 21(1): 32 - 50.
Conaway, R N & Wardope, W J (2010). Do their words really matter?
Thematic analysis of U.S. and Latin American CEO letters. Journal of
Business Communication. Vol 47, Issue 2, Pages 141-168.
Fairclough, N (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social
Research. Routledge, London and New York.
FSA – Financial Supervisory Authority (Finland). Retrieved June 10,
2013, from http://www.finanssivalvonta.fi/en/Pages/Default.aspx
Garzone, G (2012) Why do genres change? In: Garzone G, Catenaccio P
and Degano C (eds) Genre Change in the Contemporary World. Short-term
Diachronic Perspectives. Bern etc: Peter Lang, 21 – 40.
Gruner, R H (2002) Corporate disclosure: The key to restoring investor
confidence. Startegic Investor Relations, Summer 2002, 1–4.
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

Bhatia, V K (2004) Worlds of written discourse. London: Continuum.
29
REFERENCES, CONT.






Kuronen, M - L (2012) Tiedon markkinoilla – pörssiyhtiön tuloksen
hallintaa viestinnän keinoin. (At the information market – impression
management by means of communication). Media & viestintä 35 (2012), 3
– 4: 56–77.
Laskin, A V (2009) A descriptive account of the investor relatins
profession: A national stude. Journal of Business Communication. 46: 2,
207 - 233.
Martin, J R (2002) A universe of meaning. How many practices? In: Johns
A M (ed.) Genre and the Classroom. Multiple Perspectives. Mahwah N.J.:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 269 – 278.
NIRI 2003 National Investor Relations Institute. http://www.niri.org
Pander Maat, H (2007) How promotional language in press releases is
dealt with by journalists? Journal of Business Communication. 44 (1): 59 95.
Rutherford, B A (2005) Genre analysis of corporate annual report
narratives. A corpus-linguistics-based approach. Journal of Business
Communication. 42 (4): 349-378.
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

Koskela, Marja (2013, forthcoming) Same, same but different –
intertextual and interdiscursive features of communication strategy texts.
Discourse & Communication (August 2013).
30
15
15.7.2013
REFERENCES, CONT.





Seligman, J (2003). Rebuilding trust. Corporate and securities law after
Enron. White Paper. IRQ, Investor Relations Quarterly 5: 3, 4 – 17.
National Investor Relations Institutute (NIRI) Retrieved April 16, 2013,
from http://www.niri.org .
Silverman, D (2011) Interpreting qualitative data.4th edition. London:
SAGE Publications.
Steyn, B (2003) From strategy to corporate communication strategy: A
conceptualization. Journal of Communication Management 8 (2): 168 –
183.
Thompson, L M (2002) NIRI ten points program to help restore investor
confidence. NIRI Executive Alert. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from
http://www.niri.org/irresource_pubs/alerts/ea040902.pdf
Virtanen, M (2011) IR:n ammattikuvasta. (Blog of the profession of IR)
Retrieved May 24, 2013, from http://ir-blogi.blogspot.fi/search?updatedmin=2011-01-01T00:00:00%2B02:00&updated-max=2012-0101T00:00:00%2B02:00&max-results=10
Koskela & Kuronen 2013, LSP 2013, Wien

Sabefelt, S (2011). Disclosure in Investor Relations websites. Licentiate
thesis in Business Administration. Göteborgs universität,
Handelshögskolan. Göteborg.
31
16