We conduct two experiments to examine whether and how the framing (bonus vs. penalty) of a target‐based incentive contract affects knowledge sharing and knowledge seeking. In the first experiment, we predict and find that penalty‐framed contracts increase employees' stress due to the fear of potential loss, which in turn reduces their willingness to share knowledge. Additionally, consistent with loss aversion, employees under penalty‐framed contracts are more likely to seek knowledge than those under bonus‐framed contracts. The second experiment corroborates our theoretical arguments by demonstrating the crucial role of stress in reducing knowledge‐sharing behavior. The results show that, when stress is alleviated through an informal control mechanism, penalty‐framed contracts no longer reduce knowledge sharing. The implications of our findings for research and practice are discussed.

Downside risks are ubiquitous and can profoundly impact firm operations and valuation. Failure to adequately assess and manage target firms' downside risks hinders acquirers' ability to integrate and manage these businesses. This article introduces a novel measure of firms' downside risk similarity (DRS) based on risk factor descriptions and examines its implications for mergers and acquisitions (M&A) outcomes. We first validate that the measure is distinct from existing similarity measures and that it captures similarity in firms' potential significant downside. Using the new measure, we find that the market reacts more positively to deals in which acquirers and targets share more downside risks. Additional analyses show that this beneficial effect of DRS is driven primarily by risks that are idiosyncratic or firm‐specific, consistent with these risks requiring acquirers' relevant expertise to manage. Last, we document that in deals with more similar downside risks, the acquirers experience fewer risk profile changes and are less likely to suffer from adverse outcomes, such as deal‐specific goodwill impairment, divestitures, and significant profitability declines. Overall, we conclude that DRS plays a significant role in the M&A process.

This paper examines how accounting and control practices constitute and distribute agency and responsibility for sustainability in global supply chains. Drawing on a field study in the fashion industry, we describe the sustainability control practices used by a major buyer firm vis‐à‐vis its suppliers and trace their evolution from a “compliance‐based” to a more “collaborative” regime. We find that these controls did not simply guide, monitor, or assess supplier firms; they responsibilized them in a more fundamental sense, namely by virtue of scripting the suppliers' actorhood . We show how such scripting evolved in ways that enabled the buyer to progressively distance itself from certain sustainability and control problems, as emergent controls produced the legitimate supplier as an actor who can, and should, address sustainability in an increasingly autonomous and entrepreneurial manner. A key argument that we therefore develop is that sustainability control practices operate as technologies of actorhood that not only address sustainability problems but also redistribute locales of moral authority and responsibility in interorganizational settings—not only among actors but also into the invisible hand of the market. We further show how such constitution of organizational actorhood relies on, and triggers, processes of subjectivation at the individual level, as members come to embody their organization's imagined actorhood

Accounting is often thought of in terms of numbers and abstract models, yet it is sustained in practice by a host of ordinary objects. This paper demonstrates how seemingly mundane items—blackboards, cue cards, flipcharts, sticky notes, envelopes, and boxes—can play quiet yet decisive roles in extending and connecting accounting into new settings. Borrowing from literature on everyday surface aesthetics, we introduce the notion of geometric mediation to denote how certain arrangements of mundane objects can draw us in, appearing so compelling that they invite us to connect the abstract logics associated with them. We illustrate this process through a study of the Logical Framework, a performance tool for nongovernmental organizations, and its transformation when adopted by a German development agency in the 1970s. Although the tool initially met resistance from an agency whose logics conflicted with the use of managerial devices, the simple materials used to operationalize the tool helped these differences feel less stark. Their shapes and arrangements made the framework look naturally compatible with other approaches, leading to a new version of the tool, known as ZOPP. Our study contributes in two ways. First, it shows how everyday aesthetics can quietly help accounting spread and adapt. Second, it offers a new view of how accounting brings together competing aspirations, not only through explicit negotiation or compromise, but also through subtle, often unnoticed material connections that make things feel “right” before they are fully thought about

A concentrated debt structure can facilitate creditor coordination, which reduces the financial distress cost in a liquidity default but also increases the risk of a strategic default. Debt concentration affects the sensitivity of leverage to tax through these two forces. We show that firms with a more concentrated debt structure are more responsive to state corporate income tax rate increases in increasing financial leverage, suggesting that when the tax rate increases, debt concentration's role in reducing the financial distress cost matters more. The impact of debt concentration on leverage is more pronounced when firms are subject to a high default risk, have low asset redeployability, or have a low liquidation value. Additional debt covenants can facilitate low debt concentration firms to increase leverage after tax rate increases. Our findings suggest that debt concentration is an important factor influencing the tax sensitivity of financial leverage.

This article studies how the mandatory disclosure of audit risk and targeted regulatory inspections influence audit quality. We develop a model in which the auditor tests a firm's internal control over financial reporting before auditing the financial report and must issue an opinion on both. Due to higher regulatory scrutiny received by audits with weak internal control opinions, we show that targeted inspections generate countervailing effects: they reduce the auditor's internal control audit effort while increasing substantive testing effort. We show that a positive level of targeted inspections can improve audit quality when the level of random inspections is high. Furthermore, we show that targeted inspections are not always consistent with risk‐based inspections, due to the auditor's strategic response to the oversight measures. Nevertheless, such targeting can still result in higher audit quality. Our results suggest the need to exercise caution when using audit risk disclosures as a basis for enforcement.

Companies are strongly encouraged to implement whistleblowing programs to help detect and deter misconduct in organizations, but whistleblowers often face ostracism, as their coworkers are less willing to work with them (the whistleblower effect). Rewarding the whistleblower and protecting the whistleblower's identity are two highly recommended features of whistleblowing programs that aim to encourage reporting. Across two experiments, I examine the spillover effects of these whistleblowing program features on how willing employees are to work with their coworkers after reporting occurs. I find that providing a reward to the whistleblower exacerbates the whistleblower effect, leading employees to work even less with the whistleblower (the reward effect). I also find that protecting the whistleblower's identity removes the reward effect but does not remove the whistleblower effect. Instead, the whistleblower effect is extended to neutral coworkers. As a result, when employees do not know the identity of the whistleblower, they view their coworkers less as separate individuals and are less willing to work with everyone in their group

Sell‐side equity analysts serve as external monitors, yet evidence on how they fulfill this monitoring role remains limited. We examine whether analysts utilize earnings conference calls to monitor firms suspected of real earnings management and assess the implications of such monitoring. Our findings reveal that analysts are more likely to ask about discretionary expenses during conference calls of firms suspected of lowering these expenses to meet or narrowly beat analysts' expectations. These questions are associated with lower subsequent EPS forecast revisions, indicating a potential cost to managers. Moreover, analysts' questions on discretionary expenses to suspect firms are linked to subsequent increases in discretionary expenses and a lower likelihood of meeting or narrowly beating analysts' earnings expectations in the following 2 years. Overall, our results suggest that analysts' active participation in earnings conference calls potentially discourages managers from engaging in real earnings management.

Firms with multiple pieces of information can disclose the information concurrently (bundled disclosure) or sequentially (unbundled disclosure). This paper examines the pricing implications of (un)bundled disclosure in a rational expectations equilibrium model. The model considers a firm whose liquidating cash flow consists of two components. Some investors possess private information about one component (e.g., earnings) and all investors are uninformed about the other component (e.g., unexpected events). We analyze three disclosure policies. In bundled disclosure, both cash flow components are disclosed concurrently; in unbundled disclosure, the informed cash flow component is disclosed early, and the uninformed component is disclosed later; and in alternative unbundled disclosure, the uninformed component is disclosed early, and the informed component later. We find that the disclosure policy influences the cost of capital prior to any disclosure through a risk allocation effect and a price informativeness effect. Unbundled disclosure results in a lower cost of capital compared to bundled disclosure, as it improves risk allocation and enhances the informativeness of the stock price prior to any disclosure. However, for alternative unbundled disclosure, the cost of capital can be higher or lower than that of the other disclosure policies. This is because late disclosure of the informed cash flow component alters investors' risk exposure to the noisy supply of shares, thereby influencing the risk allocation and price informativeness effects

Mandatory audits of internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR), intended to strengthen financial reporting processes, may also have implications for broader organizational compliance systems. Increased scrutiny of financial controls could either enhance overall control quality, yielding benefits for nonfinancial controls, or induce firms to reallocate resources away from those areas. We exploit quasi‐exogenous variation in financial control scrutiny arising from (1) the initial implementation of ICFR audits, (2) the subsequent relaxation of ICFR auditing standards, and (3) the introduction of management assessments of financial controls absent concurrent ICFR audits, to examine how changes in external scrutiny affect Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspection findings, an important form of regulatory noncompliance with direct public health implications. Our results show that the introduction of ICFR audits is associated with a reduction in FDA inspection findings; however, these benefits reverse when ICFR audit scrutiny declines. Mechanism analyses suggest that remediation of control deficiencies, investments in information systems, and expanded internal audit functions facilitate spillovers to compliance controls. Importantly, we find limited evidence that management assessments alone, without concurrent ICFR audits, generate similar spillover effects. Overall, our findings suggest that internal control systems operate as integrated organizational processes rather than isolated financial reporting mechanisms and that external scrutiny plays a critical role in enabling spillovers across control domains. These insights have implications for audit committees, auditors, regulators, and other stakeholders.