See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/288653025

The Awareness of the Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) In Malaysia

Article  in  Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce · December 2014

CITATIONS READS

5 227

1 author:

Azleen Ilias
Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN)
44 PUBLICATIONS   281 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Azleen Ilias on 24 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce
An open access Internet journal (http://www.arraydev.com/commerce/jibc/)

Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, August 2014, vol. 19, no.2
(http://www.arraydev.com/commerce/jibc/)

The Awareness of the Extensible Business Reporting Language

(XBRL) In Malaysia
AZLEEN ILIAS, MBA
Senior Lecturer, Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN), Malaysia
Postal Address: Department of Accounting, College of Business and
Administration UNITEN-Campus Sultan Haji Ahmad Shah, 26700, Muadzam Shah,
Pahang, Malaysia
Author's Personal/Organizational Website:
http://www.uniten.edu.my/newhome/uploaded/staff_profiles/coba/accounting/Azleen%20
Ilias.pdf
Email: [email protected] / [email protected]
Azleen Ilias is a member of Department of Accounting. Her research is focused on
Services in Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL), Computerised Accounting
System, Public Sector Accounting, Reporting Technology, Financial and Management
Accounting Practice and Business Reporting and Public Sector Accounting. To date, she
has published her research in academic journals such as Computer Information Systems
(CIS) and International Business Research (IBR), the Journal of Internet Banking and
Commerce, IPN Journal of Research and Practice in Public sector Accounting and
Management, Review of Integrative Business & Economics Research and Sustaining
Competitiveness in a Liberalised Economy: the Role of Accounting

ZULKEFLEE MOHD ABD RAZAK, MBA

Senior Lecturer, Department of Marketing and Entrepreneur Development, College
of Business and Accounting, Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN), Malaysia
Postal Address: Department of Marketing and Entrepreneur Development, College
of Business and Administration UNITEN-Campus Sultan Haji Ahmad Shah, 26700,
Muadzam Shah, Pahang, Malaysia
Author's Personal/Organizational Website:
http://www.uniten.edu.my/newhome/content_list.asp?contentid=3414
Email: [email protected]
Mohd Zulkeflee Abd Razak research interests include Services Marketing, Retailing,
International Business and Cross-cultural Issues, Accounting, Banking and Financial
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -2-

Instrument-based Services. To date, he has presented and published his research at

national and international conferences and in journals such as Computer Information
Systems (CIS) and International Business Research (IBR), the Journal of Internet
Banking and Commerce, IPN Journal of Research and Practice in Public sector
Accounting and Management, Review of Integrative Business & Economics Research
and Sustaining Competitiveness in a Liberalised Economy: the Role of Accounting.

SITI FARA FADILA ABD RAZAK, MBA

Lecturer, Department of Finance and Economics, College of Business and
Accounting, Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN), Malaysia
Postal Address: Department of Finance and Economics, College of Business and
Administration UNITEN-Campus Sultan Haji Ahmad Shah, 26700, Muadzam Shah,
Pahang, Malaysia
Author's Personal/Organizational Website:
http://www.uniten.edu.my/newhome/uploaded/staff_profiles/coba/finance%20and%20ec
onomics/Siti%20Fara%20Fadila%20Abd%20Razak.pdf
Email: [email protected]
Her research interest are Corporate Governance, Mutual Funds, Islamic Wealth
Management, Security Analysis, Contemporary Issues in Finance, Volatility of Gold,
Government / Public Agencies, Education, Accounting Based Services, Banking Based
Services & Financial Instrument Based Services.

Abstract
The current study had explored the Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL)
among various stakeholders from a financial reporting perspective. In addition, the
impact of the benefits on users, organization and preparers might vary according to the
culture, country or financial regulations. Thus, this research will focus on Malaysia since
Malaysia is multi-cultural and the adoption of XBRL can be considered as a new
development. Pertaining to this research, it is important to understand the concept of a
new reporting technology and the way XBRL will provide interactive data. The
awareness and intention to adopt the XBRL will resume effectively once users, preparers
and regulators are able to understand the whole concept of XBRL. This research is
considered significant in order to explore the readiness and awareness of new reporting
technology in Asia, particularly in Malaysia. This study found only a few respondents was
fully aware of XBRL, while the majority of respondents were unaware about XBRL.
Besides awareness, the study found that there are approximately 67.2% of respondents
who are likely to investigate the XBRL technology, which indicates that there is a
possibility that XBRL will be more significant and eventually accepted by stakeholders.
This study found that approximately 3.1% understood fully what XBRL is and 18%
understood the basic concepts.

Keywords: Extensible Business Reporting Language, XBRL, financial reporting,

technology, Malaysia, awareness, adoption, stakeholders

© Azleen Ilias, Zulkeflee Mohd Abd Razak and Siti Fara Fadila Abd Razak, (2014).
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -3-

INTRODUCTION
The financial and non-financial information is usually distributed and disseminated by
digital reporting formats. The well-known digital reporting formats are the Portable
Document Formats (PDFs) and Hypertext Mark-up Language (HTML), which are exactly
the same as the printed version. Currently, there is a new development in reporting
format technology, which is known as eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL).
XBRL is an advanced technology and an extension to communicate corporate reporting
in a structured manner in order to be understood and received across borders. The
XBRL is a more effective reporting technology format compared to PDF and HTML. Cox
(2006) from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission had agreed that the
interactive data would be provided by a new reporting technology, which has the
capability of real-time reporting and real-time analysis.

Lymer, Debreceny, Gray & Rahman’s (1999) report showed the development and
evolution of business reporting. The existing technology had started business reporting
with printed financial statements and CD-ROMs. Then came the electronic paper
version, whereby the annual report was distributed through the internet. The electronic
version is exactly the same as the paper based printed financial report. The well-known
electronic version is the Adobe Acrobat software, which can be read by the Acrobat
Reader. Besides that, other electronic versions that are used are Microsoft Word and the
Excel Spreadsheet. According to Xiao, Jones & Lymer (2005), experts believed that
internet reporting would be the norm and companies would place all financial reporting
on the web. Next, there is the Hypertext Mark-Up Language (HTML) technology, which is
used to support navigation and links between pages. HTML focuses more on
presentation and graphics, thus the development of “plug-ins” function to improve the
efficiency of web sites. Some examples of “plug-ins” are Flash, Macromedia’s
Shockwave and Adobe Acrobat.

Then, in order to ensure that information such as profit announcements, analyst briefing
and dissemination of annual meetings in real-time, there is interactive multimedia in the
web sites. The interactive multimedia that has been set-up in the website is RealPlayer
and Quicktime. Besides all the technology, the technology experts have come up with
3D reporting, connection between web pages and database, providing search engine
tools, designing websites with a variety of interactions on the pages by using Java
applets in simple spreadsheets, statistical data, graphs, and display charts related to
accounting information. There is also a push technology, which collects emails from
stakeholders or users that need updated information from reports and processes them.
Then, there is the intelligent agent that complements human analyses and provides
further support, particularly for decision makers, such as analytical tools, for quick ratios
in the websites. After the existence of HTML, the eXtensible Markup Language (XML)
was developed to facilitate the exchange of information on the internet.

The latest technology in business reporting is the eXtensible Business Reporting

Language (XBRL), which came into existence when Charles Hoffman found that XML
had capabilities for electronic reporting. The implementation of XBRL can be seen as a
worldwide adoption since XBRL has been implemented, for instance in UK, US,
Netherland, Australia, Singapore, Japan, India and China.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -4-

The eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL)

Charles Hoffman is the founder of XBRL and started it in 1998. He has been called ‘the
father of digital language of business’. Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL)
is a global standard for business reporting. Charles Hoffman had started the XBRL after
he found that the eXtensible Markup Language (XML) could be used for presenting
financial statements and auditing purposes. During that time, the AICPA (American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants) was the key organization for developing the
XBRL international standard, particularly for business reporting (Hoffman, 2006). Based
on XBRL, the International standards have been described as:

“XBRL is the extension of XML language that is used to communicate tagged data on
the internet. XBRL stands for eXtensible Business Reporting Language. It is a language
for electronic communication of business information, providing major benefits in the
preparation, analysis and communication of business information. It offers savings in
costs, greater efficiency and improved accuracy and reliability to all those involved in
supplying or using business information. An international non-profit consortium of over
600 major companies, organisations and government agencies is developing XBRL,
which is an open standard and free of license fees. It is already being put to practical use
in a number of countries and implementations of XBRL are growing rapidly around the
world.” (http://www.xbrl.org).

XBRL can be difficult to understand because it seems similar to a technical sound and
based on Bergeron (2003), XBRL can be defined from a business perspective as: “an
open independent platform, international standard for a timely, accurate, efficient and
cost effective electronic storage, manipulative, repurposing, and communication of
financial and business reporting data. XBRL is fundamentally about a standard language
for reporting financial data”.

Based on Bergeron (2003), XBRL is an extension of Extensible Markup Language

(XML), which is a language that has been extended to business reporting standards.
XBRL exists because of the challenge in reporting, since there few problems in reporting
based on electronic data interchange (EDI). Electronic reporting was developed to
overcome the disadvantages of communicating corporate information in the paper-based
version, which ensures a lower cost of communication and transaction. However, there
are also challenges of using the electronic data interchange (EDI) since there are
several standards involved in exchanging electronic documents and EDI systems used
by companies that are not compatible with each other. Thus, the challenges of EDI have
been resolved by the existence of the internet and the use of static web pages via
Hypertext Mark-up Language (HTML) to transmit and distribute general communications,
email and e-commerce. Since HTML is a static web page that is difficult to share
transactions and reports in real-time, several languages were developed such as
Extensible Mark-up Language (XML). XML is a language compatible with the internet
and for communications. Bergeron (2003) also mentioned that XML is known to be
extensible or easily modified and the language is able to provide extended vocabulary
for text and images in all fields and areas. XML owns unique characteristics that enable
corporate information to be translated, transmitted and communicated between different
systems. Since XML is an attractive and freely available language, the new evolutions
and extensions from XML have been developed and is known as eXtensible Business
Reporting Language (XBRL).
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -5-

A standards committee established XBRL vocabulary while XML is a language with a

standard mode for referring and reporting all business transactions.

Reports using the XBRL will be comprehensive compared to HTML, which is in plain
text. XBRL is extensible and more specific then XML, which makes data more
identifiable by the system. In XBRL, the amount will be very comprehensive whenever
the numbers have been tagged by taxonomy or vocabulary that has been communicated
via several systems. For example, it as useful as a bar code on a product that is
scanned during payment, such as <Product series>1234562342</Product Series>. The
numbers attached to the products will appear meaningful and indicate the product
category. For example, to report the amount of “Dollars 20,000 for Account Receivable”
with Microsoft Excel, the amount will appear as plain text. However, reports in XBRL are
different because the tag or taxonomy will be attached with the amount of Dollars
20,000. It will be tagged and appear as: <Account Receivable
currency=”Dollars>20,000</Account Receivable>.

XBRL will make the life of business documents, reports and exchanges easier and
effective when the data becomes more meaningful. The report can be utilized and used
by every stakeholder and organization from various countries although under different
jurisdictions, regulations and accounting standards. With one single information supply
chain, organizations only need to create one report for every user instead of different
reports for different users.

In this study, researchers will discuss the awareness of users and preparers on the
benefits of using XBRL standard formats based on other previous researchers and
adopters. The concept of benefits needs to be understood in order for awareness,
adoption and acceptance of XBRL by organizations and users. Cox (2006) in a speech
had mentioned, “far too many people think XBRL might be a new car model or maybe a
newly discovered medical condition”. The statement indicates that there are some
challenges for users and preparers in understanding the implementation and implication
of XBRL. Thus, the government needs to educate users on the concept of XBRL and
how future adopters will benefit by its implementation. The full understanding of the
concepts will improve the level of awareness of all parties involved in formulating future
digital reports. The first challenge faced by every country pertains to awareness. In the
U.S, as mentioned by Cox (2006), more than 10,000 public companies were not aware
of the possibilities of XBRL. The awareness of the possibilities might be developed by
improving the general knowledge of users on XBRL. As mentioned by Hoffman in a
conversation with Tie (2005), he stated that the lack of general knowledge on XBRL is
an important challenge faced by certified public accountants.

Besides awareness and understanding of benefits, the important terminology needs to

be introduced to potential users or adopters. The understanding of the terminology and
jargons will ensure that it is easier to understand the way XBRL works on reporting. In
this study, a few important jargons will be highlighted based on experts such as Hoffman
(2006), Bergeron (2003) and XBRL International.

Firstly, the meaning of the word ‘concept’, also known as the “financial reporting concept,
has been defined in an XBRL taxonomy as an XML Schema element”
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -6-

Second, the meaning of Context is known as “important information about the values”.
Third, the meaning of XBRL Specification is known as “the XBRL syntax or technical
rules”. Fourth, the meaning of XBRL Taxonomies is known as “concepts that are
expressed within a dictionary”. Fifth, the meaning of XBRL Instant Documents is known
as “business reporting in a special way and published in a special format”.

In this research, it is important to understand the concept of a new reporting technology

and the way XBRL will provide an interactive data. The awareness and intention to adopt
the XBRL will be resumed effectively once users, preparers and regulators are able to
understand the whole concept of XBRL. This research is considered significant in order
to explore the readiness and awareness of new reporting technology in Asia, particularly
in Malaysia. The readiness of stakeholders can be substantiated by understanding the
concepts and benefits of XBRL. Since XBRL is still new in Malaysia, more research
needs to be done on the user’s present and potential awareness, understanding and
interest in XBRL. In addition, research also needs to be done on future impact of XBRL
adoption among various stakeholders. As mentioned by Francis (2012), XBRL can be
very useful to accountants, auditors, chief executive officer, chief finance officer,
investors, financial advisors and regulators.

Thus, this current study will explore the adoption of XBRL among various stakeholders.
Furthermore, the impact of the benefits on users, organization and preparers might be
different according to the various cultures, countries or financial regulations. Thus, this
current research will be valuable in the Malaysian context since Malaysia is multicultural.
As mentioned by Liu (2013), different cultural and financial regulatory factors will
influence the decision to adopt XBRL. Thus, the currents authors believe that their study
will discover exploratory results in order to ensure the adoption of XBRL in the future.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The Awareness of the eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL)
The adoption of XBRL by the stakeholders will be even more challenging if they did not
understand or are unaware of the concepts and benefits provided by implementing
XBRL. Most researches had found a low level of awareness at the early stage of XBRL
introduction.

Pinsker (2003) did a study in the US on seven auditors and nine accountants on the
knowledge, experience and perceived benefits pertaining to XBRL. The study found a
low level of knowledge (1.71) and experience (1.24) concerning XBRL and they had
expected the low level of experience by the users because of the new XBRL software.
These results were based on the seven-tier Likert scale from 1 being “low” and 7 being
“high”. The research concluded that XBRL International needed to communicate the
understanding, knowledge and usage benefits to a variety of auditing non-members all
over the world. Thus, these users will really understand the meaning of XBRL and the
reason why XBRL is important to auditors and accountants all over the world.

In 2007, the Institute of Certified Financial Analyst (CFA) conducted a survey that
focused on awareness and knowledge on XBRL (CFA, February 2008). From the total
number of respondents (N=856), approximately 59% were unaware about XBRL, 32%
were aware about XBRL but were not up-to-date with XBRL usage in financial reporting.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -7-

Besides, there is evidence that few respondents (9%) were aware and had up-to-date
knowledge on XBRL usage in financial reporting. Among the CFA members, the
awareness element was the most prominent feature among them in the United States
(46%) and the most unaware members came from Latin America (71%).

In 2009, another XBRL survey done by the Institute of Certified Financial Analysts (CFA)
had indicated that there was an improvement in the level of awareness (CFA, November
2009). The results showed that approximately 55% of respondents were not aware of
XBRL, 35% were aware of XBRL but not up-to-date with XBRL usage in financial
reporting and an increasing number of respondents (11%) were aware and planned to
use XBRL in financial reporting. In 2009, the level of awareness was significantly lower
in the Asia Pacific region and was highest (52%) in the US. Recent research by CFA in
2011 had found that 53% of members were not aware, 38% were aware but were not
up-to-date with the usage and 9% were aware and planned to use XBRL. They also
found that the level of awareness was significantly lower among CFA charter holders
(28%) then non-charter holders (43%) compared with more tenured chart holders (59%).
By comparing occupations, academics had the highest awareness (66 percent), followed
by credit analysts (54 %), portfolio managers (53 %), research analysts (47 %),
investment banking analysts (36 %), and financial advisors (36 %) (CFA, December
2011).

Another research by Nel & Steenkamp (2008) in South Africa had limited the research to
chartered accountants and focused on the elements of awareness and understanding of
XBRL implementation. The research found that more than 50% (89%) of respondents
had never heard of XBRL prior to this research or had heard of it but did not know what
XBRL was all about. The research also explored whether respondents were interested in
investigating XBRL after the survey and it was found that only 17% were not interested
to investigate further, compared to 84% who were interested in investigating further on
XBRL.

Dune, Helliar, Lymer & Mousa (2009) had done research in the UK on XBRL from the
perspective of stakeholders such as accountants in UK listed companies, external
auditors, tax practitioners, representatives of investment management and the analyst
community. This research aimed to investigate the level of awareness and
understanding of XBRL, explore the benefits and difficulties of the new technology and
the implications for auditing and assurance.

This study looked into whether respondents were aware of the benefits of XBRL. They
found that most of the accountants, tax practitioners and users were not aware of the
benefits of XBRL and they choose to answer, “do not know”. Then, they investigated the
obstacles to XBRL adoption and found that only auditors seemed to understand and had
some knowledge on it and most respondents comprising accountants, tax practitioners
and users answered, “do not know”. In XBRL, tagging documents are very important for
its implementation and most respondents had answered, “do not know”. This indicates
that most of them lacked the knowledge and did not know anything about the
taxonomies.

Venkatesh & Armitage (2012) had investigated the awareness among accountants and
auditors.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -8-

They found that 7.7% of respondents were aware of XBRL, while 43.6% said they were
aware but knew few details about XBRL. Moreover, 17.9% had possessed moderate
levels of knowledge and 30.8% had indicated possessing a high level of knowledge in
XBRL. The awareness and understanding of XBRL was related to training received by
respondents, as the research found that 51.3% did not receive any training or below
average training. In addition, 17.9% of respondents had received average training and
30.8% had received well above average training on XBRL. Besides, researchers also
found that respondents did not have the skills, expertise or training in order to provide
assurance on XBRL data.

Steenkamp & Nel (2012) did a study on the adoption of XBRL in South Africa, which
focused on the level of awareness, factors influencing adoption of XBRL and the impact
of economic conditions on the decision to adopt XBRL. Firstly, they looked into the
awareness on XBRL and found that 49.3% stated that they did not know what actually
XBRL was, 45% had a slight idea on XBRL and 5.7% had some knowledge on it. The
level of awareness and knowledge on XBRL implementation might be influenced by the
source of the information on XBRL that will appear to users and potential users. This
study also showed that about 83.1% understood was XBRL was from reading articles
and browsing the internet.

The Adoption of the eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL)

In order to adopt XBRL as a continuous disclosure reporting technology, Pinsker (2007)
had developed a theoretical framework, which is based on Li et.al.,’s (2004) IT model
(Computer Mediated Communication Apprehension-neighbourhood effect) and
Fichman’s (1992) IT adoption (applying Technology Acceptance Model and Absorptive
Capacity). Pinsker (2007) had used the framework to develop seven propositions from
the relevant theories, which consist of factors (level of computer mediated
communication apprehension, perceived usefulness, attitude, absorptive capacity, level
of education, perceived technological market leadership and external pressures) that
affect the decision to adopt XBRL.

Thus, Pinsker (2008) had extended his research based on theoretical development from
his previous work (Pinsker, 2007). The purpose of his research was to provide a better
understanding of XBRL adoption intentions of mid-level managers in large U.S firms.
Pinsker (2008) focused on managers who had little or no previous XBRL knowledge and
included MBA students enrolled in the accounting course. The study found that the
Technology Acceptance Model and Absorptive Capacity represented appropriate
theories for research on XBRL adoption. The research found that XBRL was perceived
to be useful in their jobs. However, favourable attitudes by decision makers did not have
an influence on XBRL technology. For Absorptive Capacity, Pinsker (2008) had found
that the convenience to learn is positively related to the decision to adopt XBRL.

Troshani & Doolin (2005) had carried out qualitative research on XBRL in Australia,
which explored the driving factors and their inhibitions that affected technology adoption.
This research data were collected through semi–structured interviews that involved
eleven interviewees from large accounting firms, software developers and vendors,
regulatory agencies, XBRL Australia Ltd and tertiary accounting educators. The research
was done in order to determine the driving factors and their inhibitions in the context of
environmental, organizational and innovation factors.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 -9-

In the environmental contexts, they found few issues from the interviewees. The first
category was the local adoption strategy, which found that the lack of effectiveness,
flexibility and responsiveness in the local adoption strategy. The second category
referred to the limited local XBRL success stories. The local success on XBRL adoption
will actually reveal the benefits experienced by adopters and this might be easier for
decision makers to decide whether to adopt or not. The third category is the design of
the accounting standards, where the priority lies with the International Accounting
Standard (IAS). In XBRL adoption, the successful adoption of IAS is a prerequisite that
facilitates the creation of Australia’s single taxonomy. In an organizational context,
researchers found two important categories. Firstly, employees need to be educated on
the basic understanding of the functionality and benefits of XBRL. They also need to be
fluent in using the applications on XBRL. Secondly, interviewees had raised the issue of
limited resources, which involved time, expertise and funding that was required for
developmental efforts. The last context is innovation factors, which involved limited
software tool support and the instability of the XBRL specification. Firstly, interviewees
touched on the issue of limited software tools on XBRL, which were in dire need by
potential adopters. Secondly, the interviewees were of the view that XBRL specifications
need to be stable with no changes, in order to ensure the stability and smooth running of
the software.

Doolin & Troshani (2007) had found the issues and factors on organizational adoption,
which were in line with the Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) model. They
carried out exploratory research through qualitative evidence that was in line with the
technology-organization environment model. In their study, the first context involved was
technology. Based on relative advantage, they found that XBRL was beneficial to
software vendors and professional accounting firms. Complexity was the second context
the researchers had found. Researchers found that specialized tasks and knowledge
were required in order to develop specific taxonomies and tagging of financial data.
Thirdly, researchers had found trialability, which is one way to reduce uncertainty when
trying out a new application. Potential adopters have the ability to observe and
experience the benefits of XBRL, which can be a factor in XBRL adoption. Observability
means that potential adopters will be interested in knowing about XBRL application and
to determine whether XBRL is suitable according to the needs of the organization when
they observe the readily available software. The last element that can influence the
decision to adopt under the first context is stability. Here, potential adopters had
mentioned about the stability of software tools and applications, especially the changes
of specification and functionality. Another context is organization. They found that
innovation and organizational readiness were able to influence the decision to adopt
XBRL. The third context is environment. The first element in this context is market
conditions, whereby market size will have an influence on XBRL. Second is the influence
of trading partners. Researchers found that business partners were perceived to be part
of a potential influence on organizations in relation to XBRL adoption. Third, the
available information about XBRL and its benefits are crucial in increasing the
awareness of new reporting technology in potential adopters. Active communication of
information will attract potential adopter’s interest towards XBRL development. Fourth,
researchers found that one of the reasons why there were limited XBRL adoptions in
Australia was because of the lack of critical mass of XBRL applications, software tools
and users. Interviewees claimed that software vendors were reluctant to invest time and
resources into developing XBRL exporting facilities until there was a demand.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 10 -

The last element in the environment context is available support. The development of
taxonomies depends on the accounting standards and format used. The taxonomies will
change if the accounting standards keep changing. The development of XBRL must be
in line with the harmonization of accounting standards. The study done by Doolin &
Troshani (2007) was in line with Troshani & Rao (2007), in which Troshani & Rao (2007)
had conducted convergent interviews and found that environmental, organizational and
innovation related factors had an influence on XBRL adoption.

Nel & Steenkamp (2008) had also explored the future implementation and adoption of
XBRL in organizations. They found that approximately 31% of the chartered accountants
had perceived that their organization would implement XBRL in the coming future and
5% had perceived that their organization had already implemented XBRL. The study
also looked into how accountants understood XBRL concepts and they found that 55%
of overall respondents were actually aware and understood the basic concepts of XBRL,
however 45% were aware but did not understand the basic concepts.

Pinsker & Li (2008) has done a study on XBRL adoption for financial reporting to look
into the costs and benefits. Pinsker, Gara & Karim (2005) had mentioned in Pinsker & Li
(2008) that due to a variety of information on business and financial reporting across
countries worldwide, reporting had become more challenging, compared to traditional
reporting that did not have a standard format and needed to be manually assembled
from incompatible information systems in order to prepare a financial report.

Pinsker & Li (2008) had carried out interviews on four business managers from Canada,
Germany, South Africa and the U.S pertaining to XBRL adoption. The purpose of the
study was to improve the knowledge and understanding pertaining costs and benefits of
XBRL adoption. The study found that the benefits accrued to XBRL adoption were the
diversification of international corporate cultures, increased processing capability,
reduced data redundancy, improved operation efficiency, reduced costs of book-
keeping, reduced time needed for generating financial statements, increased company
efficiency due to lower operating costs, reduction in cost of adoption resulting from
substantive technological capabilities and reduction in perceived risks of capital
provision due to lower costs. Besides that, XBRL adoption is a key marketing tool used
by companies to reach potential investors. In post adoption, respondents would view
risks and costs as low and a reflection of them as being technically savvy early adopters.
Besides, the study also mentioned that transparency in financial reporting increases the
level of transparency in the organization. Finally, respondents believed that XBRL
adoption would give companies the competitive advantage compared to non-adoption of
XBRL technology. Pinsker & Li (2008) also emphasized that respondents had taken
cognizance of the key emergence of financial reporting technology and expect to obtain
the first mover advantage in the market.

Dune, Helliar, Lymer & Mousa (2009) had explored the regulations pertaining to
adoption and the government’s involvement in XBRL implementation, which focused on
five categories of reports such as financial reports, company’s house filing, non-financial
reports, stock-exchange listing announcements and tax filing. Regarding financial
reports, most of the respondents believed that the XBRL should be voluntary, with no
government involvement; however, auditors preferred XBRL to be mandatory within 2
years.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 11 -

For company’s house filing, XBRL should be on a voluntary adoption basis and with no
government involvement. In reference to non-financial reports, tax filing and stock
exchange listing announcements, XBRL should be voluntary with no involvement of
regulators or the government.

Dune, Helliar, Lymer & Mousa (2009) explored the requirement to have enough IT
expertise or IT personnel if the organization wishes to adopt XBRL. The results showed
that more than 50% did not agree that the organization needed to have IT expertise and
knowledge. The study also investigated the respondents training experience on XBRL
and found only four respondents had experienced in-house training and CPD
requirements. Thus, training provided to stakeholders is relevant in improving their level
of awareness, understanding and knowledge.

Bonson, Cortijo & Escobar (2009) did a research using the Delphi Technique to identify
the factors that could affect companies that had volunteered to submit their information
through XBRL. The study found three factors that played an important role in imparting
an impact on voluntary adoption such as gaining deeper knowledge on XBRL, acquiring
a company image as a pioneer in new technology adoption and the improvement of the
firm’s reputation in the capital market.

Steenkamp & Nel (2012) had explored the factors influencing the adoption of XBRL.
They found that the most common reason why their organization or clients did not
implement XBRL was that XBRL was not yet mandatory (24.5%), followed by the reason
that they did not perceive any benefits by implementation XBRL (18.6%). The study also
found other reasons such as potential adopters not having the necessary technical
knowledge (14.2%), management itself did not know what actually XBRL was (14.2%),
respondents perceived that XBRL was not relevant to the organization (9.3%), the high
cost involved in XBRL preparation prior to implementing XBRL (6.9%), respondents
thought that management did not have the motivation or vision to adopt XBRL in their
organization (2.9%), respondents believed that their current system was too old to adopt
and implement XBRL (2.0%) and some believed the poor economic condition as one of
the reasons (2.0%).

Steenkamp & Nel (2012) also discovered the level of perceived relevance of XBRL
adoption in an organization. The study found that approximately 73.9% had perceived
the adoption and implementation of XBRL as not relevant to their organization. The
study concluded that preparers of financial reporting are supposed to believe that XBRL
adoption is relevant to the organization because they are the people who are involved
with financial information and XBRLs’ key focus is in that same area. Besides perceived
relevance, the study investigated whether economic circumstances would influence the
decision to adopt XBRL and found that a majority (87%) believed that economic
circumstances would not have any impact in deciding whether to adopt XBRL in their
organization. About 12% of respondents stated that XBRL implementation will be
delayed or postponed due to economic circumstances and 1% felt that economic
circumstances would part an impact on the decision on whether to adopt and implement
XBRL.

Henderson, et.al., (2012) did a study on the adoption of XBRL with the purpose of
investigating the driving force behind internal and inter-organizational XBRL adoption.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 12 -

This study was carried out based on the Technological-Organizational-Environmental

(TOE) framework. Researchers had found that the factors for internal adoption were
different compared to factors for inter-organizational XBRL adoption. This study carried
out a survey comprising 65 organizations that had not adopted XBRL. The study found
that relative advantage, compatibility, complexity and learning from external sources
were factors that instigated the decision to adopt XBRL in an internal organization.
However, learning from external sources and normative pressure had shown a
significant effect in inter-organizational adoption. Thus, the study had concluded that
relative advantage, compatibility and complexity had stronger influence on internal XBRL
adoption compared in inter-organizations.

Most of the research had come out with a few factors that might influence XBRL
adoption. Thus, it is important to ensure which factors that might significantly influence
XBRL adoption. In a recent study by Liu (2013), the researchers had encouraged more
research be carried out on the role of environmental factors pertaining to national
cultures and financial regulatory environments in XBRL diffusion. The study had also
motivated other researchers to carry out research on contingent factors such as
organizational, cultural or financial regulatory factors that could influence value
realization due to XBRL adoption.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Samples and Data Collection
Since XBRL was still in the beginning phase in Malaysia, it was difficult to obtain
information on adoption and perception because at this phase the stakeholders had not
experienced much on XBRL formats. Researchers began by contacting the relevant
regulatory authorities involved in implementing XBRL in Malaysia for examining the early
stages of XBRL adoption. In the beginning, researchers had done a short semi-
structured interview focusing on the relevance of implementing XBRL in Malaysia and
the respondents were also required to provide feedback via a set of questionnaires. The
researchers believed that all stakeholders were relevant and should be respondents in
the research by providing feedback on the awareness, interest, understanding and
adoption of XBRL. They were also asked to rate their understanding on XBRL concepts
and benefits.

In order to use the method in this research, the researchers had called on all firms and
relevant respondents involved in using and preparing business reports, especially in the
Kuala Lumpur and Selangor area. The information on the firms was obtained from the
representative of the Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA), Malaysian Yellow Pages
and by approaching the attendees of MIA courses and conferences. The researchers
found about 1200 potential respondents and eventually 650 potential respondents had
agreed to provide some feedback. Thus, about 650 potential respondents were identified
and had received a set of questionnaires; however, only 350 respondents from various
job descriptions had successfully completed the questionnaires and returned them.
Thus, the samples represented a response rate of approximately 58%.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 13 -

Table 1: Respondents’ Profile

Age Frequency Percent
22 – 30 years 193 55.1
31 – 40 years 109 31.1
41 – 50 years 38 10.9
51 – 60 years 7 2.0
61 – 70 years 3 .9
Gender
Female 225 64.3
Male 125 35.7
Highest level of Education.
Certificate 7 2.0
Professional certificate 49 14.0
Diploma 42 12.0
Degree 228 65.1
Master Degree 23 6.6
Other 1 .3
Job Descriptions
Senior management 9 2.6
Accountants 81 23.1
Auditors 147 42.0
Tax practitioners 36 10.3
Consultants 5 1.4
Other director 1 .3
Financial director 1 .3
Bankers 11 3.1
Regulators 5 1.4
Academician 1 .3
IT / Systems Manager 4 1.1
Other 49 14.0
Organization
Public Listed Company (PLC) 71 20.3
Non Public Listed Company 35 10.0
Big Four Audit Firm 17 4.9
Medium-sized Audit Firm 72 20.6
Small-sized Audit Firm 83 23.7
Accounting Firm 23 6.6
Tax Firm 7 2.0
Other 42 12.0

In Pinsker’s study (2003), the respondents consisted of 17 internal auditors. Nel &
Steenkamp (2008) had approximately 208 respondents from the overall number of
chartered accountants in South Africa. In another research by Steenkamp & Nel (2012),
some 337 chartered accountants were involved. Based on research done by the Institute
of Certified Financial Analyst (CFA), it showed the lowest response rate of 9.03% from a
total of 9,992 respondents in 2007 and 6.1% from a total 23,894 in 2009 (CFA, February
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 14 -

2008; November 2009). Henderson, et.al., (2012) had 65 respondents involved in their
research from various job functions. Dune, Helliar, Lymer & Mousa (2009) had
approximately 153 respondents from various groups involved. Whereas, for interviews
done by Pinsker & Li (2008), the respondents involved were four representatives from
four companies that had adopted XBRL. Troshani & Doolin (2005) had carried out semi-
structured interviews on 11 key representatives from organizational members of XBRL
user-groups.

In addition, most of the previous research had used the qualitative and quantitative
research methodology. As mentioned by Liu (2013), looking at the summary of XBRL
research methods, about 65% of the research applied qualitative analysis, 20% used
archival data analysis, 6% of interviews, 4% of case studies, 3% did experiments and
2% used the survey method. Thus, there were many researches done on XBRL using
several methodologies in order to find significant and relevant results.

Instruments
The instrument for this research was divided into several parts that were pertinent to
XBRL such as awareness, implementation, understanding, demand for XBRL knowledge
and courses and intention to use. The questionnaire was developed through adoption
and modification based on the suitability of the XBRL development in Malaysia. The
items on this questionnaire were mainly developed based on Nel & Steenkamp (2008).
Hence, for the purpose of ensuring sufficiency and suitability of the questions, the
instruments were reviewed and pre-tested by researchers who were experts on XBRL
and questionnaire survey.

AWARENESS OF XBRL

Figure 1: Awareness of XBRL

Table 2: Awareness of XBRL

Have you ever heard about XBRL? Frequency Percent
No, I have never heard of it 107 30.6
Yes, I have heard of it, but do not really know the concept of
188 53.7
XBRL
Yes, I have basic understanding about XBRL 44 12.6
Yes, I am fully aware of XBRL 11 3.1
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 15 -

Generally, this result shows the awareness of XBRL in Malaysia. XBRL is still
considered a new technology in Malaysia and its awareness might be relevant as an
item to be identified in this study in order to determine the preparation process involved
in shifting to a new technology. This study had found that 55 respondents were aware
and understood XBRL, 188 (53.7%) respondents did not really understand the concept
of XBRL and 107 (30.6%) respondents had never heard about XBRL. These results are
surprising because previous research had also shown similar low-levels of awareness at
the first stage of adoption (Nel & Steenkamp, 2008 & Dune, Helliar, Lymer & Mousa,
2009).

Awareness of XBRL among job descriptions

Table 3: Awareness of XBRL among job description

No, I have Yes, I have Yes, I have Yes, I
never heard heard of it, basic am fully
of it but do not understanding aware of
really know about XBRL XBRL
the concept
of XBRL
Senior management 5 3 1 0
Accountants 21 45 11 4
Auditors 50 78 15 4
Tax practitioners 12 19 5 0
Consultants 2 2 1 0
Other director 0 0 1 0
Financial director 0 0 1 0
Bankers 1 7 3 0
Regulators 1 1 3 0
Academician 0 1 0 0
IT / Systems Manager 1 0 1 2
Other 14 32 2 1

This study had identified the level of awareness among respondents such as users in
IFR and some of the preparers. Very few of accountants (n=4) and auditors (n=4) were
aware and understood XBRL. Most of the accountants, auditors, tax practitioners,
consultants, bankers and other job positions that were related with IFR had heard about
XBRL but did not really know the XBRL concept prior to this survey. This result will help
regulators to plan a lot of training and courses in order to introduce the benefits and
emphasize the importance of implementing XBRL. XBRL is not only important for
regulators but also for users and preparers of financial reports in order to improve the
information supply chain.

Based on the research by CFA (February 2008), sell-side investment analyst had shown
the greatest awareness in XBRL (51%), whereas fund and portfolio managers had
shown the least awareness (5%) and indicated that most were unaware (63%) of XBRL.
In another research by CFA (November 2009), academicians had shown the highest
awareness level (72%) from total overall number of academicians. This was followed by
research analyst (48%), portfolio managers (46%), financial advisors (45%), investment
banking analysts (33%) and credit analysts (26%).
 JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 16 -

Interest to investigate about XBRL

Figure 2: Interest to investigate about XBRL

Table 4: Interest to investigate about XBRL

Do you plan to investigate and gain more knowledge about Frequency Percent
XBRL in the near future?
No, I am not interested 60 17.1
No, it is not relevant to me 55 15.7
Yes, I probably investigate about XBRL 170 48.6
Yes, I will investigate about XBRL 65 18.6

This study aimed to identify respondents’ interest to investigate and gain more
knowledge on XBRL in the future, hence, 18.6% said they would investigate about XBRL
and 48.6% said they would most likely investigate about XBRL. Fortunately, less than
50% said that they were not interested and XBRL was not relevant to them (32.8%). This
is a signal to regulators to prepare more training and campaigning in order to attract new
XBRL adopters.

The Interest to Investigate about XBRL among Aware and Unaware Respondents
Table 5: Interest to investigate about XBRL among aware and unaware respondents
Have you ever heard about XBRL? Total
No, I have Yes, I have Yes, I have Yes, I am
never heard of it, but basic fully aware
heard of it do not really understanding of XBRL
know the about XBRL
concept of
XBRL
No, I am not
18 36 5 1 60
interested
Do you plan to No, it is not
19 30 4 2 55
investigate and relevant to me
gain more Yes, I probably
knowledge investigate about 48 96 25 1 170
about XBRL in XBRL
the near future? Yes, I will
investigate about 22 26 10 7 65
XBRL
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 17 -

This result shows whether respondents who are unaware about XBRL will or will not be
interested to know more. The result indicated that 13.7% (n=48) of respondents who had
never heard about XBRL were interested to investigate and understand more on the
benefits, implementation and costs. About 18.8% (n=66) felt they were not interested
and the issue was not relevant to initiate further investigation although they lacked the
knowledge on the concept of XBRL. Fortunately, about 96 of the respondents had made
efforts to know more about XBRL in order to understand the basic concepts. Besides
that, it is also a good signal when there were about 43 respondents interested in
enhancing their knowledge in the future even though they already had the basic
knowledge on XBRL.

Implementation of XBRL at the organizational level

Figure 3: Implementation of XBRL at organizational level

Table 6: Implementation of XBRL at organizational level

Do you think that your organization should adopt XBRL in Frequency Percent
the future?
Yes, should be adopted 66 18.9
No, should not be adopted 14 4.0
Do not know 255 72.9
Already implemented 5 1.4
Already in progress implemented 10 2.9

The results showed what respondents thought about the future implementation of XBRL
in their organization. The majority of respondents responded with a “do not know” when
asked if they thought whether their organization would or would not adopt XBRL. This
decision might be influenced by their level of awareness that showed no basic
knowledge on the concept of XBRL (85%). Only about 5 respondents indicated that
XBRL was already implemented and 10 respondents indicated that their organization
was in the process of preparing XBRL implementation.
 JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 18 -

Understanding of XBRL

Figure 4: Understanding of XBRL

Table 7: Understanding of XBRL

How is your understanding of XBRL before this survey? Frequency Percent
I was aware, but did not fully understand the basic concepts 276 78.9
I understand the basic concepts of XBRL 63 18.0
I understand fully what XBRL is about 11 3.1

The study identified that 78.9% were aware but did not fully understand what XBRL was
all about. This indicates that they were lacking the understanding of XBRL prior to this
survey. Only 18% of respondents understood the basic concepts and 3.1% fully
understood XBRL. The, researchers anticipated that the respondents might not be
aware of this new reporting technology due to the lack of understanding of the basic
concepts.

Figure 5: Understanding of XBRL among job description

 JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 19 -

Table 8: Understanding of XBRL among job description

How is your understanding of XBRL before this survey?
I was aware, but I understand the I understand fully
did not fully basic concepts of what XBRL is about
understand the XBRL
basic concepts
Senior management 8 1 0
Accountants 67 12 2
Auditors 114 28 5
Tax practitioners 28 8 0
Consultants 5 0 0
Other director 0 1 0
Financial director 0 1 0
Bankers 10 1 0
Regulators 3 2 0
Academician 1 0 0
IT / Systems Manager 1 0 3
Other 39 9 1

This result shows the level of understanding according to the job description, which
indicated that auditors (n= 114), accountants (n=67), tax practitioners (n=28) and other
job positions (n=39) did not fully understand the basic concepts of XBRL. Normally, the
XBRL concept will involve the concept of benefits, costs, implementations and any
successful history of XBRL by early adopters. However, the results also showed a good
indication whenever there were respondents who understood the basic concepts; in this
case, the respondents were 33 auditors, 14 accountants, 8 tax practitioners and 10 with
various job descriptions. This indicates that regulators were able to improve the level of
awareness and understanding in order to ensure that the respondents will be part of
future adopters.

Demand for XBRL knowledge and courses

Table 9: Demand for XBRL knowledge and courses

Have you attend any course of XBRL before this survey? Frequency Percent
Yes 33 9.4
No 317 90.6

Respondents were also asked about their experience in attending any course connected
to XBRL. The results showed that only 9.4% of respondents had attended any course
before this survey. Their experience from attending the course will improve their level of
awareness and understanding pertaining to benefits, costs and implementation.
 JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 20 -

Table 10: Demand for XBRL knowledge and course

If yes, please indicate the type of training on XBRL that you Frequency Percent
have attended?
Workshop 8 2.3
Course 4 1.1
Seminar 10 2.9
Others 11 3.1
NA 317 90.6

Table 10 above shows that 33 respondents had attended some form of training in XBRL
and the break-down shows that they had attended workshops (n=8), courses (4) and
other types of training (n=11). This result suggests that regulators and enforcers should
consider these respondents as new future adopters of XBRL.

Intention to use XBRL in the future

Figure 6: Intention to use XBRL in future

Table 17: Figure 6: Intention to use XBRL in the future

I intend to use XBRL in future Total Considere
Strongly Disagree Somewhat I Do Not Somew Agree Strongly d have
Disagree Disagree Know hat Agree Agree intention
Senior management 0 0 0 6 2 1 0 9 33.33%
Accountants 0 4 3 47 12 13 2 81 33.33%
Auditors 2 1 7 85 31 18 3 147 35.37%
Tax practitioners 0 0 0 29 1 6 0 36 19.44%
Consultants 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 5 40.00%
Other director 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 100%
Financial director 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 100%
Bankers 0 0 0 4 4 3 0 11 63.64%
Regulators 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 5 80.00%
Academician 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
IT / Systems
0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4 75.00%
Manager
Other 0 2 0 30 11 6 0 49 34.70%
 JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 21 -

The study investigated the respondents’ intention towards XBRL in the future according
to their job position as preparers or users of financial reporting. The findings showed that
35.37% of auditors and 33.33% of accountants understood the concept and had the
intention to use XBRL. Other potential users such as senior management, tax
practitioners, consultants, other director, financial director, bankers, regulators,
IT/Systems manager and other related users also had their own intention. However,
accountants and auditors were a big portion since they were the biggest contributors in
this research.

Figure 7: Intention to use XBRL to generate financial information for decision-making

Table 18: Intention to use XBRL to generate financial information for decision-making
I intend to use XBRL to generate financial information in Total Considere
doing decision making d have
Strongly Disagre Somewh I Do Not Somew Agree Strongl intention
Disagre e at Know hat y Agree
e Disagree Agree
Senior management 0 0 0 6 2 1 0 9 33.33%
Accountants 0 2 3 47 14 13 2 81 35.80%
Auditors 2 1 6 85 33 18 2 147 36.05%
Tax practitioners 0 0 0 28 2 6 0 36 22.22%
Consultants 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 5 40.00%
Other director 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 100%
Financial director 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 100%
Bankers 0 0 0 3 4 4 0 11 72.73%
Regulators 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 5 80.00%
Academician 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
IT / Systems 75.00%
0 0 0 1 0 3 0 4
Manager
Other 1 0 1 31 8 8 0 49 32.65%

One of the benefits for adoption and use of XBRL is for the purpose of making good
business reporting and high quality decisions. A good business report would provide
reliable information for decision-making and analysis for all preparers, users, regulators
and related parties.
 JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 22 -

From here, it can be seen that respondents that actually understood the concept of the
advantages of XBRL for decision-making purposes would have the intention to use it in
the future.

Figure 8: Likely to use XBRL

Table 19: Likely to use XBRL

I am likely to use XBRL Total Considere
Strongly Disagre Somewh I Do Not Somewh Agree Strongl d probable
Disagre e at Know at Agree y Agree to use
e Disagree
Senior 33.33%
0 0 0 6 3 0 0 9
management
Accountants 1 3 3 50 13 10 1 81 29.63%
Auditors 1 2 7 89 34 12 2 147 32.65%
Tax practitioners 0 0 0 30 2 3 1 36 16.67%
Consultants 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 5 20.00%
Other director 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 100%
Financial director 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 100%
Bankers 0 0 0 3 4 4 0 11 72.73%
Regulators 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 5 60.00%
Academician 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
IT / Systems 75.00%
0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4
Manager
Other 0 1 1 31 9 6 1 49 32.65%

This result shows that respondents would probably use XBRL technology in the future. It
showed that more than 50% actually were not aware or understood the overall concept
of advantages inherent in XBRL and this would lead to the respondents’ actually refusing
to use the XBRL. Only 29.62% of accountants, 32.65% of auditors, 16.67% of tax
practitioners, 33.33% of senior management, 20% of consultants, 72.73% of bankers,
60% of regulators, 75% of IT/System manager and 32.65% of other related jobs had the
probability to use XBRL in the future.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 23 -

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

XBRL is a new technology for communicating business reporting for the purpose of
disseminating information to stakeholders. The XBRL is important not only to Information
Technology personnel, but to accountants, external auditor, internal auditors, financial
managers, analysts, regulators and every relevant party that is involved in preparing and
using business reports. This study was considered an exploratory study as it discovered
the beginning phase of XBRL in Malaysia by focusing on awareness, implementation of
XBRL, understanding of XBRL, demand for XBRL knowledge and training courses, and
intention to use. In Malaysia, XBRL is still in the beginning phase as Bank Negara
Malaysia (Malaysia’s National Bank) introduced XBRL reporting to the financial industry
in June 2012 and The Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) was in the stage of
developing XBRL Taxonomy Elements for Financial Reporting, which was expected to
be completed in 2014. The Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) believes that
XBRL will provide more benefits in the future.

Moreover, this study had found few respondents who were fully aware of XBRL and a
high percentage who were unaware of XBRL. This research is in tandem with Pinsker
(2003) in the USA and the research done by the Institute of Certified Financial Analyst
(CFA) in 2007 and 2009, Nel & Steenkamp (2008) in South Africa, Dune, Helliar, Lymer
& Mousa (2009) in the UK, Venkatesh & Armitage (2012) and Steenkamp & Nel (2012).
Based on survey done by Grant Thornton LLP (2006), about 46.30% of 381 senior
finance executives were not aware of XBRL and the new standard for tagged business
information. Another research done by Grant Thornton LLP (2007), found that
approximately 59.70% of chief financial officers and senior controllers were not aware of
XBRL.

Beside awareness, the study found that there were about 67.2% of respondents who
were likely to investigate further about XBRL, which indicated that there was a possibility
the XBRL would be more valuable and be accepted by stakeholders. Furthermore, about
192 of respondents (54.85%) did not know the concept of XBRL and would probably
investigate further about XBRL. This result is in tandem with Nel & Steenkamp (2008).

The study also looked into whether respondents believed their organization would adopt
XBRL in the future. Unfortunately, 72.9% perceived they did not know and did not have
any idea pertaining to adoption and about 18.9% believed that their organization should
adopt XBRL in the future. This result indicated that respondents would have ideas on the
adoption if they were aware and understood everything about XBRL. The result from the
current study had shown higher “do not know” than Nel & Steenkamp (2008). Based on
Grant Thornton LLP (2006), about 52.45% of senior finance executives believed that
XBRL would become a mandatory format that every organization would need to adopt.
Compared with Grant Thornton LLP (2007), 50.75% of chief financial officers and senior
controllers believed should be mandatory formats for SEC filings.

The current study questioned how respondents understood XBRL in relation to its
concept and benefits. The findings showed that approximately 3.1% fully understood
fully XBRL and 18% understood the basic concepts. Nel & Steenkamp (2008) found that
37% understood the basic concepts and 18% fully understood what XBRL is all about.
Understanding was always related to the way respondents understood the benefits of
XBRL.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 24 -

In 2007, Grant Thornton LLP had found that more respondents (2007: 13.43%, 2006:
8.60%) believed that the accounting industry had adequately communicated the benefits
of XBRL concerning internal and external reporting. The early adopter’s understanding
of the benefits were paramount in communicating it to potential stakeholders in order to
develop their intention to adopt in the future.

Hence, in order to ensure their understanding of the benefits, the current research had
posed the question regarding the courses attended prior to the XBRL survey. Not
surprisingly only 9.4% had attended any related course on XBRL. This indicates that
more courses and training related to XBRL should be held in the near future, particularly
in Malaysia. Currently, CCM and MIA have initiated efforts by conducting a short course
on XBRL in order to improve the awareness and understanding of the benefits of XBRL
adoption. Nel & Steenkamp (2008) found that respondents believed that they needed to
attend more courses.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

This current study had limitations whereby respondents were from various job
descriptions from numerous parties involved in reporting instead of just focusing on each
job description only. The small group of respondents in this study will not represent the
whole issue of XBRL adoption in the future; however, it is still in accordance with other
studies done since this study is a preliminary study of XBRL in Malaysia. It was very
difficult to gain cooperation and feedback from respondents since XBRL was not really
familiar to everyone.

In future, more research should be carried out by applying other research methodologies
such as case studies and experimental studies and obtaining feedback regarding the
initial process of the adoption.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation to Prof. Dr Noor Azizi Ismail (UUM) and
Prof. Dr Ramayah (USM) for their invaluable and constructive suggestions during the
planning and development of this research as part of their advisory. My special thanks is
also extended to Universiti Tenaga Nasional for the grant provided for this research
work.
JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 25 -

REFERENCES
Bergeron, B. (2003), Essentials of XBRL: Financial Reporting in the 21st Century. Wiley.
ASIN: B008AUU85O
Bonson,E. Cortijo,V. & Escobar,T. (2009). A Delphi Investigation to Explain the Voluntary
Adoption of XBRL. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research,
ISSN: 1577-8517, Vol. 9, 2009, pp. 193-205.
CFA Institute Market Intelligence (2011). CFA Institute Member Survey: XBRL
December 2011. CFA Institute Market Research. Available at:
http://www.cfainstitute.org/Survey/cfa_institute_member_survey_xbrl.pdf
CFA Institute Market Intelligence (2008). CFA Institute Member Survey: XBRL February
2008. CFA Institute Market Research. Available at:
http://www.cfainstitute.org/Survey/xbrl_survey_report.pdf
CFA Institute Market Intelligence (2009). CFA Institute Member Survey: XBRL
November 2009. CFA Institute Market Research. Available at:
http://www.cfainstitute.org/survey/xbrl_member_survey_report_2009.pdf
Cox, C. (2006). Speech by SEC Chairman: The Promise of Interactive Data. 14th
International XBRL Conference Philadelphia, Pennsylvania December 5, 2006.
Available at: http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/2006/spch120506cc.htm.
Accessed on: 16th December 2013.
Doolin, B. & Troshani,I. (2007), Organizational Adoption of XBRL. Journal Electronic
Markets, Vol. 17 Issue 3, Routledge, an imprint of Taylor & Francis Books Ltd.
pp.199-209.
Dune,T., Helliar,C., Lymer , A. & Mousa, R. (2009). XBRL: The Views of Stakeholders.
Research Report. The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. ISBN:
978-1-85908-454-0.
Fichman, R.G. (1992): Information Technology Diffusion: A Review of Empirical
Research, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information
Systems (ICIS), pp. 195-206. in Pinsker,R. (2007). A Theoretical Framework for
Examining the Corporate Adoption Decision Involving XBRL as a Continuous
Disclosure Reporting Technology a book chapter Debreceny,R. Felden,C. &
Piechocki, M. New Dimensions of Business Reporting and XBRL. ISBN-10:
3835008358. Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag.pp.75-93.
Francis, P. (2012), Intro to XBRL. Accountants today. pp.35-41. Available at:
http://www.mia.org.my/at/at/2012/10/06.pdf
Grant Thornton LLP (2006), Half of senior finance executives unaware of XBRL, survey
finds. 6th October 2006. Available at:
http://www.finextra.com/news/announcement.aspx?pressreleaseid=11646.
Grant Thornton LLP (2007), Forty-one per cent of US CFO's unaware of XBRL. 23rd April
2007. Available at:
http://www.finextra.com/News/Announcement.aspx?pressreleaseid=14534
Henderson, D., Sheetz, S.D. & Trinkle, B.S. (2012). The determinants of inter-
organizational and internal in-house adoption of XBRL: A structural equation
model. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems , Vol.13, pp.109–
140.
Hodge, F.D., Kennedy, J.J., and Maines, L.A. (2004). Does search facilitating technology
improve the transparency of financial reporting?. Accounting Review, Vol. 79, No.
3, pp. 687-703.
Hoffman, (2006). Financial Reporting Using XBRL: IFRS and US GAAP Edition. ISBN-
 JIBC August 2014, Vol. 19, No.2 - 26 -

10: 1411679792. Lulu.com.

Hoffman, C. & Watson, L. (2010), XBRL For Dummies. For Dummies. 1st Ed.
Li, S.; Park S. H.; Li S. (2004): The Great Leap Forward: The Transition from Relation-
based Governance to Rule-based Governance, Organizational Dynamics 33, 1,
pp. 63-78 in Pinsker,R. (2007). A Theoretical Framework for Examining the
Corporate Adoption Decision Involving XBRL as a Continuous Disclosure
Reporting Technology a book chapter Debreceny,R. Felden,C. & Piechocki, M.
New Dimensions of Business Reporting and XBRL. ISBN-10: 3835008358.
Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag.pp.75-93.
Liu, C. (2013), XBRL: A New Global Paradigm for Business Financial Reporting. Journal
of Global Information Management (JGIM). Vol. 21, Issue 3.pp.1-26.
Liu,C., Wang, T. & Yao, L.J. (2013). XBRL’s impact on analyst forecast behavior: An
empirical study. J.Account. Public Policy (2013),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2013.10.004.
Lymer, Debreceny, Gray & Rahman ( 1999), Business Reporting on the Internet. A
Report for the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC). ISBN
0905625773.
Nel, G.F. & Steenkamp, L.P. (2008). An exploratory study of chartered accountants'
awareness and understanding of XBRL, Meditari Accountancy Research, Vol. 16
Iss: 1, pp. 79 - 93
Pinsker, R. & Li, S. (2008). Costs and Benefits of XBRL Adoption: Early Evidence.
Communications of the ACM, Vol. 51, No. 3. pp.47-50.
Pinsker, R. (2003). XBRL awareness in auditing: a sleeping giant?, Managerial Auditing
Journal, Vol.18 Iss: 9 pp. 732 - 736
Pinsker,R. (2007). A Theoretical Framework for Examining the Corporate Adoption
Decision Involving XBRL as a Continuous Disclosure Reporting Technology a
book chapter Debreceny,R. Felden,C. & Piechocki, M. New Dimensions of
Business Reporting and XBRL. ISBN-10: 3835008358. Deutscher Universitäts-
Verlag.pp.75-93.
Steenkamp, L.P. & Nel, G.F. (2012). The adoption of XBRL in South Africa: an empirical
study, The Electronic Library, Vol. 30 Iss: 3 pp. 409 – 425.
Tie, R. (2005), XBRL: Its Unstoppable. A conversation with the father of the digital
language of business.Journal of Accountancy. Available at:
http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Issues/2005/Aug/XbrlItsUnstoppable.htm.
Troshani, I. & Doolin,B. (2005). Drivers and Inhibitors Impacting Technology Adoption: A
Qualitative Investigation into the Australian Experience with XBRL. 18th Bled
eConference eIntegration in Action Bled, Slovenia, June 6 – 8. pp.1-16.
Troshani, I. & Rao, S. (2007), drivers and Inhibitors to XBRL adoption: a Qualitative
approach to Build a Theory in under-Researched areas. International Journal of
E-Business Research , IGI Global .Vol. 3, Issue 4, PP.98-111.
Venkatesh, R. & Armitage, J. (2012). Accountants’ Awareness And Perceptions About
Assurance On XBRL Financial Statements. The Journal of Applied Business
Research, Vol, 28. No.2.
Xiao,J.Z., Jones, M.J. & Lymer., A. (2005). A conceptual framework for investigating the
impact of the internet on corporate financial reporting. The International Journal
of Digital Accounting Research, Vol. 5, No. 10, ISSN: 1577-8517, pp. 131–169.
XBRL International. Available at: http://www.xbrl.org/

View publication stats