This paper examines the impact of early Party school education for top executives on corporate innovation using Chinese listed SOEs data during 2003–2017. We find that SOEs with top executives who get a Party school degree engage in less innovative activities with the lower number of patent application and grants. The text description of the patents applied by the company is less similar to the text description of the company's main business operation, even filed patents are less capable of improving the future performance if SOEs' executives get a Party school degree. We further find that top executives with the Party school degree affect SOEs' innovation activities mainly through the government intervention originated from covert alumni relationship with local officials, which intensifies the executives' political promotion incentive. Our results are robust after we control for other managerial background characteristics, political connection, R&D expenditure and potential endogeneity. Our paper offers first evidence on the economic consequences of Party school education in China.

Using a quasi-natural experiment based on the introduction of Rule 18, a key component of China's anti-corruption campaign, this paper finds that the accuracy of analysts' earnings forecasts, especially for firms whose headquarters are located in regions with less developed markets, exhibits improvement after Rule 18. We investigate plausible underlying mechanism and find that after Rule 18, firms improve the quality of information conveyed by reported earnings, become more willing to respond to investors' online questions, and are more likely to have their chairpersons or CEOs attend meetings with analysts during analyst site visits. In addition, compared to the pre-Rule 18, the market reacts more positively to analyst earnings forecast reports for firms that lost political connections due to Rule 18 relative to those for other firms. There is also a decrease in stock price synchronicity after Rule 18. However, these effects of Rule 18 last only one year or two, and disappear three years after the policy. These findings suggest that in the short period after the policy, firms increase their information disclosure to the market. Regarding the disappearance of these effects after a longer period of policy implementation, one possibility is that firms adapt to the new rules over time, finding more covert ways to seek rents and re-establish political ties.