This study examines the influence of global board reforms on cross-border mergers and acquisitions (CBMAs). Using a difference-in-differences methodology, we find that CBMA flows increase significantly following board reforms in both home and host countries. The effect is more pronounced for countries with relatively weaker external governance mechanisms compared to their counterparts. Our findings suggest that board reforms enhance board functions, thereby facilitating firms' outbound investments. Simultaneously, improved board governance mitigates acquisition risks, attracting inward investments and, consequently, stimulating CBMA flows.

We examine post-IPO exits of private equity sponsors of portfolio firms via follow-on secondary equity offerings and third party takeovers. Sponsors retain considerable ownership in listed portfolio firms for lengthy periods after IPOs, well beyond lockup expiration. After private equity post-IPO secondary offerings, corporate profitability is strongly superior to benchmark firms, indicating portfolio firms are successfully prepared for private equity's subsequent exit. Nevertheless, share prices fall at offering announcements, reflecting the failure of private equity sponsors to exit stakes in listed entities at the high premiums paid in third party takeovers, premiums that are invariably shared equally with public shareholders.

This paper provides new evidence on whether and how boards solve costly ex post settling up to recover CEO cash compensation for unrealized gains that fail to materialize. Our analyses are motivated by the likely expanding role for ex post settling up as the risk of compensating executives for unrealized gains that may never materialize increases in a more intangibles‐based economy, as well as by the conflicting evidence of prior research. We provide evidence consistent with ex post settling up by (i) using alternative truncation methods to derive observations most likely to fall within the theoretically motivated incentive zone; (ii) replicating and reconciling the conflicting results of prior research that supports (Leone et al. 2006) and fails to support (Shaw and Zhang 2010) ex post settling up; (iii) using Incentive Lab data with contract‐specific information, allowing strong identification of observations in the incentive zone; and (iv) documenting predictable cross‐sectional variation, with ex post settling up being more pronounced for firms with stronger corporate governance, less conservative accounting earnings, and a larger proportion of total pay in the form of cash compensation. Overall, we conclude that evidence is strong in support of the ex post settling up hypothesis.

We estimate the pay premium associated with CEO incentive compensation. Using explicit detailed U.S. CEO compensation contract data and simulation analysis, we find that CEOs with riskier pay packages receive a premium for pay at risk that represents 13.5 percent of total pay. The premium is positively correlated with proxies for CEO risk aversion, but implied risk aversion values suggest that the premium is economically smaller than suggested by prior studies. We perform our tests using a variety of proxies to measure the variance of pay and find consistent evidence of economically small pay risk premiums. These results are consistent with recent findings suggesting that risk may have a more limited influence over the level of pay than previously thought. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.