We contribute to multinationality and real options theories by considering the role of firm heterogeneity in real options awareness for MNCs. We test the joint impact of real options awareness (RO-AWN) and multinationality on firm value using an extensive sample of U.S.-listed international firms over the ten-year period 1996–2005. We show that when a firm's growth options and degree of RO-AWN are considered, multinationality has a significant positive impact on firm value and performance as measured by Tobin's Q, return-on-assets and the 3-year average stock returns. We find that the benefits of multinationality accrue asymmetrically to firms differing in RO-AWN. Managers who are more aware of their corporate real options are able to significantly enhance firm value. Our findings are robust to a range of dataset and measurement specifications, endogeneity issues and controlling for alternative theories of the firm.

This paper examines the relationship between investors' ambiguity in the financial options market and systemic banks' risk. Eliciting ambiguity information from option pricing data on the twelve major U.S. banks between 2003 and 2010, we show that higher behavioral deviations from risk-neutral and Bayesian valuation (i.e., investor ambiguity) are associated with higher systemic banks' downside, market and credit risks. Consistent with behavioral explanations, we confirm the detrimental effect of ambiguity on financial market outcomes and find strong evidence of ambiguity among call and put option holders. Variance decomposition indicates that such a pattern of behavior explains a significant proportion of U.S. banking risk variance. This effect is more pronounced during periods of economic turbulence and bank stress (i.e., the 2007–2009 crisis), and holds after controlling for size, tail risk, implied volatility, and volatility of volatility dynamics. We also document that ambiguity from the financial market has a depressing impact on real economic activity, including capacity utilization, non-farm payrolls and overall economic performance. Our findings are robust to alternative specifications of ambiguity such as multiple priors and expected utilities with uncertain probabilities.

Considerable debate surrounds how the US government's TARP bailout intervention has affected the risk-taking and moral hazard behavior of U.S. banks around the global financial crisis. We examine this issue with a focus on lottery behavior introducing MAX/MIN as a new measure of lotteryness in banking to capture the loss protection from bank bailout guarantees. We find that the TARP bailout increased the likelihood of bank lotteryness and risk shifting. Lottery-like bank equities are riskier after TARP and exhibit fatter right to left tails. A consistent pattern of risk taking and lottery behavior extends both before and after the 2008–2009 crisis, engulfing the largest systemic banks (SIFIs). While confirming that lottery-like bank equities have lower short-term return, we find they exhibit better cumulative long-term return performance. Our findings have important policy implications regarding government intervention in banking crises.

We posit that outsourcing flexibility helps overcome financial constraints and provide evidence concerning the role of financial constraints and its interaction with operational flexibility on the likelihood and market value of outsourcing. We find that the likelihood of outsourcing is higher the greater the firm's financial constraints prior to outsourcing and that the effect of financial constraints on the likelihood of outsourcing is greater the lower the ex-ante operational flexibility, suggesting partial substitution between financial and operational flexibility. We further show that the market value impact of outsourcing announcements is predominantly positive confirming net flexibility gains positively related to ex-ante financial constraints. Our findings suggest that outsourcing is a vehicle for flexibility acquisition and that financial constraints play a prominent role.

Customer orientation reflects the organizational culture and climate that promote behaviors enabling the firm to create superior value for its customers. Using a textual measure of customer orientation (Custor) constructed from 10-K filings, we document a positive and economically significant relation between Custor and stock returns in the financial crisis of 2008–2009 and the COVID-19 pandemic. High-Custor firms outperform low-Custor firms by 1.5% per month during the financial crisis and by 4.7% per month during the COVID-19 crisis. This positive Custor-returns relation is robust to different treatments and persists after accounting for factors that contribute to corporate resilience, such as CSR activities. Our findings lend credence to the notion that customer orientation enhances a firm’s social capital, leading to improved operational performance during adverse periods, whilst our empirical evidence further supports that Custor and CSR represent distinct pathways for building trust. Consequently, firms that prioritize customer orientation experience greater resilience to negative shocks, especially during periods of low market confidence.

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.