auditing. But both literature as well as the people interviewed agreed that the added value of XBRL lies in the internal use. Adoption The multi domain approach in The Netherlands with the SBR program initially seemed to cause a lagging position regarding the use of XBRL. But now the benefits for harmonization and standardization are becoming visible. Current situation With the SBR program in The Netherlands with the bolt-on approach, the focus is still on the rear end of the business reporting supply chain, and XBRL is used for external reporting only. Most often this is done with a “save as” method. Future All of the interviewees independently stated that this research was conducted three years too early. They expect that when reporting in XBRL will be regulated and required by law, and when that goes smoothly, the focus of the companies will shift towards the benefits of XBRL for their internal processes. Research Limitations Because of the lack of implementation of XBRL for internal use in The Netherlands, case studies were used to fill this gap. These projects may not be representative for the situation in The Netherlands for most firms. Another limitation could be that companies already use XBRL for internal purposes, but they have not published about this. XBLR FR is for open, external communication and therefore not a competitive issue. XBRL GL is for internal use, and for the reason of operational sensitivity, it is a competitive issues and could be companies reluctant about publishing about their pilots with GL. But if this was the case, the experts interviewed for this research would have known this and could have mentioned this project, but anonymously. The people interviewed for this research are all advocates of XBRL. There was nobody interviewed that was against XBRL. This could result in conclusions that are biased. On the
auditing. But both literature as well as the people interviewed agreed that the added value of XBRL lies in the internal use. Adoption The multi domain approach in The Netherlands with the SBR program initially seemed to cause a lagging position regarding the use of XBRL. But now the benefits for harmonization and standardization are becoming visible. Current situation With the SBR program in The Netherlands with the bolt-on approach, the focus is still on the rear end of the business reporting supply chain, and XBRL is used for external reporting only. Most often this is done with a “save as” method. Future All of the interviewees independently stated that this research was conducted three years too early. They expect that when reporting in XBRL will be regulated and required by law, and when that goes smoothly, the focus of the companies will shift towards the benefits of XBRL for their internal processes. Research Limitations Because of the lack of implementation of XBRL for internal use in The Netherlands, case studies were used to fill this gap. These projects may not be representative for the situation in The Netherlands for most firms. Another limitation could be that companies already use XBRL for internal purposes, but they have not published about this. XBLR FR is for open, external communication and therefore not a competitive issue. XBRL GL is for internal use, and for the reason of operational sensitivity, it is a competitive issues and could be companies reluctant about publishing about their pilots with GL. But if this was the case, the experts interviewed for this research would have known this and could have mentioned this project, but anonymously. The people interviewed for this research are all advocates of XBRL. There was nobody interviewed that was against XBRL. This could result in conclusions that are biased. On the