Previous literature provides multiple conflicting arguments on why and when multinationality should enhance or impede the value-relevance of firms' real options. We address this issue by examining whether the relationship between stock returns and changes in return volatility varies with multinationality. Our results indicate that multinationality does indeed act as a real option facilitator. Furthermore, we show that, consistent with the notion that there are limits to the operating flexibility associated with multinationality this benefit only accrues fully if the firm is not financially constrained and stabilizes at very high degrees of multinationality.

We investigate whether and how multinationality affects the opaqueness of the firm. We use multiple alternative measurements of multinationality and opaqueness. Spanning nearly three decades for a large sample of US non-financial firms, we find a statistically and economically significant, positive relationship between multinationality and opaqueness. We find that this positive relationship hinges on whether or not the degree of foreign involvement is compatible with the structure of the firm's foreign operations network. Our results imply that multinationality's impact on opaqueness is alleviated when there is harmony between the size of foreign involvement and the extent of the MNC network's geographic dispersion. Previous literature has implicitly assumed a simple, positive relationship. This is the first study to explicitly address the question in a comprehensive manner.

We investigate the market efficiency implications of firm-specific return variation measured by absolute idiosyncratic volatility. We find that the absolute idiosyncratic volatility (the variance of the residual from an asset-pricing model) displays a positive and robust relationship to mispricing, which reflects an increasing role of noise traders. Previous literature has produced similar – or opposing – results. We deepen our understanding of the previous conflicting results by showing that (1) market volatility by itself is associated with mispricing, (2) absolute idiosyncratic volatility is associated with mispricing even when controlling for market volatility, (3) the strength of the association between absolute idiosyncratic volatility and mispricing depends on the level of market volatility, and (4) absolute and relative measures of idiosyncratic volatility have opposing associations with mispricing. Our findings contribute to the existing literature by reconciling the mixed results for the relationship between idiosyncratic volatility and mispricing displayed in the previous literature.

Previous literature finds a positive association between short-term changes in institutional holdings (especially those of local institutions) and subsequent short-term stock performance. We contribute by investigating the importance of geographical proximity under policy uncertainty. We show that the short-term informational advantage of local institutions only thrives in areas that are either politically closely aligned with the president or where the state government (governorship and legislature) is under the control of one party. Our findings are important in understanding the avenues through which geographical proximity may provide the basis for exploitable informational advantages.

Reexamining CEO personality traits from a real options theory perspective, we suggest that the firm's strategic flexibility can be worsened by CEO conscientiousness and neuroticism. We use a measure of strategic flexibility as the firm's ability to take advantage of heightened volatility, which then results in superior stock returns. Our results suggest that strategic adaptability is impeded by rigid planning, resistance to change (conscientiousness) and lack of emotional stability (neuroticism). For firms that experience a decrease in volatility, the opposite holds. In line with trait activation theory, our results imply that the effect of specific CEO personality traits on firm dynamics and performance is contingent and context-specific. Our findings are economically significant and have important implications concerning CEO selection and management.