Integrated Reporting Implementation: Evidence from Indonesia

Integrated Reporting Implementation: Evidence from Indonesia

Hanifa Harumbunga, Tita Djuitaningsih, Sylvia Fettry

Accounting Department, Bakrie University

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.907000479

Received: 29 July 2025; Accepted: 04 August 2025; Published: 23 August 2025

ABSTRACT

The existence of mixed results and the low application of integrated reporting encourage researchers to re-examine the factors that influence the adoption of integrated reporting. This study examines the effects of the audit committee, profitability, firm size, leverage, and international activity on the implementation of integrated reporting. The population of this study consists of companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for the 2023 period, which totaled 934. The sampling technique is the purposive sampling method. Based on these methods, a sample size of 71 was obtained. The analysis method used was multiple linear regression using SPSS version 26. The results of the study indicate that profitability has a positive impact on the implementation of integrated reporting, while leverage has a negative effect on this implementation. Meanwhile, the audit committee, firm size, and international activity do not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

Keywords: audit committee, firm size, international activity, leverage, and integrated reporting.

INTRODUCTION

In 2010, the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) was formed to provide a solution for creating reports that integrated a company’s financial and non-financial performance (Christian and Salim, 2022). This reporting trend is known as integrated reporting, commonly symbolized by <IR>. According to Chariri and Januarti (2017), integrated reporting demonstrated dissatisfaction with annual reports, leading to the emergence of integrated reporting, which provides holistic and integrated information about a company.

According to the IIRC (2021), the concept of integrated reporting is “an integrated report is concise communication about how an organization’s strategy, governance, performance, and prospects, in the context of its external environment, lead to the creation, preservation, or erosion of value over the short, medium, and long term.” There are eight elements in integrated reporting: (1) Organizational overview and external environment, (2) Governance, (3) Business model, (4) Risks and opportunities, (5) Strategy and resource allocation, (6) Performance, (7) Outlook, and (8) Basis of presentation (IIRC, 2021).

According to the IIRC (2020), the benefits of integrated reporting for organizations include helping them understand and communicate their impact and how they create value holistically, thereby improving relationships with all stakeholders, reducing the cost of capital, and facilitating long-term performance improvements, resilience, and sustainable development. Other benefits experienced by investors, employees, customers, and regulators include providing an understanding of the business and its prospects, enabling better decision-making (IIRC, 2020). For society, integrated reporting benefits business performance, and investors will enhance economic well-being, while proper consideration and management of all capital in the short, medium, and long term will promote sustainable development and financial stability (IIRC, 2020).

The numerous benefits offered by integrated reporting have encouraged various companies worldwide to adopt it. However, in Indonesia, its implementation remains very low. Of the 936 companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2023, only 71 companies, or approximately 7.6%, submitted annual reports using the integrated reporting model (https://www.idx.co.id/id). This is because the implementation of integrated reporting in Asia, particularly in Indonesia, is still voluntary due to the lack of mandatory government policies (Kurniawan et al. 2020; Fuadah and Kalsum, 2021; Soegiarto et al. 2022; and Dosinta, 2023).

The significant benefits of integrated reporting, on the one hand, and the still low level of implementation in companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange, are interesting to study. This relates to the factors underlying companies’ need to disclose extensive information, which is assessed using integrated reporting elements. ¬

Previous research examining the influence of audit committees, profitability, company size, leverage, and international activity on the implementation of integrated reporting has been conducted by several researchers, including Novaridha (2017), Ahmad and Sari (2017), Rahayuningsih and Pujiono (2018), Marrone and Oliva (2019), Iredele (2019), Dilling and Caykoylu (2019), Permata et al. (2020), Sari et al. (2020), Utamie (2021), Dani and Purwanti (2021), Damayanti et al. (2022), and Rosyadi et al. (2022), and Naylufar and Syafruddin (2023).

This study replicates Utamie’s (2021) study, which aimed to examine the influence of the audit committee, profitability, firm size, and leverage on the implementation of integrated reporting in manufacturing companies listed on the IDX. The difference between this study and Utamie’s (2021) study is the addition of the independent variable of international activity. Therefore, this study examines the effects of the audit committee, profitability, firm size, leverage, and international activity on the implementation of integrated reporting.

Theoretical Framework

This study uses Freeman’s (1984) Stakeholder Theory and Jensen & Meckling’s (1976) Agency Theory. Stakeholder theory emphasizes organizational accountability far beyond simple financial or economic performance (Diono and Prabowo, 2017). This theory states that organizations will voluntarily disclose information about their environmental, social, and intellectual performance, above and beyond mandatory requests, to meet the actual or recognized expectations of stakeholders (Deegan, 2004) as cited in Khafid and Mulyaningsih, 2012). This is because companies are no longer solely responsible to their shareholders, but are shifting their responsibilities to encompass the broader social sphere (stakeholders), hereinafter referred to as social responsibility (Kurniawan et al., 2020).

Agency theory addresses two issues that can arise in agency relationships (Eisenhardt, 1989). The first agency problem arises when the desires or goals of the principal and agent conflict, and it is difficult or expensive for the principal to verify what the agent does (Eisenhardt, 1989). The second problem arises when the principal and agent have different attitudes towards risk, so that the actions taken will also differ depending on their respective risk preferences (Eisenhardt, 1989). Based on the agency theory of Jensen & Meckling (1976), the existence of an audit committee can minimize conflicts of interest between the agent (management) and the principal (company owner) (Utamie, 2021). The audit committee plays an active role in reviewing financial reports, including integrated reporting (Haji, 2015 in Yahaya and Onyabe 2022). The audit committee must also review the disclosure of sustainability information in integrated reporting to ensure that the disclosure does not conflict with other information (The Institute of Directors in Nigeria (2009) in (Yahaya and Onyabe, 2022).

Implementation of Integrated Reporting

According to the IIRC (2021), the concept of integrated reporting is “an integrated report is concise communication about how an organization’s strategy, governance, performance, and prospects, in the context of its external environment, lead to the creation, preservation, or erosion of value over the short, medium, and long term.” Integrated reporting is useful for stakeholders interested in an organization’s ability to create value over time, including employees, customers, suppliers, business partners, local communities, legislators, regulators, and policymakers (IIRC, 2021). According to the IIRC (2021), there are seven guiding principles for presenting integrated reporting: strategic focus and future orientation, connectivity of information, stakeholder relationships, materiality, conciseness, reliability and completeness, and consistency and comparability. Integrated reporting encompasses eight fundamentally interrelated and mutually exclusive content elements (IIRC, 2021): organizational overview and external environment, governance, business model, risks and opportunities, strategy and resource allocation, performance, outlook, and basis of presentation.

Audit Committee

According to Financial Services Authority Regulation No. 55/POJK.04/2015 concerning the Establishment and Guidelines for the Implementation of the Audit Committee, an audit committee is a committee formed by and responsible to the board of commissioners to assist in carrying out the duties and functions of the board of commissioners. According to this regulation, the audit committee must consist of at least three members, consisting of independent commissioners and external parties from the issuer or public company. The establishment of an audit committee is carried out by a corporate entity to improve oversight of management performance, ensuring effective and efficient management performance and helping to improve comprehensive and transparent information disclosure to interested parties or stakeholders (Damayanti et al., 2022).

Profitability

Profitability is a company’s ability to generate profits from invested capital (Sukmayanti and Triaryati, 2019). Profitability ratios provide information about a company’s ability to generate profits using the amount of investment or capital invested (Hermawan, 2020). Several profitability measures exist, including return on assets, return on equity, net profit margin, and operating profit margin. This study uses Return on Assets (ROA) as a measure of profitability because it is more relevant to the implementation of integrated reporting. ROA is one element in calculating economic value added (EVA), which leads to value creation, where value creation is part of the definition of integrated reporting.

Company Size

According to Kartini et al. (2022), company size is a scale used to classify the size of a business entity. Company size can be measured by sales, assets, equity, or the number of employees within the company to determine the size of a company (Rahayuningsih and Pujiono, 2018). The measurement of company size in this study uses total assets. Considering that asset value is more stable than other company metrics such as sales and equity.

Hypothesis

Based on the description of agency theory and the results of previous research on the implementation of integrated reporting, the following research hypotheses are as follows:

Ha1: The Audit Committee has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting

Ha2: Profitability has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting

Ha3: Company size has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting

Ha4: Leverage has a negative effect on the implementation of integrated reporting

Ha5: International activity has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting

RESEARCH METHODS

The population of this study was companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2023. The sampling technique used was purposive sampling. Based on this method, a sample size of 71 was obtained using the following sampling process:

Table 1. Sample Selection Process

Source: https://www.idx.co.id/id (processed data, 2024)

This study uses secondary data in the form of annual reports of companies listed on the Indonesia Stock

Exchange (IDX) for the 2023 period. The data was obtained from the official IDX website, www.idx.co.id, and the official websites of each company. The data collection technique used in this study was documentation.

Implementation of Integrated Reporting

Each disclosed item is given a score of 1 and 0 if not disclosed. The total score is then compared to the total number of items that should be disclosed. The more items disclosed, the higher the index score. Studies (Ahmad and Sari, 2017) and (Permata et al., 2020) use the following formula to measure the implementation of integrated reporting.

Description:

n = number of items implemented by the company

k = total number of items expected to be implemented by the company

Audit Committee

The audit committee is a committee formed by and responsible to the board of commissioners to help carry out the duties and functions of the board of commissioners (Financial Service Authority, 2015). The measurement used to measure the audit committee variable is (Naylufar and Syafruddin, 2023):

Profitability

Profitability is the company’s ability to generate profits from invested capital (Sukmayanti and Triaryati, 2019). The formula used to measure the profitability variable is as follows (Ebenhaezer and Rahayu, 2022):

Company Size

According to Kartini et al. (2022), company size is a scale used to classify the size of a business entity. This study uses total assets calculated using the natural logarithm (Ln) as a measure of company size. The formula used to measure company size is as follows (Gunawan and Sjarief, 2022):

Leverage

Leverage is a financial ratio used to determine and assess a company’s ability to pay off its long-term obligations. The formula used to measure leverage is as follows (Kasmir, 2019):

International Activities

International activities refer to company activities conducted abroad, such as foreign subsidiaries and foreign or export-oriented sales (Sari et al., 2017). The formula used to measure the international activity variable is as follows (Sari et al., 2017):

Data Analysis Method

The data analysis method used descriptive statistics and classical assumption tests, including normality tests, multicollinearity tests, heteroscedasticity tests, and autocorrelation tests. Hypothesis testing used multiple linear regression analysis with a p-value <0.05 as the acceptance criterion (Ghozali, 2021). The multiple linear regression equation model used in this study is as follows:

Y = α + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + ε

Y = Implementation of integrated reporting

α = Constant

β = Regression coefficient of each variable

X1 = Audit Committee

X2 = Profitability

X3 = Company Size

X4 = Leverage

X5 = International Activity

ε = Standard error

Research Model

The research model can be seen in Figure 1. below.

Figure 1. Research Model

RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Descriptive Statistics of Research Variables

The descriptive statistics for this study can be seen in Table 2, as follows:

Source: SPSS 26 Processing Results

Based on the above, the average Integrated Reporting Implementation score is 0.7594, meaning that the average sample company has implemented 75.94%, or 37 items out of a total of 49 integrated reporting items. The average audit committee score of 3.0141 indicates that the average sample company has an audit committee of three people. The number of audit committees complies with POJK No. 55/POJK.04/2015, which stipulates a minimum of three audit committee members. The average profitability score is 0.0261, or 2.61%, indicating that the average sample company has relatively low profitability. The average company size is 27.7938, indicating that the average sample company is categorized as a large company. The average leverage score is 0.9827, indicating that the leverage of the average sample company is still safe because total debt is still smaller than total equity. The average value for international activity was 0.3239, meaning that only 32.39% of sample companies had international activity.

Classical Assumption Test Results

The results of the One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test in Table 2 show an asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) value of 0.200, with c, d > 0.05. These results indicate that the data are normally distributed. The results of the multicollinearity test are shown in Table 3. The results indicate that all variables obtained tolerance values > 0.10 and VIF values < 10, indicating that all five independent variables are free from multicollinearity symptoms. The results of the heteroscedasticity test using the White Test can be seen in Table 4, which shows a calculated c2 value of 3.834 < the c2 value (0.05;4) in the table of 9.488, indicating no signs of heteroscedasticity in the regression model. The results of the autocorrelation test show a Durbin-Watson (DW) value of 1.653. This meets the criteria of -2 < 1.653 < 2, meaning there is no autocorrelation in the regression model.

Hypothesis Testing Results

The results of the multiple linear regression analysis can be seen in Table 3, as follows:

Table 3. Results of Multiple Linear Regression Analysis

Source: SPSS 26 Processing Results

Based on the results of the multiple linear regression analysis in Table 4.3, the regression equation can be formulated as follows:

IRI = 0.654 + -0.006X1 + 0.051X2 + 0.003X3 – 0.004X4 – 0.009X5 + ε

Where:

IRI = Implementation of Integrated Reporting

KA = Audit Committee

PROF = Profitability

SIZE = Company Size

LEV = Leverage

IA = International Activities

The Influence of the Audit Committee on the Implementation of Integrated Reporting

Based on the results of the hypothesis test, it was found that the audit committee did not affect the implementation of integrated reporting. This indicates that the number of audit committees does not determine the level of integrated reporting implementation. This occurs because the number of audit committees is insufficient to influence company management in disclosing complete non-financial information. Another reason is that some audit committees lack expertise in accounting or finance, thus lacking competence in overseeing the financial reporting process, especially in the implementation of the integrated reporting model.

The results of this study are inconsistent with agency theory, which argues that the existence of an audit committee can minimize conflicts of interest between management and company owners (Utamie, 2021) through its oversight function, particularly in the financial reporting process, particularly integrated reporting. These results are also inconsistent with the research of Ahmad and Sari (2017); Dani and Purwanti (2021), and Damayanti et al. (2022), which found that audit committees have a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting. The results of this study support the research of Widya and Sandra (2016) and Utamie (2021), which showed that the audit committee does not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

The Effect of Profitability on the Implementation of Integrated Reporting

Based on the results of the hypothesis test, profitability has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting. This indicates that greater profitability leads to higher levels of integrated reporting implementation.

These results align with agency theory and previous research conducted by Utamie (2021); Marrone and Oliva (2019); Iredele (2019), and Permata et al. (2020), which stated that profitability has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting. However, these results do not support the research of Dilling and Caykoylu (2019), which stated that profitability has a negative effect on the implementation of integrated reporting. These results also do not support the findings of Novaridha (2017); Sundari et al. (2020); Sari et al. (2020); Permata et al. (2020); Rosyadi et al. (2022) and Soegiarto et al. (2022), which showed that profitability did not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

The Effect of Company Size on the Implementation of Integrated Reporting

Based on the results of the hypothesis test, it was found that company size did not affect the implementation of integrated reporting. This indicates that company size does not influence the level of integrated reporting implementation. This occurs because companies do not want to incur agency costs and therefore choose not to disclose their information widely. Another reason is suspected to be that the elements in integrated reporting for both small and large companies use the same content elements.

The results of this study are inconsistent with agency theory, which states that information asymmetry and agency conflicts are prone to occur in large companies. These results also do not support the research findings of Ahmad and Sari (2017); Rahayuningsih and Pujiono (2018); Iredele (2019); Utamie (2021); Rejeki and Ahmar (2022); Moeljadi et al. (2022), and Rosyadi et al. (2022) stated that company size has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting. This study’s results support previous research by Novaridha (2017), which showed that company size does not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

The Effect of Leverage on the Implementation of Integrated Reporting

Based on the results of the hypothesis test, leverage negatively affects the implementation of integrated reporting. This indicates that the greater the leverage, the lower the level of integrated reporting implementation.

This study’s results align with agency theory, which states that companies with high leverage will reduce their social responsibility disclosures to avoid attracting attention from debtholders (Zanirah, 2014). High leverage also increases the risk of debt default, leading creditors to closely monitor company activities (Belkaoui and Karpik, 1989) in (Yani and Suputra, 2020). Khafid and Mulyaningsih (2012) state that companies with higher debt levels have higher capital costs and therefore must reduce costs for disclosing social and environmental reports. Thus, companies will tend to focus on increasing company profits rather than disclosing information that is not commensurate with the costs incurred (Rahayuningsih and Pujiono, 2018) and Utamie (2021), which shows that leverage does not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

The Influence of International Activities on the Implementation of Integrated Reporting

Based on the results of the hypothesis test, it was found that international activities did not affect the implementation of integrated reporting. This indicates that the presence or absence of international activities does not determine the level of integrated reporting implementation. This occurs because there are no regulations mandating the implementation of the integrated reporting model from regulators, and it remains voluntary.

The results of this study are inconsistent with Freeman’s (1984) stakeholder theory. Stakeholder theory defines stakeholders in an organization as groups or individuals who can influence or be influenced by the achievement of organizational goals (Freeman, 1984). According to Indrawati et al. (2017), when a company has international activities, the proportion of foreign stakeholders increases. Therefore, the type of information requested is expected to increase, leading to increased voluntary disclosure (Choi and Muelle, 1992; Meek et al., 1995) in (Indrawati et al., 2017).

The results of this study also deviate from the research of Sari et al. (2017), which stated that international activities have a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting. The results of this study support the results of previous research conducted by Indrawati et al. (2017), which showed that international activity did not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

CONCLUSION

Based on the analysis and discussion of the hypothesis test results, it can be concluded that:

1. The Audit Committee does not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

2. Profitability has a positive effect on the implementation of integrated reporting.

3. Company size does not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

4. Leverage has a negative effect on the implementation of integrated reporting.

5. International activity does not affect the implementation of integrated reporting.

REFERENCES

1. Ahmad, R., & Sari, R. C. (2017). The Influence of Audit Committee, Company Size, and Public Accounting Firm Size on the Level of Alignment of Annual Reports with the Integrated Reporting Framework. Jurnal Nominal, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.21831/nominal.v6i2.16654.
2. Chariri, A., & Januarti, I. (2017). Exploring Integrated Reporting Elements in Annual Reports of Indonesian Companies. Jurnal Akuntansi, 21(3), 411. https://doi.org/10.24912/ja.v21i3.245
3. Christian, Y., & Salim, S. (2022). Factors Influencing the Nature of Forward-Looking Disclosure in Integrated Reporting. Jurnal Paradigma Akuntansi, 4(2), 918–926. https://doi.org/10.24912/jpa.v4i2.19691
4. Damayanti, A., Ulupio, I. G. K. A., & Muliasari, I. (2022). The Influence of Corporate Governance on Integrated Reporting. Journal of Accounting, Taxation and Auditing, 3(3), 744–765.
5. Dani, S. D. R., & Purwanti, L. (2021). The Influence of the Number and Expertise of Audit Committees on Integrated Reporting Disclosure in Mining Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. FEB Student Scientific Journal, 10(1), 1–30.
6. Dilling, P. F. A., & Caykoylu, S. (2019). Determinants of Companies that Disclose High-Quality Integrated Reports. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133744
7. Dosinta, N. F. (2023). Accounting Research in Indonesia: Integrated Reporting and Corporate Reporting. Scientific Journal of Accounting Economics Students, 8(2), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.24815/jimeka.v8i2.26308.
8. Financial Services Authority (2015). Financial Services Authority Regulation Number 55/POJK.04/2015 concerning the Establishment and Guidelines for Work Implementation.
9. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman: London. In Business Ethics Quarterly (Vol. 4, Issue 4, pp. 409–420).
10. Fuadah, L. L., & Kalsum, U. (2021). Review of the Implementation of Integrated Reporting Disclosure in Indonesia. Scientific Journal of Economics and Business, 11(1), 108–119.
11. Ghozali, I. (2021). Application of Multivariate Analysis with IBM SPSS 26.
12. Gunawan, V., & Sjarief, J. (2022). Analysis of the Effect of Profitability, Leverage, and Company Size on Sustainability Report Disclosure. BALANCE: Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 19(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.25170/balance.v19i1.3223
13. Hermawan, S. (2020). Monograph: Financial Performance Measurement and the Role of Intellectual Capital.
14. IIRC. (2020). Integrated reporting in India: Survey on adoption and way forward. https://www.grantthornton.in/insights/articles/integrated-reporting-in-india/
15. IIRC. (2021). International <IR> Framework. In IFRS Foundation (Issue January). https://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/InternationalIntegratedReportingFramework.pdf
16. Indrawati, N., Darlis, E., & L. Azhar, A. (2017). The Accuracy of Earning Forecast Analysis, Information Asymmetry and Integrated Reporting – Case of Indonesia. Journal of Accounting and Business Dynamics, 4(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.24815/jdab.v4i1.5843
17. Iredele, O. O. (2019). Examining the association between quality of integrated reports and corporate characteristics. Heliyon, 5(7). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01932
18. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Human Relations, 72(10), 1671–1696. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718812602
19. Kartini, Lukita, & Astriani. (2022). The Influence of the Audit Committee’s Role, Company Size, and Financial Performance on Sustainability Report Disclosure (An Empirical Study of Publicly Listed Companies on the Indonesian Stock Exchange (ISSI) in 2016-2020). Journal of Management and Accounting Students, 2(2), 263–283.
20. Kasmir. (2019). Financial Statement Analysis. Raja Grafindo Persada. Jakarta.
21. Khafid, & Mulyaningsih. (2012). The Contribution of Company Characteristics and Corporate Governance to Sustainability Report Publication. Ekuitas: Journal of Economics and Finance, 19(3), 340–359.
22. Kurniawan, B., Refianto, & Fernando, K. (2020). Implementation of Integrated Reporting and Its Relationship to Accounting Information: A Study of Companies in Asia Registered with the International Integrated Reporting Council. Journal of Accounting Research, 1(2), 99–114.
23. Marrone, A., & Oliva, L. (2019b). Measuring the Level of Integrated Reporting Alignment with the Framework. International Journal of Business and Management, 14(12), 110. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v14n12p110
24. Moeljadi, M., Angelina, N., & Pangestu, S. (2022). Determinants and Consequences of Integrated Reporting Disclosure. Journal of Business Accounting, 20(2), 200–220.
25. Naylufar, I., & Syafruddin, M. (2023). The Effect of Board Size, Cognitive Diversity of the Board of Commissioners, and Audit Committee on Integrated Reporting. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 12(2), 1–15. http://ejournal-s1.undip.ac.id/index.php/accounting
26. Novaridha, I. A. (2017). The Effect of Institutional Ownership, Company Size, and Profitability on Integrated Reporting Elements. Online Journal of Students of the Faculty of Economics, University of Riau, 4(1).
27. Permata, S., Mulyadi, J., & Supriyadi, E. (2020). The Effect of Company Size, Institutional Ownership, and Profitability on Integrated Reporting with External Auditors as a Moderating Variable. Jurnal Ekobisman, 4(3), 166–182.
28. Rahayuningsih, H., & Pujiono. (2018). The Effect of Company Size, Leverage, and Ownership Structure on Integrated Reporting. Jurnal Akuntansi Akunesa, 7(1), 128.
29. Rejeki, D., & Ahmar, N. (2022). Literature Review: The Importance of Implementing Integrated Reporting (IR). Jurnal Ilmiah MEA (Management, Economics, and Accounting), 6(3), 151–163.
30. Rosyadi, N., Murdianingsih, D., & Saras Meilia Puspitasari, D. (2022). The Influence of Firm Size, Company Age, Leverage, Profitability, and Institutional Ownership on Integrated Reporting Quality. Proceedings of the National Seminar, Unikal, February 2022, 427–440.
31. Sari, D. D. P., Wijaya, S. Y., & Miftah, M. (2020). Readiness of Companies in Indonesia to Implement Integrated Reporting. Ramanujan Journal, 949–966. https://ocs.upnvj.ac.id/index.php/korelasi/2020/paper/view/1018
32. Sari, R. P., Indrawati, N., & Darlis, E. (2017). The Influence of International Activities, Industry Type, and Growth Opportunity on Integrated Reporting Elements (Empirical Study of Non-Financial Companies Listed on the IDX in 2015). JOMFekom, 4(1), 843–857. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/125589-ID-analisis-dampak-pemekaran-daerah-ditinja.pdf
33. Soegiarto, D., Novianti, Y., & Delima, Z. M. (2022). The Effect of Profitability (ROA), Leverage, Board Size, Gender Diversity, and Ownership Structure on Integrated Reporting. Journal of Finance and Business, 20(1), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.32524/jkb.v20i1.413
34. Sukmayanti, N., & Triaryati, N. (2019). The Effect of Capital Structure, Liquidity, and Company Size on Profitability in Property and Real Estate Companies. E-Journal of Management, 8(1), 7132–7162.
35. Utamie, D. N. (2021). Determinants of Integrated Reporting Implementation in Manufacturing Companies. EMBA Journal, 9(3), 1442–1450.
36. Yahaya, O. A., & Onyabe, J. M. (2022). Audit Committee and Integrated Reporting. European Research Studies Journal, 25(4), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/293x
37. Yani, N. P. T. P., & Suputra, I. D. G. D. (2020). The Effect of Foreign Ownership, Institutional Ownership, and Leverage on Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure. E-Journal of Accounting, 30(5), 1196. https://doi.org/10.24843/eja.2020.v30.i05.p10
38. Zanirah, D. N. (2014). Factors Influencing the Extent of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure in a Company’s Annual Report. 40. https://www.idx.co.id/id

APPENDIX

Appendix 1: List of Companies Selected as Samples

Appendix 2 Descriptive Statistics Output

Appendix 3 Output of Normality Test

Appendix 4: Output of Multicollinearity Test

Appendix 5 Output of Heteroskedasticity Test – Glejser Test

Appendix 6 Output of Heteroskedasticity Test – White Test

Appendix 7 Output of Autocorrelation Test

Appendix 8 Output of Hypotheses