Search results

This paper aims to explore the value of geographic diversification in the context of deglobalization, drawing evidence from a quasi-natural experiment – the Brexit referendum that took place on 23 June 2016 in the UK.

This study applies an event study methodology to estimate the impact of the Brexit vote on a cross-section of firms with varying levels of geographic diversification – undiversified UK firms, UK firms with significant operations in the European Union (EU) and globally diversified UK firms. This study deploys a Heckman two-stage regression approach to address sample selection bias.

This study finds that undiversified UK firms experienced negative cumulative abnormal returns (CARs) around the Brexit referendum. The value of UK firms with majority sales within the UK declined by 0.9 percentage points, on average, in the three days centred on the Brexit referendum. In contrast, UK firms that are globally diversified, with the majority of sales within the EU are unaffected, while diversified firms in the rest of the world generated positive CARs of 1.8 percentage points over the same period. These results are robust to firm characteristics, selection bias and alternative measures of CARs and diversification.

This study is subject to some limitations that open avenues for future work. There are a few available proxies of diversification and further work on developing other proxies is much needed. Further work may also examine the long-term impact of diversification on UK firms. This study considered Brexit as a quasi-natural experiment, and this study could be applied to other deglobalization events like COVID-19 and can enhance the generalizability of diversification strategy in the deglobalized world. Findings may stimulate future work to explore how another form of diversification – product diversification has affected firm returns around Brexit. Finally, this study has focused on the UK as its base case. It may be interesting to corroborate the findings by exploring the impact of Brexit on European firms, who hitherto Brexit, had some operations in the UK.

This work offers some insights for policymakers and regulators around the impact of deglobalization on local firms. Findings suggest that these trends significantly negatively impact the most vulnerable firms (smaller firms with less global reach), while their larger counterparts with significant global reach might be insulated. This finding is important for determining the nature of support needed by different firms in times of deglobalization. The work also offers insights to managers of firms operating in countries where there are real prospects of deglobalization. Specifically, the work highlights the importance of geographic diversification when free movement of goods, services and people is restricted.

This study shows that a certain group of globally diversified firms earned significantly higher returns from the prospect of the UK leaving the EU, thereby highlighting the value of geographic diversification in a time of deglobalization.

This study proposes a novel measure for management’s horizon (short-termism or myopia vs long-termism or hyperopia) derived from easily obtainable firm-level accounting and stock market performance data. The authors use the measure to explore the impact of managements’ horizon on firms’ investment efficiency.

The authors rely on two commonly used but uncorrelated measures of management performance: accounting performance (return on capital employed, ROCE) and stock market performance (average abnormal return, AAR). The authors combine these measures to develop a multidimensional framework for performance, which classifies firms into four groups: efficient (high accounting and high market performance), poor (low accounting and low market performance), myopic (high accounting and low market performance) and hyperopic (low accounting and high market performance). The authors validate this framework and deploy it to explore the relationship between horizon and firms’ investment efficiency.

In validation tests, the authors show that management myopia (hyperopia) explains firms’ decision to cut (grow) research and development investments. Further, as expected, myopic (hyperopic) firms are associated with significantly more (less) accrual and real earnings management. The empirical tests on the link between horizon and investment efficiency suggest that myopic managers cut new investments while their hyperopic counterparts grow the same. Ultimately, the authors find that myopia (hyperopia) exacerbates(mitigates) the over-investment of free cash flow problem.

The authors introduce a framework for assessing management’s horizon using easily obtainable measures of performance. The framework explains inconsistencies in prior empirical research using different measures of performance (accounting versus market). The authors demonstrate its utility by showing that the measure explains decisions around research and development investment, earnings management and firm investments.

The paper aims to comparatively examine the impact of risk governance disclosure (RGD) on the market valuation of firms in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and the mediating role of institutional investment and national governance bundles (NGB).

Using a dynamic system generalized method of moments estimation to control for endogeneity, the data for this research is manually collected from the annual reports of small and large firms in Nigeria (80 firms) and South Africa (100 firms) for the period 2012–2017 (900 firm years).

The authors find that firm RGD directly impacts firm valuation positively, but this association is significantly mediated by national governance practices (bundles) and institutional investment. The authors also develop a conceptual framework that shows the direct and indirect impact of RGD on firm market valuation.

The paper contributes to the comparative corporate governance literature in three ways. First, the authors show that differences in country-level RGD are explained by the maturation of governance regulations and institutions in each country. Second, despite the differences in the level of maturity of governance institutions across countries, stock markets value risk governance information. Finally, the study develops a conceptual framework that addresses prior inconsistent findings by showing that firm-level NGB and institutional investment significantly mediate the association between RGD and market valuation.

This paper aims to investigate the association among trustee board diversity (TBD), corporate governance (CG), capital structure (CS) and financial performance (FP) by using a sample of UK charities. Specifically, the authors investigate the effect of TBD on CS and ascertain whether CG quality moderates the TBD–CS nexus. Additionally, the authors examine the impact of CS on FP and ascertain whether the CS–FP nexus is moderated by TBD and CG quality.

The authors use a number of multivariate regression techniques, including ordinary least squares, fixed-effects, lagged-effects and two-stage least squares, to rigorously analyse the data and test the hypotheses.

First, the authors find that trustee board gender diversity has a negative effect on CS, but this relationship holds only up to the point of having three women trustees. The authors find similar, but relatively weak, results for the presence of black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) trustees. Second, the authors find that the TBD–CS nexus depends on the quality of CG, with the relationship being stronger in charities with higher frequency of meetings, independent CG committee and larger trustee and audit firm size. Third, the authors find that CS structure has a positive effect on FP, but this is moderated by TBD and CG quality. The evidence is robust to different econometric models that adjust for alternative measures and endogeneities. The authors interpret the findings within explanations of a theoretical perspective that captures insights from different CG and CS theories.

Existing studies that explore TBD, CG, CS and FP in charities are rare. This study distinctively attempts to address this empirical lacuna within the extant literature by providing four new insights with specific focus on UK charities. First, the authors provide new evidence on the relationship between TBD and CS. Second, the authors offer new evidence on the moderating effect of CG on the TBD-CS nexus. Third, the authors provide new evidence on the effect of CS on FP. Finally, the authors offer new evidence on the moderating effect of TBD and CG on the CS–FP nexus.

The firm size hypothesis – takeover likelihood (TALI) decreases with target firm size (SIZE) – has enjoyed little traction in the TALI modelling literature; hence, this paper aims to redevelop this hypothesis while taking account of prevailing market conditions – capital liquidity and market performance.

The study uses a logit modelling framework to model TALI. Model performance is assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The empirical analysis is based on a UK sample of 34,661 firm-year observations drawn from 3,105 firms and 1,396 M&A deals over a 30-year period (1987-2016).

While acquirers generally seek smaller targets because of transaction cost constraints, the paper shows that the documented negative relation between SIZE and TALI arises from sampling bias. Over a full sample, mid-sized firms are most at risk of takeovers. Additionally, market conditions moderate the SIZE–TALI relationship, with acquirers more inclined to pursue comparatively larger targets when financing costs are low and market growth or sentiment is high. The results are generally robust to endogeneity.

Sample truncation on the basis of SIZE leads to empirical misspecification of the TALI–SIZE relation. In an unbiased sample, an inverse U-shaped specification between TALI and SIZE sufficiently models the underlying relation and leads to improvements in the predictive ability of TALI models.

This study advances a new firm size hypothesis which is consistent with classic M&A theories. The study also evidences market conditions as a moderator of the acquirer’s choice of target SIZE. A new model specification which recognises the non-linear relation between TALI and SIZE and accounts for the moderating effect of market conditions on the SIZE-TALI relationship leads to improvements in the performance of TALI prediction models.

This paper aims to review prior studies and presents a synthesis of the takeover prediction literature spanning the period 1968–2018.

The paper adopts a narrative review approach. It explores prior studies on takeover target prediction from a historical perspective, focusing on the evolution and development of the literature over the 50-year period.

From a historical development perspective, prior studies in the area can be partitioned into four distinct eras. Studies in the first era (1968–1985) mainly established that takeover targets share common characteristics which can be captured with financial ratios. Studies in the second era (1986–2002) developed and extended formal target prediction hypotheses. These studies concluded that it was impossible to build a successful investment strategy around takeover target prediction. Studies in the third era (2003–2009) explored similar questions using alternative modelling techniques but arrive at similar results – targets can be predicted with limited accuracy and target prediction is unlikely to lead to abnormal returns. Studies in the fourth era (2010–2018) explore implications of M&A predictability on share valuation, governance and bond prices (amongst others), but most importantly, provide some evidence that takeover prediction can lead to abnormal returns when combined with appropriate screening strategies.

This presents the first in-depth review of the literature on takeover target prediction. It highlights the development of the literature over four distinct eras and identifies several limitations, research gaps and opportunities for future research. Given the recent decline in the literature (i.e. fourth era), this study may stimulate new research in the area.

This paper examines how a “quasi-formal” organisation in a developing country engages in informal means of organising and decision-making through the use of calculative measures.

The paper presents a case study of a large-scale indigenous manufacturing company in Ghana. Data for the study were collected through the use of semi-structured interviews conducted both onsite and off-site, supplemented by informal conversations and documentary analysis. Weber's notions of rationalities and traditionalism informed the analysis.

The paper advances knowledge about the practical day-to-day organisation of resources and the associated substantive rational calculative measures used for decision-making in quasi-formal organisations operating in a traditional setting. Instead of formal rational organisational mechanisms such as hierarchical organisational structures, production planning, labour controls and budgetary practices, the organisational mechanisms are found to be shaped by institutional and structural conditions which result from historical, sociocultural and traditional practices of Ghanaian society. These contextual substantive rational calculative measures consist of the native lineage system of inheritance, chieftaincy, trust and the power concealed within historically established sociocultural practices.

This paper is one of a few studies providing evidence of how local and traditional social practices contribute to shaping organising and decision-making activities in indigenous “quasi-formal” organisations. The paper extends our understanding of the nexus between “technical rational” calculative measures and the traditional culture and social practices prevailing in sub-Saharan Africa in general, and Ghana in particular.

Drawing on a cost–benefit perspective, this paper aims to explore the relation between information asymmetry and the decision to delist from stock exchanges during periods of uncertainty. Specifically, it investigates the role of firms’ intangible investments and the availability of alternative sources of finance on the decision to delist from foreign stock markets.

The study takes advantage of a natural experiment in which cross-listed Chinese firms facing uncertainty in US markets because of widespread allegations of accounting fraud decide on whether to remain listed or voluntarily delist. The decision to delist is modelled as a function of the level of information asymmetry between firms and their stakeholders and the availability of alternative financing, while controlling for other drivers of firms’ delisting decision. The data used in the empirical analyses cover a hand-collected sample of 91 Chinese firms voluntarily delisting from US stock markets between 2010 and 2016. This sample is matched with an equal sample of Chinese firms, which remained listed in US stock markets during the same period. A probit regression model accounting for fixed effects is used.

There is a significant positive relationship between investments in intangible assets and firms’ decision to delist. Moreover, the positive intangibles−delisting nexus is accentuated by the availability of alternative sources of financing. Collectively, the results are consistent with the theoretical argument that the higher information asymmetry associated with intangible assets may increase the cost of staying listed on stock exchanges, particularly in periods of uncertainty (captured in this study by accounting fraud allegations targeting cross-listed firms). The results have important implications for corporate managers, capital market participants and policymakers.

Policymakers and standard setters must continue to work to improve the accounting regulations of intangible assets and to promote the adoption of global accounting standard across both emerging and advanced economies.

The study exploits a unique natural experimental setting to explore why cross-listed firms delist. The underlying theoretical framework to explain delisting is new. This framework captures the role of information asymmetry, uncertainty and alternative financing in explaining the cost and benefits of remaining listed on a foreign market.

This study empirically examines the nonlinear effects of mimicking peer firms' cash holdings on shareholder value, with consideration of macroeconomic conditions.

An instrumental variable approach for nonlinear models is estimated for a large sample of US firms over the period 1991–2019. This approach addresses the reflection problem in examining peer effects, whereby it is impossible to separate the individual's effects on the group, or vice versa, if both are simultaneously determined.

The authors find an inverted U-shaped association between shareholder value and mimicking intensity of peer firms' cash holdings. This result suggests that mimicking peer firms' cash holdings is subject to diminishing returns. It is more beneficial at lower levels of mimicking intensity but less so or suboptimal at higher levels. Further evidence indicates that this inverted U-shaped shareholder value-mimicking intensity nexus is asymmetric. Specifically, it is salient for decreases relative to increases in cash holdings and, more importantly, in good relative to bad macroeconomic states. The findings are robust to several concerns and have important implications for liquidity management policies.

The authors provide new empirical evidence of the nonlinear effects of mimicking peer firms' cash holdings on shareholder value, which varies with macroeconomic conditions.