Classic disclosure theory suggests that investor uncertainty increases the probability of discretionary disclosure, while managerial uncertainty decreases this disclosure. Because R&D projects are inherently risky, R&D‐intensive firms face high managerial uncertainty as well as high investor uncertainty. This paper empirically examines how R&D intensity impacts the provision, horizon, and content of management earnings guidance. To address endogeneity concerns, state‐level R&D tax credits serve as an instrumental variable for R&D intensity. I find that high R&D firms do not provide less earnings guidance than low R&D firms. However, they issue more quarterly guidance but less annual guidance. This substitution strengthens when there is high managerial uncertainty about the success of R&D projects. Consistent with litigation risk leading to asymmetric disclosure incentives, the decrease in annual earnings guidance is concentrated in positive guidance. Overall, the results imply that firms modify the horizon and content of their earnings guidance by substituting long‐term positive guidance with short‐term guidance when managerial uncertainty discourages the issuance of the former.

This paper examines how increased competition among environmental, social, and governance (ESG) rating agencies relates to ESG rating quality. We exploit the entry of Sustainalytics as a new ESG rating agency in 2010. We conduct a difference‐in‐differences analysis and provide three main findings. First, we find that higher competition decreases incumbents' ESG rating disagreements of the same scope. The negative relation between competition and ESG rating disagreement persists for same‐scope rating metrics not covered by Sustainalytics, suggesting that neither learning nor herding drive the results. The relationship between competition and rating disagreement strengthens for firms with more ESG disclosures, which generally require more effort to analyze. Second, we find that incumbents' ratings of ESG concerns are more strongly associated with future negative ESG news for firms additionally covered by Sustainalytics. This finding is consistent with competition improving ratings' ability to predict future negative ESG incidents. Third, we find that incumbents evaluate more difficult‐to‐measure outcome metrics for firms covered by Sustainalytics, consistent with competition inducing more effort. Overall, our findings suggest that competition serves as an implicit disciplining mechanism of ESG rating agencies' quality.

This paper examines whether the sensitivity of local government credit ratings to external signals about the local economy varies with the quality of the governments' financial reports. We find the credit ratings of local governments that are required to comply with GAAP are less sensitive to changes in local home values than similarly affected governments that are not required to comply with GAAP. Further, we show that GAAP's moderating role increased after Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) 34 substantially improved the quality of GAAP‐compliant governments' financial reports, which helps to attribute the main findings to reporting quality. To understand the mechanism, we study positive and negative economic signals separately. The results are pronounced when the change in home values is negative, consistent with reporting quality decreasing the rating agency's uncertainty about local governments' preexisting likelihood of default. We conclude that credit rating agencies are less sensitive to local economic signals when the local government's financial reports are of higher quality.

We examine how firms respond to the increased workplace transparency due to the coverage on Glassdoor.com, which collects and disseminates reviews on employee satisfaction. Leveraging the staggered timing of first‐time reviews on Glassdoor, we use a difference‐in‐differences design and find that after being reviewed on Glassdoor, firms improve their workplace practices, measured by corporate social responsibility scores on employee relations and diversity. Consistent with firms improving their workplace practices to remain competitive in the labor market, we find that such improvement concentrates in firms with negative initial reviews and with high labor intensity. We also find firms increase disclosures about workplace practices after being reviewed and the increase concentrates in firms with high institutional ownership, consistent with firms providing more disclosures to appease investors. Overall, our findings suggest that the increased workplace transparency through social media has a disciplinary effect on corporate policies.

Research suggests that earnings-disclosure-related litigation causes managers to reduce subsequent disclosure, perhaps stemming from a belief that even their good faith disclosures will cause them trouble. This paper considers unexplored dimensions of disclosure and alternative channels of disclosure to provide additional evidence that speaks to how litigation shapes managers’ disclosure strategies. Consistent with Skinner (1994)’s classic legal liability hypothesis, we find that, while managers reduce and delay forecasts of positive earnings news following litigation, they increase the frequency and timeliness of their bad news forecasts. Moreover, many managers who were nonguiders prior to facing legal scrutiny begin guiding following litigation. Managers also maintain (if not increase) the information they provide via press releases and during conference calls following litigation. Supporting the notion that managers use disclosure to walk down expectations, additional analyses document an increase in the likelihood that lawsuit firms report earnings that beat consensus forecasts in the post-lawsuit period. Collectively, our evidence suggests that following litigation managers continue to view disclosure as a valuable tool that shapes their firms’ information environments and reduces expected legal costs. In so doing, it supports an important alternative viewpoint of how firms respond to litigation as well as the effectiveness of litigation as a disciplining mechanism.

We examine whether and, if so, how retail consumers change their shopping in response to firm‐specific negative environmental, social, and governance (ESG) news. Using an event study methodology, we do not find significant changes in consumer foot traffic in response to negative ESG news, on average. However, the average consumer reacts negatively when such news is covered by national or global media outlets, which elevates consumer awareness. In addition, we provide evidence of the heterogeneity in responses to negative ESG news across consumer groups. Consumers in more ESG‐conscious counties, as measured by county ESG preferences, income, education, and political ideology, reduce store visits in response to negative ESG news. In contrast, consumers in the least ESG‐conscious counties increase their visits in response to negative ESG news. These opposing reactions explain the insignificant average consumer response to negative ESG news. Furthermore, the ESG‐conscious consumers' negative reaction is, at most, modest, dissipating within six weeks. Overall, our findings suggest that firms face divergent responses to ESG activities from different consumer groups, underscoring the divisive nature of ESG issues.