Both sell-side analysts and the media are information intermediaries in capital markets. This study investigates the association between sell-side analyst research and information in firm-specific news coverage. More frequent recent news coverage is associated with stronger market reactions to analysts' research revisions, and primarily explained by soft information in news coverage. The primary result is robust to using both an instrumental variable and a quasi-natural experimental setting to generate exogenous variation in media coverage, alleviating concerns about endogeneity. In addition, using textual analysis, we document that explicit media references in analyst research reports are significantly associated with more frequent analyst revisions and stronger market reactions to revisions. Our study provides empirical evidence of analysts' assimilation of information from the financial press and their role in the efficiency of capital markets.

We find that firms that grant performance-contingent (p-c) equity awards with accounting-based vesting conditions to their CEOs have lower cost of debt and less restrictive loan terms. The benefits of p-c accounting-based awards on debt financing are greater when the moral hazard problem faced by debtholders is potentially more significant—for example, for firms with poorer credit ratings and lower asset tangibility. We find some evidence that certain types of p-c equity awards with stock price-based conditions increase the cost of debt financing. The adoption of p-c accounting-based awards increases firm value, as indicated by stock and bond event studies. Overall, our findings suggest that the incentive compatibility of accounting-based p-c awards mitigates the potential agency conflict between shareholders and debtholders.

Because internal control audits never existed before the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), and these audits simultaneously became mandatory for all U.S. accelerated filer companies, it has been difficult to assess the extent of investor demand for these audits. To understand whether investors demand internal control audits for these large companies, we exploit a regulatory exemption that permits companies to exclude acquired operations from an internal control audit. Using this voluntary setting, we find that investors react negatively if a company excludes acquired operations from their internal control audit. This negative reaction is larger when more of the company's operations are excluded from audit and when there is greater information uncertainty. Further, companies that exclude acquired operations from internal control audits are more likely to have a subsequent restatement. Collectively, these findings are consistent with investors perceiving value in (i.e., demanding) internal control audits for large U.S. public companies.

Propensity score matching (PSM) has become a popular technique for estimating average treatment effects (ATEs) in accounting research. In this study, we discuss the usefulness and limitations of PSM relative to more traditional multiple regression (MR) analysis. We discuss several PSM design choices and review the use of PSM in 86 articles in leading accounting journals from 2008–2014. We document a significant increase in the use of PSM from zero studies in 2008 to 26 studies in 2014. However, studies often oversell the capabilities of PSM, fail to disclose important design choices, and/or implement PSM in a theoretically inconsistent manner. We then empirically illustrate complications associated with PSM in three accounting research settings. We first demonstrate that when the treatment is not binary, PSM tends to confine analyses to a subsample of observations where the effect size is likely to be smallest. We also show that seemingly innocuous design choices greatly influence sample composition and estimates of the ATE. We conclude with suggestions for future research considering the use of matching methods. Data Availability: All data used are available from sources cited in the text.

This study examines the effects that two balanced scorecard framework (BSF) elements, causal linkages between strategic objectives (“causal linkages”) and time delay information (“delays”) in a strategy map, have on long-term profit performance in a dynamic decision-making environment. Using a computer-based simulation task, we conduct a 3 × (4) experiment (control group; causal linkages without delays; causal linkages with delays; four simulation rounds) and find that managers presented with causal linkages without delays generate greater long-term profit compared to a control group. For managers presented with causal linkages with delays, long-term profit generation is higher than the control group, but is not significantly different from the causal linkages without delays treatment. Those managers presented with causal linkages with delays, however, demonstrate learning across the four simulation rounds. In contrast, learning is found to plateau for the causal linkages without delays treatment and is not present for the control group. We also examine the cognitive mechanism through which these two BSF elements impact performance, by measuring the accuracy of two components of managers' mental models. Data Availability: Experimental materials are available upon request from the authors.

We investigate the role of accounting and audit quality in the allocation of international development aid loans provided by the World Bank. This aid is crucial to improve governance functions, infrastructure, and capital markets, and the accounting and audit environments in a country can provide the World Bank with confidence that aid is being used as intended rather than being diverted for personal or political gain. We find that development aid loans are higher for countries with stronger accounting quality, where IFRS use is mandated, and where the audit environment is stronger. However, we also find that United States geo-political interests influence these results. Specifically, the World Bank appears to “overlook” accounting and audit quality in countries where geo-political interests are relatively aligned with those of the U.S. Finally, we find that accounting and auditing matter only in countries with relatively high corruption levels, indicating that the World Bank has greater trust that accounting and auditing are of relatively high quality in low-corruption countries. Data Availability: All data are publicly available.

Research in budgeting suggests that subordinates may exhibit economically significant degrees of honesty, in spite of pecuniary incentives to do otherwise. This study continues the exploration of honesty in budgeting along two dimensions. First, unlike prior experiments, we measure the incremental effect of honesty by manipulating whether budget requests are made in the form of a factual assertion. Second, prior designs may have emphasized the ethical dimension of budgeting by granting the subordinate wide discretion over setting the budget, whereas we manipulate whether the subordinate or the superior has final authority over setting the budget. We find that less slack is created when budget communication requires a factual assertion in the subordinate authority treatment, but not when the superior has final authority. Hence, we find an incremental effect of honesty only when the subordinate has final authority. We conjecture, and provide some evidence, that this is due to subordinates framing the superior authority situation as one of negotiation where each party acts in his or her self-interest, rather than as an ethical dilemma. This view, that budgeting is essentially devoid of ethical considerations, is consistent with some recent characterizations of budget practices.

This paper analyzes the process of private negotiations between financial institutions and the companies they attempt to influence. It relies on a private database consisting of the correspondence between TIAA‐CREF and 45 firms it contacted about governance issues between 1992 and 1996. This correspondence indicates that TIAA‐CREF is able to reach agreements with targeted companies more than 95 percent of the time. In more than 70 percent of the cases, this agreement is reached without shareholders voting on the proposal. We verify independently that at least 87 percent of the targets subsequently took actions to comply with these agreements.

There appears to be a consensus that the recent instability in global financial markets may be attributable in part to the failure of financial modeling. More specifically, it is alleged that current risk models have failed to properly assess the risks associated with large adverse stock price behavior. In this paper, we first discuss the limitations of classical time series models for forecasting financial market meltdowns. Then we set forth a framework capable of forecasting both extreme events and highly volatile markets. Based on the empirical evidence presented in this paper, our framework offers an improvement over prevailing models for evaluating stock market risk exposure during distressed market periods.