We examine information quality and financial leverage when an entrepreneur needs financing to undertake a risky project and his effort input affects the project's outcome. We show that information quality and financial leverage interact to play active roles in both investment and effort decisions. Our analysis shows a positive association between leverage and optimal information quality—when leverage is low (high), low (high) information quality is optimal. This is because with low leverage, the entrepreneur is already motivated by his large share of the outcome to exert effort, and high information quality is not efficient as a precise bad signal discourages the entrepreneur's effort. In contrast, when leverage is high and thus the entrepreneur is less motivated by his residual cash flows, high information quality is optimal, because a precise good signal encourages the entrepreneur's effort. Our study highlights the joint effect of information quality and financial leverage on overall efficiency through firms' effort inputs as well as on defining investment efficiency.

Motivated by the debate about the introduction of the fair value option for (financial) liabilities (FVOL) and the requirement to recognize and separately disclose in financial statements debt valuation adjustments (DVAs), this study explores what we can learn about a firm’s credit risk from DVAs. Using a sample of US bank holding companies that elect the FVOL, we show that DVAs generally cannot be explained by the same factors that explain contemporaneous changes in bank’s credit quality. We further find that DVAs can explain future changes in credit risk when the fair value of liabilities is based on managerial inputs (Level 3). Overall our results suggest that managers have an information advantage in estimating credit risk and that DVAs provide inside information to the market.

Using the Chinese stock market data, we test the hypothesis that cognitive dissonance influences the stock market response to earnings news. Supporting this notion, we find that investors disregard earnings news that contradicts their sentiment due to cognitive dissonance, thereby causing a muted announcement date price reaction to such news. Further analysis shows that higher retail concentration and greater valuation uncertainty of the underlying firm exacerbate this cognitive dissonance and hence amplify its impact, but less credible financial report does not. Finally, we find that cognitive dissonance is temporary for bad news under optimism, but is quite persistent for good news under pessimism. Overall, our findings offer a behavioral bias explanation to understand why investors underuse accounting information.

This study examines whether the proportion of equity-based compensation in outside director compensation is associated with corporate strategic alliances. We hypothesize that equity incentives provided to outside directors mitigate potential agency conflicts between outside directors and shareholders that arise from the strategic alliance decision-making process, thus resulting in more alliance activities. Our empirical evidence indicates that the percentage of equity in outside director compensation is positively associated with the incidence and the number of strategic alliance activities. Additionally, when the proportion of outside directors' equity in total compensation is higher, firms with strategic alliances generate better future stock returns. Overall, our findings suggest that providing equity incentives in outside director compensation mitigates the agency problems inherent in corporate strategic alliance decisions and enhances the quality of alliance activities.