https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/5141 2026-06-10T21:04:05Z https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/48746 Title: O efeito do tom e da legibilidade das informações ESG no desempenho organizacional e na qualidade das informações contábeis Abstract: This research aims to examine the influence of the tone and readability of sustainability reports on organizational performance and accounting information quality. Sustainability reports are voluntarily disclosed documents that provide information regarding companies’ environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices. The study is grounded in Disclosure Theory (Verrecchia, 1983; Dye, 1985), which considers information as a signal reflecting the intrinsic value of a risky asset, although such signals may be affected by factors such as information asymmetry. Assuming that ESG information may affect corporate performance, the study first conducted a systematic literature review using the Knowledge Development Process – Constructivist (ProKnow-C) method. The findings revealed that the effects of ESG disclosure on economic and financial performance are not uniform, varying according to firms’ level of engagement, institutional context, and industry characteristics. In addition, internal and external moderating variables may strengthen or weaken these effects. Subsequently, the relationship between the tone and readability of ESG disclosures and organizational performance was investigated considering operational (ROA), financial (ROE), and market (Tobin’s Q) dimensions. Tone was measured using the ESG dictionary proposed by Baier et al. (2020), while readability was estimated through the Flesch Index. The results did not provide statistical evidence that tone and readability significantly affect organizational performance. Nevertheless, the findings reinforce the assumptions of Disclosure Theory by suggesting that the usefulness of information depends not only on disclosure itself, but also on the way information is communicated to the market. Finally, the study examined the influence of tone and readability of ESG disclosures on accounting information quality, measured through the proxies of value relevance, accrual-based earnings management, and conditional conservatism, considering organizational performance as a moderating variable. The results indicate that, individually, only readability showed a significant effect related to value relevance. Furthermore, when analyzing the moderating role of organizational performance, only financial performance significantly influenced the interaction between ESG readability and value relevance. This research contributes to the literature by providing an updated review of studies on the relationship between ESG disclosure and organizational performance, exploring different theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches, while also identifying gaps for future investigations. Moreover, by testing tone and readability of ESG disclosures in the Brazilian context, the study highlights that the way information is communicated may be as relevant as the information itself, generating implications for investors, managers, analysts, and regulators. In an innovative way, the research integrates textual attributes of ESG disclosures, accounting information quality, and organizational performance within the same analytical framework, reinforcing the assumptions of Disclosure Theory and contributing both theoretically and practically by offering insights for the development of clearer, more consistent, and more effective sustainability reports for stakeholders. 2026-02-20T00:00:00Z https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/48713 Title: Burocracia representativa no serviço público federal: uma discussão de sua manifestação a partir do perfil e perspectiva de técnicos administrativos em educação Abstract: Considering the assumptions of the Theory of Representative Bureaucracy, according to which the composition of the public service should reflect social diversity, this study aimed to analyze the passive and active representation among administrative and technical staff working in accounting-related positions at the Federal University of Uberlândia, considering the social markers of gender, race, and disability. The study is grounded in the understanding that diversity within bureaucratic structures constitutes a relevant element for democratic legitimacy and for the responsiveness of public institutions to social demands, based on the theoretical contributions of Kingsley (1944), Mosher (1968), and Meier (1975). Methodologically, a mixed-methods paproach was adopted. Initially, a survey of the demographic and professional profile of administrative and technical staff in the investigated institutions was conducted using administrative data, considering variables such as gender, race/color, disability, and entry through affirmative action policies. Additionally, a qualitative analysis on representativeness and inclusion was developed, focusing on professionals working in accounting-related positions, with the Federal University of Uberlândia defined as the empirical locus of the study. The results indicate progress in access to public service for marginalized groups, but also reveal the limits of passive representation and the persistence of institutional asymmetries. It is concluded that bureaucratic representativeness depends on institutional conditions that enable the transformation of numerical presence into effective inclusion practices. As a contribution, this study advances the discussion on representative bureaucracy by focusing on an occupational group that remains underexplored in the literature, integrating demographic data with the perceptions of accounting professionals, and offering insights for institutional reflections on diversity, inclusion, and personnel management in federal higher education institutions. 2026-02-26T00:00:00Z https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/48689 Title: Comportamento da utilização dos recursos discricionários nas universidades federais do estado de Minas Gerais no período de 2012 a 2024 Abstract: This study analyzed the relative technical efficiency of federal universities in the state of Minas Gerais in the use of current discretionary expenditures from 2012 to 2024. Given the context of fiscal constraints and the need to improve the use of public resources, the study sought to examine how these institutions convert discretionary inputs into academic results. The research adopted a quantitative and descriptive-comparative approach, using the university-year as the unit of analysis, totaling 143 DMUs. To measure efficiency, Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA-BCC), output-oriented, was employed, complemented by the analysis of benchmarks, targets, slacks, and institutional size segmentation. The results indicated a concentration of efficiency scores at high levels but also revealed relevant differences among the units when composite normalized efficiency was considered, as it showed greater discriminatory power. The efficient frontier was also concentrated in a small number of reference units, suggesting the recurrence of specific benchmarks in the projection of inefficient DMUs. The analysis of targets and slacks showed that inefficiency is explained not only by insufficient results, but also by mismatches between the resource structure mobilized and the performance achieved. In addition, the findings showed that larger institutional size and greater volume of resources do not necessarily imply better relative performance. As a contribution, the study broadens the interpretation of university efficiency by articulating scores, references, and projected adjustments, offering analytical support for management and resource allocation in public higher education. 2026-02-27T00:00:00Z https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/48635 Title: Whistleblowing na contabilidade: uma análise dos fatores de incentivo e barreira sob a perspectiva do q-method Abstract: The anti-corruption agenda embedded in integrity and governance systems, and associated with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), depends on institutional mechanisms capable of detecting and correcting wrongdoing in a timely manner. In this context, whistleblowing is frequently presented as a key mechanism, yet its effectiveness is shaped by factors that go beyond the formal existence of a reporting channel: institutional credibility, protection for reporters, confidence in investigations, and the quality of organizational responses. In Brazil, this debate also intersects with the AML/CFT regulatory framework aligned with FATF standards, under which accounting professionals and accounting firms may have duties to communicate certain suspicious operations to COAF, adding a legal-regulatory layer to the voice–silence dilemma. While the literature recognizes multiple barriers and incentives, there is still limited understanding of how these elements are organized as subjective configurations that structure the decision to report wrongdoing, particularly among accounting professionals, whose practice is permeated by professional normativity, reputational risk, and potential career consequences. Addressing this gap, this study identifies typologies of viewpoints on whistleblowing among accounting professionals and examines how the perceived social value of the profession relates to these viewpoints, articulating the process of problem perception, decision-making, channel choice, and expectations of response. To capture patterns of shared subjectivity, the study adopts Q-Method, which enables the mapping of typical decision logics from comparative rankings of statements. A set of 40 statements, organized into theoretical dimensions, was administered through an online Q-sort task and complemented by post-sort interviews with participants selected for their defining power within the extracted viewpoints. The study involved 31 accounting professionals with active registration with the Brazilian Regional Accounting Council (CRC), all located in Southeast Brazil; 18 had more than ten years of experience in accounting and 13 had between five and ten years. Regarding highest educational attainment, the group included four PhDs and four MScs in Accounting, three MScs in other fields (Education and Engineering), six MBA-level specialists, twelve BSc holders in accounting, and two technical-level accounting professionals. The findings reveal two interpretable typologies. The first (F1) expresses a viability/self-protection decision logic marked by institutional skepticism: the reporting channel is perceived as a potential source of exposure, impunity is considered plausible, and retaliation risks, reputational costs, and career impacts become central. From this viewpoint, reporting becomes conditional, requiring effective anonymity, operational protection, and governance of case handling, including feedback and a minimum expectation of consequences. The second (F2) expresses a moral–professional duty decision logic oriented toward the public interest: willingness to report is triggered by evidence deemed reliable and by an assessment of meaningful harm to third parties, combining situational prudence with comparatively greater confidence in investigative capacity and enforcement. The post-sort interviews reinforce and semantically refine the distinction between “the channel as exposure” (F1) and “duty with criteria” (F2), clarifying the judgment mechanisms that underpin each viewpoint. The study concludes that the profession’s social value operates in two complementary registers: as a public mission that can motivate voice, and as reputational and career vulnerability that favors silence when institutional credibility is low. Implications include the design of reporting channels with protection and feedback, effective anti-retaliation policies, and ethical education with procedural and institutional emphasis. 2026-02-23T00:00:00Z