We examine the predictive information content of the management forecasts of stock return volatility (i.e., expected volatility) that are disclosed in annual reports. We find that expected volatility predicts near-term and longer-term stock return volatility and earnings volatility incremental to implied volatility, historical volatility, firm characteristics, and alternative measures of uncertainty. We also find that expected volatility reflects managers’ private information about their firms’ future investment activities, such as mergers and acquisitions and R&D intensity. Finally, we find that the predictive power of expected volatility shrinks when managers have stronger incentives to manage earnings. Overall, we provide novel evidence that management forecasts of volatility contain private information about future uncertainty that can help forecast volatility.

This paper studies how culture works as an implicit incentive alignment mechanism in corporate alliances. We measure the ancestral connection between different corporate headquarters places, using historical immigration from different countries to different areas of the U. S. When forming business alliances, the ancestral composition of the area where firms locate plays an important role in their choices of partners and the location of new ventures. Exploiting immigration to U.S. cities induced by WWI and the immigration acts of the 1920s, we find that ancestral connection driven by the supply-push component of historical immigrant inflows is associated with an increase in alliance intensity today. Finally, partnering firms experience significantly better performance when the ancestral connection between their headquarters or between their inventors is stronger. Shared values and beliefs between firms' key stakeholders likely underlie the role of ancestral connection.

We examine how adverse selection problems when hiring new external CEOs affect contractual features of inducement grants. Focusing on the sensitivity of inducement grants to the new CEO announcement return ($ Sensitivity ), we find that firms provide inducement grants that are more sensitive to the new CEO announcement return when information asymmetry about the new CEO is more severe and the costs of adverse selection problems are higher. We also find a positive relation between the market reaction to the appointment and $ Sensitivity . We consider factors that reduce information asymmetry (e.g., engaging a search firm or appointing internal CEOs) and find they are associated with lower sensitivity of the inducement grant to the announcement.

We examine whether firms benchmark annual equity grants to compensation peers and whether meeting the participation constraint is a motive. Studying CEO equity grants over the period of 2006–2016 and compensation peers disclosed by the firm, we find that equity grants by these peers significantly determine a firm's equity grants. We find no evidence that the relation between a firm's and its peers' CEO equity grants is an indirect outcome of meeting peer total compensation levels. In contrast, we show that firms are more likely to meet peer equity grant levels when the labor market is more competitive and when losing key personnel is a risk factor. We also find that CEO turnover is more likely when the CEO receives lower equity grants than peers. Collectively, these findings are consistent with the theoretical prediction that benchmarking equity grants helps firms satisfy the participation constraint, which varies with performance. Data Availability: Data are available from sources cited in the text.

Exploiting the setting of staggered adoption of the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine (IDD) in U.S. state courts, we examine how quasi-exogenous restrictions of outside employment opportunities affect CEO compensation structure. The IDD adoption constrains executives' ability to work for competitors, which likely decreases CEOs' tendency to take risks by increasing the cost of job loss and reducing the reward to risk taking. We expect the board to respond by increasing the sensitivity of CEO wealth to stock volatility (vega) to encourage risk taking. We find a significant increase in vega post-IDD adoption. The effect is stronger among CEOs with greater career concerns. The effect also increases with the ex ante CEO mobility and the importance of trade secrets, suggesting the board increases vega more when there is a greater reduction in CEO outside opportunities. Overall, we provide new evidence on how external labor market frictions affect the convexity of CEO compensation.