We document that firms vary in their timeliness of support for the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement following the death of George Floyd in May 2020, and that timeliness is an indicator of authenticity. We predict that firms that speak out quickly in support of BLM (via Twitter or their websites) have made more investments in diversity and inclusion, relative to firms that speak out slowly (via conference calls or annual reports) or that remain silent. Consistent with this prediction, quick -disclosing firms have greater workforce diversity, have boards with greater ethnic diversity, and are more likely to tie executive compensation to diversity and inclusivity. Furthermore, quick -disclosing firms increase their hiring of both Black American employees and Black directors relative to firms that stay silent. We also document that quick-disclosing firms are part of more supportive stakeholder networks. We develop an inclusivity index and show that firms with higher index levels are more likely to speak out on the Capitol Riots, the Asian Spa Shootings, and voting rights.

We develop a rating system to evaluate the quality of individual non-GAAP exclusions. Our perspective is that high-quality exclusions reflect nonrecurring economic transactions, are transitory accounting adjustments, or have little usefulness in forecasting cash flows. We use four approaches to rate exclusions. We evaluate the serial correlation of the exclusion, survey accounting academics’ views, obtain practitioner ratings from the CFA Institute, and identify the exclusions approved by the Chinese securities regulator. A firm’s exclusion quality score is the weighted average rating of its individual exclusions. For our sample of S&P 500 firms, we document that exclusion quality varies by industry, captures trends in non-GAAP reporting, and is reasonably stable at the firm level. To validate the rating, we show that firms with lower exclusion quality scores receive more SEC comment letters, incur more Regulation G violations, exhibit greater analyst forecast dispersion, and have slower price discovery following earnings announcements.

We propose a framework to assess the decision-usefulness of heterogeneous disclosure practices that managers use to convey information to market participants. We illustrate an application of our framework to non-GAAP earnings, management earnings guidance, and earnings conference calls. We first identify key quality attributes for each disclosure practice and then develop a list of quality metrics that we apply to a small pilot sample. We focus on metrics that are easily measured in real time and discuss the practical challenges of conducting assessments of disclosure quality at the firm-quarter-disclosure level. Our descriptive analysis provides preliminary insights into whether and how voluntary disclosure quality varies across firms and highlights the interconnectedness of these disclosure practices. We discuss future research opportunities to expand and fine-tune the application of the framework to develop a comprehensive disclosure quality assessment.