Knowledge that Transforms

This study examines the association between firm performance and promotion incentives (i.e., the product of vertical pay disparity and promotion probability) in multilayer corporate tournaments using a unique data set of Korean public firms. We dissect the corporate tournament into layers and separately examine their association with firm performance while also accounting for the role of promotion probability. We find that (1) upper‐layer, rather than lower‐layer, tournaments are the main drivers of the positive association between vertical pay disparity and firm performance and (2) this association becomes stronger with higher promotion probability, consistent with tournament theory, but only in the upper layer. These results are more pronounced in settings where tournament incentives are plausibly more important, such as those characterized by high labor productivity and high average tenure. Our study draws a comprehensive picture of the corporate tournaments that simultaneously accounts for various factors that previous studies have examined only in isolation.

This study examines whether and how brokers manage the distribution of their stock recommendations. We document that if a broker's percentage of buy recommendations in a quarter is substantially higher than its target level, the broker issues significantly fewer buy recommendations than other brokers in the following quarter. This evidence remains robust after controlling for mean reversion in the data and varies systematically with brokers' expected benefits and costs of managing the distribution. Exploring possible methods to manage the distribution, we find evidence suggesting that brokers alter the timing of recommendation initiations and reiterations, and shift recommendations between adjacent quarters. Finally, we show that distribution management affects the informativeness of stock recommendations in the market.

In three experiments, we examine how the widespread phenomenon of overwithholding affects retirement savings and how the additional option at tax time of saving retroactively for retirement affects total savings levels. Our results show that overwithholding significantly reduces retirement savings. We show that this outcome can be explained by individuals' anchoring on their take‐home pay when making savings decisions and by individuals' reduced motivation to save in the presence of overwithholding. Moreover, we find that the introduction of an additional retroactive savings option at tax time increases overall savings by providing information about the correct after‐tax income and by emphasizing the importance of a savings norm that nudges individuals to save. Furthermore, our findings demonstrate that immediate taxation (back‐loaded retirement plans) results in greater effective savings than deferred taxation (front‐loaded retirement plans), irrespective of whether there is overwithholding or the existence of an additional option to save. Policy‐makers may therefore consider both the introduction of an additional savings option at tax time and immediate taxation as policy tools to encourage retirement saving.

We examine whether audit partner individualism reduces earnings comparability in the United States. We argue that individualistic audit partners are more likely to deviate from internal working rules and allow clients more flexibility in making accounting choices, consequently decreasing their clients' earnings comparability. Using a novel partner‐level measure of individualism, we find that within individual Big 4 audit firms, earnings are less comparable between a company audited by an individualistic partner and a company audited by a non‐individualistic partner, relative to a pair of companies that are each audited by a non‐individualistic partner. Our inferences are robust to a changes analysis, a falsification test, and a propensity score matching procedure. We also find that the effect of partner individualism is less salient when the audit firm is under more stringent regulatory monitoring and when clients are more important, but more salient when individualistic partners are more confident about being different. Further analyses suggest that our main inferences are robust to controlling for differences in partners' cultural backgrounds and using client‐pairs audited by the same audit partner. Collectively, our study provides novel evidence on the role of auditor individualism in earnings comparability.

A significant challenge firms face is providing performance feedback that effectively motivates low‐performing employees. In our field experiment, we examine the impact of an often‐overlooked form of relative performance feedback (RPF) that emphasizes comparing employees based on their inputs. Our results indicate that input‐based RPF enhances the input performance of low performers without adversely affecting high performers. Furthermore, our field experiment demonstrates that selecting the right input—specifically, actions that employees can control and that are linked to outputs—can significantly boost low performers' contributions to a firm's overall output. Together, our findings support our prediction that input‐based RPF provides a viable strategy for low performers to narrow the performance gap with high performers by guiding them toward the crucial inputs that high performers use to generate output. Our study adds an important refinement to our understanding of how RPF promotes upward social comparison and facilitates social learning, offering insights for firms aiming to motivate low performers in their workforce.

Using industry restatement contagion as an external negative shock, we study the effectiveness of enterprise risk management (ERM) in mitigating downside risk and enhancing investor confidence. We find that ERM curbs overinvestment and earnings misstatement among firms when other firms in their industry engage in undisclosed misstatements that are subsequently restated. Following the announcements of these industry restatements, peers with ERM experience a smaller increase in implied volatility skewness. These effects are driven by peers with young CEOs, complex segment structures, low prior earnings performance, and in competitive industries. Overall, our findings highlight ERM's role in bolstering investor confidence by effectively managing firms' underlying risks.

In this study, we examine whether environmental, social, and governance (ESG) funds' investment decisions are sensitive to the existence and extent of firms' voluntary environmental disclosures. We create our measures of voluntary environmental disclosure using bigrams extracted from the Global Reporting Initiative standards. We provide robust evidence that voluntary environmental disclosure in conference calls is associated with greater ESG fund ownership in the subsequent period, incremental to firms' ESG ratings. We also provide evidence that fund managers' reliance on environmental disclosure is concentrated in water, waste, emissions, and compliance disclosures. ESG fund ownership increases with environmental disclosure that is more positive and specific. Our primary finding persists both when we rely on the sustainability report as an alternative proxy for environmental disclosure and when we use fund‐level tests. Overall, our evidence is consistent with ESG funds relying on firms' disclosures when making investing decisions and inconsistent with recent regulatory concerns that ESG fund managers are not following through on their stated investing strategies.

In this paper, I examine the effects of failed mergers and acquisitions (M&A) deals on firms' disclosure decisions. As a firm's detailed proprietary information is shared with the counterparty during an M&A deal, the value of the information is expected to decrease if the deal fails. As a result, it may become less costly for the firm to publicly disclose the information. Consistent with this reasoning, I find increased disclosure of proprietary information in the year after firms experience failed deals. Evidence from cross‐sectional tests and a quasi‐natural experiment strengthens this inference. I also show that investor information demand contributes to the increased disclosure of proprietary information after failed deals. In addition, consistent with an increase in proprietary information provided to investors, I find reduced information asymmetry after failed deals. Finally, I document diminished future performance among firms that increase the disclosure of proprietary information after failed deals. Overall, my study sheds light on how failed deals impact firms' disclosure decisions, information environment, and future performance.

This paper extends a familiar model of competition and disclosure to incorporate the practical feature that firms may not only hold private information about consumer demand, but they can also influence demand by the investments they make in improving product quality. Such investments can reflect installing new product features, improving durability, adding design enhancements, and the like. This paper demonstrates that investments stand to significantly influence the firm's preference for disclosures and, in fact, become a determining feature of disclosure choice. In particular, under Cournot competition, a firm prefers disclosure when the industry‐wide effects of information and investments are concordant. That is, if both product quality and demand information have large positive industry spillovers, disclosure is desirable because it promotes implicit cooperation in investments; if both have low spillover, disclosure permits a firm to convey strength to a rival and then use quantity and quality in concert to dominate the market precisely when the firm's demand is at its peak.