Knowledge that Transforms

We study how financial distress of a significant customer impacts capital structure of suppliers. Using a sample of U.S. firms that filed for Chapter 11 between 1980 and 2013, we find that the suppliers of these firms increase their leverage ratio over the two years prior to the filing date. This change is economically significant and consistent with the bargaining power theory, which states that an increase in suppliers' debt decreases the surplus available for negotiations. Therefore, suppliers increase their financing leverage to fortify their bargaining power with significant, distressed customers. We also find evidence that suppliers reduce their leverage after the customer reorganizes its liabilities and capital structure in the Chapter 11 process, indicating a return to a previous status quo.

We examine the impact of local religious beliefs on organizational risk-taking behaviors using hedge funds as a new and unique setting. We find robust evidence that local religiosity is significantly negatively related to both total and idiosyncratic volatilities of hedge funds during 1996–2013. This relation is primarily driven by semi-directional funds, reversed for directional funds, and nonexistent for non-directional funds. Consistent with the local preference channel, the impact of local religiosity on risk-taking is only pronounced among funds for which local managers and investors are economically more important, namely young and small funds. Further, hedge funds located in more religious counties tend to hold less risky stocks and diversify their stock portfolios across industries, thus contributing to lower hedge fund risk-taking. Overall, our evidence suggests that local culture, in particular religiosity, may motivate hedge fund managers to reduce risk.

Based on a difference-in-differences approach, we find strong evidence that the initial enforcement of insider trading laws improves capital allocation efficiency. The effect is concentrated in developed markets and manifests shortly after the enforcement year. Further analysis shows that the improvement is positively associated with the increase in liquidity around the enforcement year and the opaqueness of the information environment before the enforcement year. The improvement is more pronounced for firms operating in more competitive markets, being more financially constrained, and with more severe agency problems. Finally, we find increased accounting performance after the enforcement and the increase is positively associated with the improvement in capital allocation efficiency. Overall, our evidence suggests that the initial enforcement of insider trading laws improves capital allocation efficiency by providing more information to guide managerial decisions and by reducing market frictions arising from information asymmetry and agency problems.

We hypothesize that high stock price levels impede informed trading on the stocks and reduce price informativeness. This is because uninformed trading is needed to facilitate informed trading, and high stock prices may impose budget constraints on uninformed investors. Indeed, we find, for high-price firms, (i) options to stock trading volume (O/S), an informed trading measure in options market, is higher, (ii) price informativeness about future earnings is lower, and (iii) investment sensitivity to price is lower. We also find these patterns reverse after stock splits, suggesting that firms can use splits to improve informed trading and enhance price informativeness.

We link the reputation incentives of independent directors to the informativeness of stock prices. We show that when more independent directors rank a directorship high, the firm-specific information content in a firm's stock price increases. Further, independent directors with high reputation incentives serve firms that voluntarily disclose more information and display lower crash risk. We find similar results when using plausibly exogenous shocks to the reputation incentives of independent directors. Our results therefore support a causal interpretation of the positive influence that independent directors with reputation incentives exert on corporate transparency.

We develop a model to predict expected or normal director compensation. Based on this, we then calculate whether directors of corporate boards are over- or undercompensated. On average, we find greater evidence of over- rather than undercompensation. For companies that overpay, the average excess compensation is greater than $60,000 per director, while directors that are underpaid receive about $33,000 less than predicted. Excess compensation declines over our sample period, which may be consistent with increased director workloads as well as increased scrutiny. We also find that overcompensated directors exacerbate agency problems and lead to reduced CEO turnover sensitivity to performance and a decrease in CEO pay-for-performance sensitivity. Thus, director excess compensation may be a sign of board entrenchment where overcompensated directors are not necessarily focused on protecting shareholder interests.

We examine how equity mispricing affects corporate investment in an international setting. We find that investment is more sensitive to stock prices for equity-dependent firms than for non-equity-dependent firms in our international sample. Investment is also more sensitive to stock prices for firms located in countries with more developed capital markets (i.e., lower costs of raising capital), higher share turnover (i.e., shorter shareholder horizons), and higher R&D intensity (i.e., more opaque assets). More importantly, the positive relation between equity dependence and the sensitivity of investment to stock prices is more pronounced for firms located in these same countries. These findings are consistent with the equity-financing hypothesis and the catering hypothesis on corporate investment proposed by Baker et al. (2003) and Polk and Sapienza (2009), respectively.

We examine the interactions of bank lending dynamics, ownership structures, and crisis phenomena in the banking systems of Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. Using a panel dataset of more than 400 banks for the period from 1994–2010, we show that the impact of ownership structure on a bank’s lending activities in CEE countries was conditional upon the type of crisis, namely, whether it was a host, home, global, or simultaneous crisis. In contrast, our evidence indicates that bank-specific characteristics, such as deposit growth and profitability ratios, are significant determinants of credit growth during both normal economic times and crisis periods, regardless of the crisis type. Moreover, we provide indirect evidence of the benefits of banking sector diversification dependent upon the criterion of parent banks’ country of origin.

Speakers of strong future time reference (FTR) languages (e.g., English) are required to grammatically distinguish between future and present events, while speakers of weak-FTR languages (e.g., Chinese) are not. We hypothesize that speaking about the future in the present tense may result in the belief that adverse credit events are more imminent. Consistent with such a linguistic hypothesis, weak-FTR language firms are found to have higher precautionary cash holdings. We report additional supportive results from changes in the relative importance of different languages in a country's business domain, evidence from within one country with several distinct languages, and results related to changes following a severe financial crisis. Our evidence introduces a new explanation for heterogeneity in corporate savings behavior, provides insights about belief formation in firms, and adds to research on the effects of languages on economic outcomes.

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.