This study examines whether and how firms' voluntary forward‐looking nonfinancial disclosure, specifically their corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure, is associated with the intensity of product market competition (PMC). Despite the importance of the proprietary cost argument in explaining corporate disclosure incentives, there is little empirical evidence of the relationship between firms' proprietary cost concerns and their voluntary nonfinancial disclosure decisions. Using a reduction in industry‐level import tariffs as an exogenous shock to competition intensity, we find that the likelihood, frequency, and length of stand‐alone CSR reports decrease in response to heightened PMC. We also find that higher PMC intensity is associated with a reduced likelihood of CSR disclosure with external assurance, CSR disclosure in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative guidelines, and CSR disclosure integrated with financial statements. Our results are robust to multiple alternative measures of PMC—namely, the level of nonprice competition, product similarity, and managers' perceptions of competition. Further analysis suggests that firms facing intense competition tend to commit more resources to advertising activities after reducing their CSR disclosure, presumably to mitigate the effect of this reduction. Overall, our findings suggest that proprietary cost concerns reduce firms' incentive to report their competition‐sensitive CSR activities.

We examine how generalist CEOs influence innovation outcomes across 25 countries from 2001 to 2019. We assemble a novel, extended dataset of generalist CEOs and find that generalist CEOs positively affect innovation, particularly in countries with abundant innovation resources. This finding aligns with the notion that generalist CEOs leverage their broad knowledge and cross-industry experience to integrate resources across institutional environments, thereby fostering innovation activities. However, in countries with stricter patent systems, the increased need for specialized knowledge and resources limits the value that generalist CEOs can contribute, leading to decreased innovation activities. Our research highlights how institutional environments shape the efficacy of CEO human capital in driving innovation, thus offering insights for the design of innovation policies that maximize leadership potential across different institutional contexts.

Using a large sample of firms from 30 countries, we find that the integration of corporate social responsibility (CSR) criteria into executive compensation is associated with greater innovation output in countries around the world. We also find that this positive association is stronger in countries with weak stakeholder orientation, countries with weak legal environments, and countries without mandatory CSR reporting requirements. These findings suggest that CSR contracting can compensate for institutional voids and high stakeholder demand for CSR, and thereby foster firm innovation. The results of the channel analyses suggest that a greater level of employee innovation productivity, enhanced managerial risk-taking, and greater responsiveness of firms' R&D investment to their investment opportunities play a significant role in the association between CSR contracting and innovation. Overall, our study demonstrates in a global context the importance of linking executive compensation to nonfinancial criteria in addition to financial criteria, and it documents the heterogeneity in the effect of CSR contracting on firm innovation in different countries.

In this study, we examine whether a country's implementation of major corporate governance reforms affects firms' cross-listing activities. Cross-listing is important in overcoming international investment barriers and thus it is worth investigating whether enhanced corporate governance at the country level contributes to the integration of international capital markets. Using a difference-in-differences (DiD) research design, we predict and find that following the implementation of corporate governance reforms in their home countries, firms are more likely to engage in cross-listing activities and tend to cross-list in host countries with stronger investor protection and more developed markets than those in countries with no reforms in the same period. The results from country-level cross-sectional tests indicate that this effect is greater for firms in home countries with weaker investor protection and less developed stock markets in the prereform period. The reforms also have a stronger effect on firms subject to less analyst following and greater external finance dependence. Finally, we find a stronger association between cross-listing activities and institutional ownership after the reforms. Taken together, this study increases understanding of the trade-off between cross-border capital supply and demand. Our finding suggests that country-level corporate governance plays an important role in facilitating the supply of cross-border capital, which in turn incentivizes firms to cross-list. Our study also offers policy implications for national stock exchanges and securities regulators by suggesting that countries without well-developed capital markets should strengthen their corporate governance to improve firms' ability to raise external financing and attract cross-border capital flows.