We examine the effects of regulations designed to address the potential conflict of interest that arises when sell-side analyst research is not independent of investment banking. We focus on two types of regulation: (1) internal barriers between equity research and investment banking that restrict communication; and (2) disclosure requirements relating to analyst compensation. We find that information barriers can increase research effort and improve report quality by limiting an investment bank's ability to distort its analyst's incentives. However, this type of regulation can also reduce information production and lower the quality of reports if an investment bank benefits directly from research activity. Disclosure requirements, on the other hand, unambiguously lead to more informative prices and a higher report quality relative to either information barriers or no regulation.

We analyze the costs and benefits of clawback provisions that enable firms to recover incentive compensation from top management if financials are restated. In a simple contracting model, we find that a clawback provision effectively lengthens the horizon of incentives and curbs misreporting. However, such a provision can add noise to the underlying performance measure, reducing managerial effort and firm value. Our empirical tests support the model’s predictions regarding which types of firms are likely to voluntarily use clawback provisions. We also document that clawback provisions are associated with higher reporting quality, greater CEO pay-for-performance sensitivity, and higher CEO compensation.

This study examines whether the labor market rewards directors for individual excellence. We use national director awards to capture large, positive shocks to individual reputation. We find strong evidence that the labor market recognizes and rewards “superstar” directors. Award events lead to positive announcement returns and increase awardees’ chances of gaining new board seats at prestigious firms. Consistent with theories of career concerns and labor market signaling, the reputational effects are greater for younger directors and for nonoverboarded directors. Overall, our findings offer new insights into the nature of reputation and rewards in the upper echelon of the director labor market. (JEL G30, G34, G39) Received August 15, 2020; editorial decision May 11, 2021 by Editor Andrew Ellul. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

ABSTRACT While many firms grant executive stock options that can be repriced, other firms systematically restrict or prohibit repricing. This article investigates the determinants of firms' repricing policies and the consequences of such policies for executive turnover and retention. Firms that have better internal governance, that use more powerful stock‐based incentives, or that face less shareholder scrutiny are more likely to maintain repricing flexibility. Firms that restrict repricing are more vulnerable to voluntary executive turnover following stock price declines. When share price declines are severe, restricting firms appear to award unusually large numbers of new options.

[This article examines the information content and consequences of third-party voting advice that arrives as news at an interim stage in corporate proxy contests. We first document significant stock returns around announcements of proxy vote recommendations. We then develop a multi-equation empirical procedure for disentangling the price impact of prediction effects (changes in contest outcome probabilities) from the price impact of certification effects (changes in outcome-contingent valuations). Both effects are present in the data: Voting advice is both predictive about contest outcomes and informative about the ability of dissidents to add value. Consequently, proxy advice plays a dual informational role.]

This article examines the information content and consequences of third-party voting advice that arrives as news at an interim stage in corporate proxy contests. We first document significant stock returns around announcements of proxy vote recommendations. We then develop a multi-equation empirical procedure for disentangling the price impact of prediction effects (changes in contest outcome probabilities) from the price impact of certification effects (changes in outcome-contingent valuations). Both effects are present in the data: Voting advice is both predictive about contest outcomes and informative about the ability of dissidents to add value. Consequently, proxy advice plays a dual informational role.

We provide large-scale evidence on the occurrence and value of FinTech innovation. Using data on patent filings from 2003 to 2017, we apply machine learning to identify and classify innovations by their underlying technologies. We find that most FinTech innovations yield substantial value to innovators, with blockchain being particularly valuable. For the overall financial sector, internet of things (IoT), robo-advising, and blockchain are the most valuable innovation types. Innovations affect financial industries more negatively when they involve disruptive technologies from nonfinancial startups, but market leaders that invest heavily in their own innovation can avoid much of the negative value effect.ReceivedMay 31, 2017; editorial decision September 30, 2018 by Editor Andrew Karolyi.