Search results

This study aims to determine whether financial statement users suffered a significant loss of information when, in November 2007, the SEC dropped the requirement for foreign private issuers using International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS firms”) to reconcile their financial statements to US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).

The study investigates whether analyst forecast errors and forecast dispersion increased for IFRS firms to a greater extent than for US GAAP firms after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) dropped the reconciliation requirement. Using a treatment group comprised of IFRS firms and a matched sample of US GAAP firms, this study uses regression analyses to compare forecast errors and dispersion for the last fiscal year the reconciliation was available and the first fiscal year during which the reconciliation was unavailable to analysts.

The study finds evidence that forecast errors for IFRS firms exhibited no systematic change after the reconciliation was no longer available for analysts covering those firms. Thus, it does not appear that dropping the reconciliation requirement was associated with a change in forecast accuracy. However, the study does find evidence of increased dispersion in the IFRS firms’ forecasts relative to their US GAAP counterparts after the reconciliation requirement was dropped.

These findings have implications for evaluating the Securities and Exchange Commission’s 2007 decision to eliminate the reconciliation for IFRS firms. Specifically, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s decision does not appear to have significantly altered analysts’ information environments.

This paper contributes to the understanding of how a group of sophisticated financial statement users adapt to different sets of accounting standards.

This study aims to examine the Securities and Exchange Commission’s final rule in Modernization of Beneficial Ownership Reporting, which reduced the time for significant public company shareholders to file Schedule 13D (effective February 5, 2024). The authors corroborate prior results under the historic 10-day maximum reporting regime and provide updated academic analysis regarding how the five-day deadline between the “triggering” event, accumulating 5% of the outstanding shares and public disclosure of that event will affect abnormal returns.

This empirical archival study uses publicly available data.

The analyses show that changing from a 10-day to a 5-day Schedule 13 disclosure window will reduce activist investors’ opportunity to profit by legally delaying the filing of Schedule 13D. These excess returns for delay exist regardless of the profitability or size of the target firm or the shareholder’s disclosed reason for filing. The authors conclude that accelerating the timing of the disclosure window is an improvement that is in the best interest of the general investing public.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the only academic study of Schedule 13D filings to include the postpandemic period. As such, the authors establish an updated “baseline projection” for expectations regarding how the Modernization final rule will impact activist investors and stock returns under a five-day reporting regime. In addition, the authors measure and test abnormal returns after considering differences between “triggering” events and filing dates of Schedule 13Ds in the sample rather than grouping all filings. This approach allows the authors to account for the time difference between the triggering event and the filing date.

This case presents students with an opportunity to develop a set of performance metrics based on four strategic goal statements. The setting is a highly ranked U.S. MBA program. Students are given some basic, limited-but-sufficient contextual information about the school to get a sense of its heritage, avowed differentiating characteristics, and important foci.

The New Year will see Britain a member of the largest multi‐national free trade area in the world and there must be few who see it as anything less than the beginning of a new era, in trade, its trends, customs and usages and especially in the field of labour, relations, mobility, practices. Much can be foreseen but to some extent it is all very unpredictable. Optimists see it as a vast market of 250 millions, with a lot of money in their pockets, waiting for British exports; others, not quite so sure, fear the movement of trade may well be in reverse and if the increasing number of great articulated motor trucks, heavily laden with food and other goods, now spilling from the Channel ports into the roads of Kent are an indication, the last could well be true. They come from faraway places, not all in the European Economic Community; from Yugoslavia and Budapest, cities of the Rhineland, from Amsterdam, Stuttgart, Mulhouse and Milano. Kent has had its invasions before, with the Legions of Claudius and in 1940 when the battle roared through the Kentish skies. Hitherto quiet villagers are now in revolt against the pre‐juggernaut invasion; they, too, fear more will come with the enlarged EEC, thundering through their one‐street communities.

In this article I propose to deal only with that legislation which is of a permanent nature and is not likely to be repealed or amended for at least some time to come. Ministry of Food Orders such as those which deal with price controls will be ignored. Most legislation from the public health point of view is dealt with by the Food and Drugs Act, an Act which consolidated, with a few amendments, some of the legislation relating to foods, drugs, markets, slaughterhouses and knackers' yards. Section 9 of the Act makes it an offence for any person (a) to sell or offer or expose for sale or have in his possession for the purpose of sale or of preparation for sale, or (b) to deposit with or consign to any person for the sale or preparation for sale any food which is intended for but unfit for human consumption. It is a defence, however, to prove that the food in question was not intended for human consumption, or at the time it was fit for human consumption, or he did not know and could not, with reasonable diligence, have ascertained that it was unfit for human consumption. It does not matter whether the meat or other foodstuff was originally consigned by the Ministry of Food or purchased in the open market unless the butcher can avail himself of the special defences just mentioned. An authorised officer of the local authority, who is either the medical officer of health, sanitary inspector or veterinary inspector specially appointed for that purpose by the local authority, may, if such food appears to him to be unfit for food, remove it to be dealt with by any Justice of the Peace, and may then report the matter to the local authority, who may institute proceedings against that person. Every piece of meat or other article of foodstuff seized may be dealt with as a separate offence, and for each offence a penalty of £50 may be imposed. The butcher, therefore, if he has any meat, offal, or other foodstuff which he thinks may be diseased or otherwise unsound, should immediately withdraw it from sale and call in the local inspector. Butchers must be registered under Section 14 of the Food and Drugs Act, 1938 (not to be confused with a licence issued by the local Food Office), with the local authority, if they carry out on their premises the manufacture or preparation of sausages or potted, pressed, cooked or preserved foods. Failure to be registered renders the butcher liable to prosecution A point of interest arises in this connection. Does a butcher who boils down fat become a fat‐boiler and render his business to be classed as an offensive trade? Legally, he does, but in practice, unless he carries it on on a large scale, it is overlooked. A butcher should make himself familiar with the Imported Meat (Marking) Order, 1941, for any butcher who sells imported meat, as nearly every butcher does, makes himself liable to prosecution unless the following provisions are complied with. This Order prohibits the sale or exposure for sale of any imported (chilled or frozen) beef, mutton, lamb, pork, or edible offals, unless a label or ticket bearing the word “Imported” is affixed to every slab, tray or rail which contains such imported meat, so as to be visible to the purchaser. Where a butcher sends or delivers imported meat to another person, the requirements of this Order are complied with if the invoice or delivery note attached to or accompanying the meat has the word “Imported” marked on it. If the meat itself is clearly marked with the country of origin, e.g., New Zealand or Argentina, it is not necessary to specially label the meat, provided the purchaser is present in the shop at the time of the sale. The provisions of the Public Health (Preservatives, etc., in Food) Regulations, 1925–40, prohibit the use of any preservative or colouring matter in any article of food. However, it is provided by the first Schedule to these regulations that sausages or sausage meat may contain 450 parts per million of sulphur dioxide. Butchers whose premises are in Scotland are allowed, during the months of June, July, August and September, to put 450 parts per million of sulphur dioxide in minced meat. Where the article of food does contain preservative, it must bear a label stating that “these sausages, etc., contain preservative”; the letters being not less than ? in. in height, or there must be a notice in the shop to the effect that the sausages contain preservative.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

The purpose of this qualitative exploratory study was to investigate the capacity of job crafting to serve as a viable response to abusive supervision. Although considerable literature has emerged on employee reactions to abusive supervision, the role of job crafting as a coping mechanism has received relatively little attention.

Using qualitative exploration, we conducted semi-structured interviews to examine how individuals engage in job crafting as a means to respond to or cope with abusive supervision. Critical Incident Interview Technique (CIIT) was used to obtain in-depth details of this topic. We analyzed the interview-based data using the thematic analysis (TA) technique. We also integrated topic modeling to cluster the identified categories of job crafting behaviors within our TA. The cultural context of our findings was further analyzed using interpretive phenological analysis (IPA).

The results of our thematic analysis led to four recurring themes in the interview-data: (1) Job crafting as a viable coping response to abusive supervision; (2) The type of coping relates to the type of crafting: Approach and Avoidance; (3) The role of perceived control; (4) Emotions play a role in the type of crafting employed. Findings from our IPA generated the following super-ordinate themes. (1) Job crafting fluidity, (2) effectiveness of job crafting, (3) resilience and (4) cultural dynamics.

This research reveals the ways in which individuals may turn to job crafting behaviors as a means to cope following instances of abusive supervision. Given the qualitative exploration of our research approach, we identify generalizability to be an issue.

Job crafting is a proactive phenomenon that equips employees with coping abilities in the workplace. While Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) suggested that job crafting behaviors tend to be hidden from management, there may be merit in organizations explicitly acknowledging the benefits of allowing employees to be active agents in their work, capable of using multiple domains of job crafting to improve their personal and professional lives (Petrou et al., 2017).

The current research reveals the ways in which individuals may turn to job crafting behaviors as a means to cope, following instances of abusive supervision. We further fine-grained our analysis to explicate employee job crafting behaviors in response to abusive supervision within a cross-cultural domain.

The Daily Telegraph has recently published several articles and a considerable amount of correspondence relating to malt whisky and the tricks of the whisky trade. As is usually the case when a daily newspaper takes up a subject of this kind, a number of well ‐ meaning people make a variety of suggestions as to what ought to be done to secure the purification of the particular Augean stable under discussion and to ensure the reception by the purchaser of the article which he really desires to have. But what ought to be done and what can be done are two very different things, and the question of what it is possible to do in the present state of scientific knowledge—and under the existing law as it is at present administered— is, as a rule, avoided by the writers referred to. It has been suggested, for instance, that it should be made compulsory that all vessels in which spirits are sold should bear a label distinctly stating the exact nature of the contents of such vessels. This would be an excellent suggestion if it could be effectively carried out, but, before this can be done, it is necessary to devise a method of compulsion. A man who sells as malt whisky an article mainly or entirely composed of spirit to which that title should not be applied would not have any very serious scruples as to the truth of the statements which appear on his labels. He must be compelled to act honestly by some sufficient force, and, short of a law which would permit the manufacture and “blending” of whisky to be carried out by certain persons only, according to specified rules, and under strict Government supervision in every case, no legislative enactments whatever would have the effect of preventing the various forms of this particular fraud. At present there are no legal definitions whereby the composition and characters of the articles described as “malt whisky” and “whisky” are laid down, excepting the definitions which may be held to be implied in the application of the 6th section of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act of 1875 to the case. This section requires that an article shall be of the “nature, substance, and quality demanded by the purchaser.” On the strength of this section it is quite unjustifiably assumed that the compulsion referred to can be effectively secured by the operation of the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts. According to our legal system it is essential under the criminal Acts— and the Food Adulteration Acts are criminal Acts—for the prosecuting authority to prove beyond all possibility of question that a person charged with an offence is guilty of that offence, and, in regard to the matter under consideration, it would therefore be necessary to absolutely prove by scientific evidence that any given mixed spirit, for the sale of which as malt whisky a prosecution had been instituted, was not of the nature, substance, and quality of the article demanded. Under the present conditions relating to sampling under the Acts this would be impracticable, except, possibly, on very broad lines; and, assuming that scientific investigation resulted in the possibility of fixing clear and definite points of distinction between the true and the false, there would still be the enormous difficulties and the heavy expenses attending the proving of offences of this character to the satisfaction of the Courts—difficulties and expenses which local authorities cannot fairly be expected to face. If, after the lengthy and expensive investigations that would be necessary, and which could only be properly carried out with Government aid, by a scientific Commission appointed by the Government, it were found possible to establish working definitions and standards, these would necessarily be only applicable to a limited extent, just as is at present the case in regard to milk and butter; while the question of quality can never be dealt with under repressive Acts of, Parliament of any kind. Assuming the establishment of standards of some kind we fully admit the possibility, under altered legal conditions, of checking the grosser forms of whisky sophistication by the employment of legal machinery, as is done with various other products; but vast amounts of various spirit mixtures could still be sold under false names with impunity. We should still have with us the legalised inferiority and the legalised adulteration of comparatively minor type which we have in the case of milk and butter. What is required and what alone can be effective, in dealing with sophistications which the law can never reach, is the provision of adequate and entirely independent guarantees which are based both on permanently‐applied analytical investigations carried out upon quantities of material which are not absurdly limited, and on a system of permanent and independent inspection,—both being supplied by some authority or authorities of sufficient standing. While the statements made by a reputable firm ought to carry weight, and ought, no doubt, to be accepted as valuable so far as they go, there is always necessarily and obviously a great element of weakness in the declarations put forward by a firm with respect to its own products. Particularly in view of modern commercial conditions something very much stronger than a personal asseveration as to the purity and excellence of one's own goods is now in reality required. That this is the case is shown by the fact that the demand for independent guarantees has recently been repeatedly voiced in the general press. The public are badly in want of education on all such questions and the Daily Telegraph is entitled to the thanks of the community for having initiated a discussion which can only be productive of good results in this direction.

The purpose of this article is to understand how academics in management deal with the concept of generation in the workplace. We begin by conducting an interdisciplinary literature analysis, thereby elaborating a conceptual framework concerning generational diversity. This framework consists of four levels of analysis (society, career, organisation and occupation) and three dimensions (age, cohort and event/period). We then conduct a meta-analysis using this conceptual framework to analyse papers from the management field. The results from this analysis reveal the existence of a diversity of generational approaches, which focus on the dimensions of age and cohort on a societal level. Four factors seem to explain these results: the recent de-synchronisation of generational dimensions and levels, the novelty of theoretical models, the amplification of stereotypes by mass media and the methodologies employed by researchers. In sum, this article contributes to a more realistic view of generational diversity in the workplace for both academics and practitioners.