Knowledge that Transforms

We examine the predictive information content of the management forecasts of stock return volatility (i.e., expected volatility) that are disclosed in annual reports. We find that expected volatility predicts near-term and longer-term stock return volatility and earnings volatility incremental to implied volatility, historical volatility, firm characteristics, and alternative measures of uncertainty. We also find that expected volatility reflects managers’ private information about their firms’ future investment activities, such as mergers and acquisitions and R&D intensity. Finally, we find that the predictive power of expected volatility shrinks when managers have stronger incentives to manage earnings. Overall, we provide novel evidence that management forecasts of volatility contain private information about future uncertainty that can help forecast volatility.

We examine the effect of media coverage on firm innovation. Using a comprehensive sample of corporate news coverage and patenting over the period from 2000 to 2012, we find a negative relation between media coverage and firm innovation. We further document the two offsetting economic mechanisms underlying the impact of media coverage on innovation: the media’s role of short-term pressure on managers relates negatively to innovation, while its role of mitigating financial constraints is positively associated with innovation. Our findings provide new insights into the effect of news coverage on firms’ long-term growth.

Research suggests that earnings-disclosure-related litigation causes managers to reduce subsequent disclosure, perhaps stemming from a belief that even their good faith disclosures will cause them trouble. This paper considers unexplored dimensions of disclosure and alternative channels of disclosure to provide additional evidence that speaks to how litigation shapes managers’ disclosure strategies. Consistent with Skinner (1994)’s classic legal liability hypothesis, we find that, while managers reduce and delay forecasts of positive earnings news following litigation, they increase the frequency and timeliness of their bad news forecasts. Moreover, many managers who were nonguiders prior to facing legal scrutiny begin guiding following litigation. Managers also maintain (if not increase) the information they provide via press releases and during conference calls following litigation. Supporting the notion that managers use disclosure to walk down expectations, additional analyses document an increase in the likelihood that lawsuit firms report earnings that beat consensus forecasts in the post-lawsuit period. Collectively, our evidence suggests that following litigation managers continue to view disclosure as a valuable tool that shapes their firms’ information environments and reduces expected legal costs. In so doing, it supports an important alternative viewpoint of how firms respond to litigation as well as the effectiveness of litigation as a disciplining mechanism.

We provide evidence on earnings management by exploiting temporary exogenous shocks to utility firms’ sales arising from weather variation. We find that sample firms’ sales are highly sensitive to annual changes in average temperatures in the region where the firm operates, but this sensitivity disappears quickly as one moves down the income statement. This evidence, while indirect, is suggestive of earnings management activities. In search of direct evidence, we study charitable giving decisions by sample firms and uncover a significant positive sensitivity of charitable spending to weather-driven demand shocks, behavior that is highly consistent with the presence of real earnings management efforts. We find no convincing evidence supporting possible alternative explanations for this evidence, but we do find limited support for the presence of a larger giving–weather relation when earnings management incentives are likely to be elevated. If other real decisions with similar characteristics scale proportionally to charitable giving, our findings suggest that the overall magnitude of real earnings management activities could be quite substantial.

We examine whether broad-based public engagement by institutional investors influences the behavior of portfolio firms. We investigate this question in the context of BlackRock’s annual Dear CEO letter, which in recent years has called for portfolio firms to acknowledge and quantify the impact of environmental and regulatory factors on their firms. We find that portfolio firms’ disclosures during the post-letter period reflect topics similar to those discussed in the letters, controlling for a variety of firm and disclosure characteristics and the occurrence of private engagements. Moreover, BlackRock appears to value these additional disclosures, as it more often votes with management on shareholder proposals during subsequent annual shareholder meetings. Finally, motivated by BlackRock’s attempts to mobilize firms toward its specific policy recommendations, we also provide some evidence that firms’ lobbying efforts during the post-letter period become more aligned with the issues highlighted in the letter, especially when firms’ share BlackRock’s policy preferences ex ante. Taken together, our evidence suggests that portfolio firms are responsive to BlackRock’s public engagement efforts.