Who’s on Stage? The roles of the project sponsor and of the project leader in IC reporting

Despite the plethora of IC reporting frameworks proposed by scholars and practitioners, their adoption is still not widespread in practice. In other words, IC seems to be more preached than practiced (Dumay, 2009, Chiucchi, 2013b, Lönnqvist et al., 2009). As a consequence, various studies have examined which are the levers and the obstacles that can influence the adoption, use and diffusion of IC reporting practices (Dumay, 2012, Lönnqvist et al., 2009, Catasús et al., 2007, Catasús and Gröjer, 2006, Chiucchi and Montemari, 2016, Giuliani et al., 2016). Levers and barriers can be related to the technical-objective side of IC, i.e. how IC is measured and managed, or to its organizational-subjective side, i.e. who measures and manages IC (Chiucchi et al., 2016). While there are some studies that aim to understand the technical sides (Giuliani, 2016, Giuliani, 2014, Giuliani et al., 2016, Dumay and Rooney, 2011, Catasús et al., 2007, Catasús and Gröjer, 2006), the subjective side of IC appears to be underinvestigated (Chaminade and Roberts, 2003, Chiucchi, 2013a, Chiucchi, 2013b). Moving from these considerations, the aim of this study is to examine the roles played by the “project sponsor” (PS) and the “project leader” (PL) in the design and implementation process of an IC reporting project. In order to achieve this aim the results of an exploratory field study (Roslender and Hart, 2003, Lillis and Mundy, 2005) referred to Italian companies that adopted an IC report will be presented. Our study adds to IC literature by showing, from a practice-based perspective, the roles played by the PSs and of the PLs in different organizations and how they are determinant in the decision to undertake these projects, in their accomplishment, prosecution and abandonment. In particular, it emerges that PSs and PLs have a relevant role in the IC sensegiving and sensemaking processes: their specialization influence the way IC is perceived within the company and the fate of the IC report, i.e. in determining the success or the failure of the IC projects.