Gender gap truth battles: conceptualising and analysing statement forms in annual reports

Purpose To radically reframe and explore gender discourse by building bridges between Bassnett et al.’s (2018) extension of Foucault’s (1972) statement now including three forms, speech, glottographic and non-glottographic writing and Butler’s (1993; 1999) ‘utterance’ and empirics; provide a systematic methodological path into empirics; showing how these statement forms interplay in gender truth battles/claims in annual reports (ARs) discourses. Design/methodology/approach The conceptualising of gender discourse as statement and languaging performativity acts is translated into a systematic methodological path into empirics using the “Order of Discourse” guide (Foucault, 1981). Initiated by the lack of Financial Times Stock Exchange 100 (FTSE100) women on board 2010, we examine Tesco’s ARs gender discourse sections 2015/2020, and Hampton-Alexander Review and the truth battles between statement forms. Findings The [non-]glottographic statements’ interplay produces fundamentally different gender truth claims and shifts the order of discourse and conditions of possibilities in what can be [not] said. It also raises the question of whether (gender) discourses can continue overlooking the non-glottographic statement form as writing. Research limitations/implications We provide a new route to empirical studies of gender discourse that adds layers of analysis to gender discourse in critical accounting and beyond (McKinlay, 2010), alongside new possibilities for (re)investigating material already collected and awaiting collection. Originality/value We offer an extended non-glottographic statement “package” of Butler’s promoting further gender discourse studies, adding what has been absent into presence in research in critical accounting and beyond, reshaping (gender) discourse regularities about what gets “said” and “not-said”.