Job vacancy duration reflects the time a firm spends searching, selecting, and hiring for a job opening. Capturing vacancy duration using the creation and deletion dates of job postings by US public firms, we examine the informativeness of vacancy duration for future firm profitability. We find that while firms that quickly fill low-skill job vacancies exhibit higher future profitability, firms that take more time to fill high-skill jobs exhibit higher future profitability. Our cross-sectional analyses across the benefits and costs of candidate selection and performance expectations suggest that the informativeness of vacancy duration comes from its reflection of firms’ hiring strategies. That is, firms expecting higher profitability recruit more intensively to avoid the opportunity cost associated with vacancies for low-skill jobs and to ensure the selection of high-quality workers for high-skill jobs. Further analyses show that the implication of job vacancy duration for future profitability is not incorporated timely in the capital markets, as evidenced by pessimistic analyst forecasts and positive earnings announcement returns in future quarters for firms with short (long) durations for low-skill (high-skill) jobs. These results demonstrate the informativeness of job vacancy duration for firm profitability and advance the understanding of firms’ hiring strategies.

We show that banks with high environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings issue fewer mortgages in poor localities—in number and dollar amount—than banks with low ESG ratings. This lending disparity happens at both the county and census tract level, worsens in disaster areas of severe hurricane strikes, is robust to alternative ESG ratings (including using only the social (S) component), and cannot be explained by banks’ differential deposit networks. We find no difference in mortgage default rates between high- and low-ESG banks, rejecting an alternative explanation based on differential credit screening quality. We report a complementary, not substitution, relation between high-ESG banks’ mortgage lending and their community development investments (like affordable housing projects) in poor localities. Loan-application-level analyses confirm that high-ESG banks are more likely than low-ESG banks to reject mortgage loans in poor neighborhoods. The evidence hints at social wash: banks deploy prosocial rhetoric and symbolic actions while not lending much in disadvantaged communities, the social function they arguably ought to perform. Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) examinations partially undo the social wash effect.

We compare the sensitivity of managerial cash compensation to firm performance, the level of long term managerial incentives, and the sensitivity of CEO turnover to firm performance for three types of state-controlled Chinese firms: A shares (firms incorporated and listed in mainland China), H shares (firms incorporated in mainland China but listed in Hong Kong), and Red Chip shares (firms incorporated outside mainland China and listed in Hong Kong). We find no difference in the three pay-for-performance sensitivity measures between H shares and A shares. The cash pay-for-performance sensitivity and the level of long-term managerial incentives are higher for Red Chip shares than for the other two firm types. However, the sensitivity of CEO turnover to firm performance is insignificant for all three firm types. Our study illustrates the complexity in the influence of mainland China’s versus Hong Kong’s institutional forces on state-controlled Chinese firms listed in Hong Kong.