Search results

The study aims to explore the impact of ownership concentration (OC) on bank financial distress (FD). Furthermore, the bank’s financial stability levels determine the association between the two.

Bank data of 33 Indian commercial banks are procured for ten years (2013–2022). The panel data econometrics is applied for empirical estimations. The quantile regression approach is used to determine the association between OC and FD at different quantiles of the FD. Non-normalcy of the data is checked and ensured before applying the quantile regression.

Surprisingly, it is found that promoters have a nonlinear impact on the firm’s stability. The inverted U-shape result implies that as promoters cross a threshold level, the benefit of increasing promoters’ stake takes a beating and a further increase in promoters’ stakes adversely impacts the stability of the banks. Moreover, this threshold value increases while moving from low to high levels of stability in a quantile regression application.

This study uses promoters as the proxy for OC. Other existing definitions of OC are not used in the study, which can further improve the robustness of the results. Additionally, the use of the type of ownership (private, public or foreign) is also not adopted in the present study. Both the limitations can be the study’s future scope on the topic.

The high OC is supposed to influence corporate governance adversely. Therefore, policymakers recommend low OC for better governance. However, the present study finds evidence that a higher OC (high threshold of OC as the stability increases) would be better for financial stability. This situation demands a trade-off between governance and financial stability regarding OC.

The authors do not observe any study having the nonlinear impact of OC on financial stability (opposite of FD). Moreover, the threshold of OC for the optimum level of financial stability increases as stability goes high. This evidence using quantile regression and finding the turning point using a quadratic equation is also not seen in the literature.

Financial distress (FD) is an unfavorable situation that can have severe negative consequences on a firm. Within the range of multiple micro and macro factors, firm’s dividend policy can impact FD. However, this relationship is yet to be explored. Since shareholder yield (SHY) is a major component of the dividend policy, this study aims to explore the effect of SHY on a firm’s FD. Taking insights from stakeholder theory and dividend signaling theory, we also examined if this relationship is moderated by competition and firm size.

The data from Fortune 500 companies over thirteen years (2010–2022) was subjected to panel data analysis (PDA). The analysis particularly takes the quantile panel data model to have a deeper understanding of variable’s association in different scenarios of FD.

The findings revealed that the SHY does not directly influence a firm’s FD. However, it is negatively moderated by competition at a lower quantile of financial stability and positively moderated by firm size at all quantiles of financial stability (reverse of FD). It means when competition increases, the shareholder’s yield reduces the financial stability. However, it improves financial stability when firm size increases.

The findings deliver significant implications for all the stakeholders to consider dividend policy in form of SHY as a crucial element for a firm’s financial soundness. It is very situational to improve or detriment the financial health of the firm when it combines with other factors particularly competition or firm size. Hence, it is important to understand its sensitivity for FD.

In this study, we evidenced competition and firm size as moderators to SHY and FD relationship thus presenting novel insights. The findings are integrated to stakeholder theory and dividend signaling theory, and thus offer theoretical advancements.

Environment, social and governance (ESG) practices and shareholder activism are making significant strides in the decision-making policies and processes for all firms. This study aims to assess the impact of ESG on the dividend payout decisions of firms in India. In addition, it also aims to determine how shareholder activism influences the impact of ESG on dividend distribution decisions.

The authors gather relevant data from 78 non-financial listed Indian firms from 2016 to 2020. This study undertakes longitudinal data analysis, with fixed effects and calculation of robust standard errors. In addition, the slope test is used to examine the effects of the interaction between ESG and shareholder activism.

It is found in the study that not only does ESG positively impact the dividends but also shareholder activism positively impacts the dividend distribution decisions. Surprisingly, the authors see a significant but negative interaction impact of shareholder activism on the positive association of ESG with dividend distribution decisions. In other words, ESG impacts dividend distribution decisions differently at levels of shareholder activism. When shareholder activism is low, ESG positively influences dividend distribution decisions. However, when shareholder activism is high, ESG negatively influences dividend distribution decisions.

This result has significant implications for all the stakeholders, including shareholders. A shareholder expecting a dividend could decide correctly through the current study’s findings. In cases of high shareholder activism, investors may skip picking a stock if investors expect high ESG to influence the dividend distribution decisions favourably. On the contrary, investors may choose a stock if shareholder activism is low and all else remains the same.

Literature has some evidence of the influence of shareholder activism and ESG (in silos) on the dividend distribution decisions in the firms. This study attempts to contribute by bringing forth the interaction effects of shareholder activism and ESG on dividend distribution decisions.

The authors have attempted to reveal the impact that transparency and disclosure (T&D) and financial distress (FD) have on the valuation of banks working in India. T&D involves disclosing the firm's operational and financial performance and corporate governance practices. FD is a position in which a company or individual is not in a condition to fulfill their promise of paying their obligations on time.

In this study, the authors have used panel data analysis (PDA) and secondary data of 34 banks working in the Indian banking sector for four financial years, i.e. 2016 to 2019.

This study has established that FD and T&D have a positive and significant impact on the valuation of firms. The authors also find evidence that T&D significantly impacts the value of firms under the influence of FD.

The present study implies that it will help firms realize how significantly the transparency level and disclosure policies impact their value in the market. Firms can understand how badly distressing situations can impact the company's whole image. This learning will encourage them to start managing their money and debts efficiently.

The authors study has considered T&D as an independent variable and FD as a moderating variable to find the interacting impact of T&D and FD on the valuation of banks working in India. No such study has come to the authors' knowledge that has established such a relationship of variables in the study.