Search results

Teleworking is often indicated as a flexible working arrangement. This paper seeks to highlight that flexibility is just one positive characteristic of telework and to demonstrate both the strategic and practical implications of adopting telework. In addition, it aims to highlight best practices and specific activities that enable telework to achieve its full potential.

Drawing on a series of interviews, personal experiences and observations encompassing a wide range of organizations to include profit and non‐profit/government across a variety of industry sectors that include retail, high technology, manufacturing and hospitality and service, the paper provides an overview on how to make telework work effectively and smoothly within profit and non‐profit organizations. Moreover, it confronts the leadership literature to examine how leadership – not technology – is the critical variable in telework success.

In the most successful cases of telework, organizations and individuals were seen to fuse technology and leadership to do work without the limitations of geography, time or physical presence. Thus, while many may embrace telecommuting or telework almost exclusively for its flexibility benefits, the most successful organizations and individuals welcomed telework, first and foremost, as a source of competitive advantage.

The paper departs from traditional management thought on two fronts. First, it is contended that the essence behind successful telework arrangements is more of a function of leadership than of technology. Second, and related to the previous point, the paper suggests that a creative, innovative and progressive leadership mentality is necessary in the design and implementation of telework programmes. As a result, many managers must be willing to depart from long‐held and conventional notions of leadership.

This research explores the spillovers and portfolio implications for green bonds and environmental, social and governance (ESG) assets in the context of the rapidly expanding trend in green finance investments and the need for a green recovery in the post-COVID-19 era.

This study utilizes Diebold and Yilmaz’s (2014) spillover method and portfolio strategies (hedge ratio, optimal weights and hedging effectiveness) for the data starting from February 29, 2012, to March 14, 2022.

The study’s findings reveal that the lower volatility spillover is evidenced between the green bonds and ESG stocks during tranquil and turbulent periods (e.g. COVID-19 and Russia-Ukraine War). Furthermore, hedging costs are lower both in normal times and during economic slumps. Investing the bulk of the funds in green bonds makes it possible to achieve maximum hedging effectiveness between the S&P green bond (GB) and the S&P 500 ESG.

Both investors and policymakers may use these findings to make wise investment and policy choices to achieve post-COVID environmental sustainability.

Unlike previous research, this is the first to explore the interconnectedness among the major global and country-specific green bonds and ESG assets. The major findings of this study about the lower volatility spillovers and hedging costs between green bonds and ESG assets during the tranquil and turbulent periods may contribute to the post-COVID investment portfolio for environmental sustainability.

This study aims to examine the effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on banks’ capital, value and risk by investigating its impact on capital inflows and asset quality. The authors aim to investigate the value-protective characteristics of socially responsible performance.

This study uses a two-stage least squares approach with instrumental variables, with bank and year fixed effects to address concerns regarding endogeneity, specifically reverse causality and unobservable factors.

The results confirm a positive association of CSR with capital adequacy, including higher quality Tier 1 Capital. The authors find strong evidence that banks with higher CSR scores are associated with greater bank value and lower risk. The extended analyses find that the improvement in capital is from annual growth in capital and lower risky assets.

The research advances the field by providing new empirical evidence of a positive association between CSR and capital, including high-quality Tier 1 Capital. This study complements the prior research by simultaneously examining the dynamic links between CSR and capital, bank risk and bank value. The findings are consistent with the view that there is a dynamic link in which CSR affects the operations of banks.

Over the past two decades, the topics of Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) have attracted an increasing amount of interest, reflecting a growing sensitivity of investors and corporations towards environmental, social and governance issues.

This survey offers an overview of the academic literature on ESG/CSR through the lens of investors, institutions and firms. We first discuss the definitions of ESG and CSR and their relationship to each other.

We next describe how ESG is measured and note problems with the measurement of and quality of ESG data and discrepancies between different measures of ESG. We then turn our attention to investors, examining what types of investors invest in ESG and the role of institutional investors in ESG. From the firm's perspective, we discuss why firms themselves conduct ESG. We also summarize the literature on the impact of ESG on firms: how ESG affects firms' financing, disclosure and reporting activities and firm performance. Finally, we describe other consequences of the focus of ESG and CSR on firms and investors.

This survey offers an overview of the academic literature on ESG/CSR through the lens of investors, institutions and firms.

This paper investigates whether sustainability performance (SP) protects financial performance (FP) for firms in both developed and emerging economies during the COVID-19-induced economic downturn.

Using a recent sample of firms in 34 countries between 2003 and 2021, the authors employ ordinary least squares regressions, moderations and the Heckman two-step method to test the hypotheses.

Firms with strong SP have higher FP in developed and emerging economies in the upcoming year. During the COVID-19 crisis in 2020–2021, the impact of sustainability on FP is pronounced in developed but not in emerging economies. Furthermore, cross-listings expose firms in emerging economies to high-standard institutional mechanisms in developed economies. Thus, sustainable firms in emerging economies cross-listed on European stock exchanges are more profitable.

For regulators and standard setters, the global-level comparative analysis helps them find solutions that may assist firms in improving SP globally (e.g. mandatory reporting) and enduring crises resiliently. For institutional investors, the study reveals the relatively different impact of sustainability risk for firms in developed and emerging economies. For practitioners and private sector firms, this study contributes to the dialogue on what makes firms more resilient in COVID-19. Although COVID-19 might be temporary, the lessons learned could protect firms from future crises.

The authors contribute to the contingency perspective between sustainability and financial performance by providing recent empirical evidence in a global setting during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors demonstrate how different external institutional mechanisms (rule-based governance and relation-based governance) and cross-listing affect the SP-FP relationship during a crisis. The authors extend the knowledge in crisis management literature with a comparative study and fill the research gap on how SP affects FP for firms in emerging economies compared to developed economies.

This paper aims to evaluate non-financial reporting (NFR) frameworks insofar as risk reporting is concerned. This is facilitated through analysis of the adequacy of climate- and pandemic-related risk reporting in three industries that are both significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and are at risk from climate change. The pervasiveness of pandemic and climate-change risks have been highlighted in 2020, the hottest year on record and the year the COVID-19 pandemic struck. Stakeholders might reasonably expect reporting on these risks to have prepared them for the consequences.

The current debate on the “complexity” of sustainability and NFR frameworks/standards is critically analysed in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and calls to “build back better”. Context is provided through analysis of risk reporting by the ten largest airlines and the five largest companies in each of the hotel and cruise industries.

Risk reporting on two significant issues, pandemics and climate change, is woefully inadequate. While very little consideration has been given to pandemic risks, disclosures on climate-related risks focus predominantly on “risks” of increased regulation rather than physical risks, indicating a short-term focus. The disclosures are dispersed across different corporate reporting media and fail to appreciate the long-term consequences or offer solutions. Mindful that a conceptual framework for NFR must address this, the authors propose a new definition of materiality and recommend that sustainable development risks and opportunities be placed at the core of a future framework for connected/integrated reporting.

For sustainable development risks to be perceived as “real” by managers, further research is needed to determine the nature and extent of key sustainable development risks and the most effective mitigation strategies.

This paper highlights the importance of recognising the complexity of the issues facing organisations, society and the planet and addressing them by encouraging robust consideration of the interdependencies in evolving approaches to corporate reporting.

This study contributes to the current debate on the future of corporate reporting in light of two significant interconnected crises that threaten business and society – the pandemic and climate change. It provides evidence to support a long-term oriented and holistic approach to risk management and reporting.

This paper aims to emphasize the importance and current deficits of non-financial impact (NFI) assessment of socially responsible investment (SRI) with reference to the action plan of the European Commission (EC) for a greener and cleaner economy.

The importance and current deficits of NFI assessment are evaluated theoretically and condensed to an equilibrated socially responsible investment (ESRI) perspective, based on a narrative literature review of highly ranked academic journals.

Due to a deficient exploration of NFI in theory and practice, the role of SRI funds for sustainability transition has not yet been adequately discussed. This has enabled a situation where a constantly rising market share of SRI has not led to similar sustainability achievements. This strongly contrasts with investors’ expectations, the self-portrayal of the sector and the goals of the EC’s action plan. As a solution, the developed ESRI perspective elevates NFI as a second cornerstone for theory and practice. ESRI, contrary to the EC, sets a primer on the role of SRI fund management for achieving sustainability goals.

This study reveals how SRI theory and practice neglect the importance of NFI. The presented ESRI perspective enables scholars to examine SRI practices more holistically through a new theoretical lens. One special focus is on the role of SRI fund management as a transmission mechanism to push portfolio companies’ business practices toward more sustainable behavior.