This paper examines whether there is a gender promotion gap among executives. Using a comprehensive dataset of executives, I find that women’s promotion probability is 16% lower than men’s after controlling for educational and employment background, age, function, rank, and firm characteristics. The gap occurs partially because women are clustered in positions that support the business rather than positions with profit-and-loss responsibilities. Additionally, my analysis shows that product market competition, public attention on gender diversity, a respectful corporate culture, and board gender diversity alleviate the gender promotion gap. These findings support the notion that demand-side factors continue to hinder women’s advancement to leadership positions.

Connected financial journalists—those with working relationships, common school ties, or social media connections to company management—introduce a marked media slant into their news coverage. Using a comprehensive set of newspaper articles covering mergers and acquisition (M&A) transactions from 1997 to 2016, I find that connected journalists use significantly fewer negative words in their coverage of connected acquirers. These journalists are also more likely to quote connected executives and include less accurate language in their reporting. Moreover, they tend to portray other firms in the same network in a less negative light. Journalists’ favoritism bias has implications for both capital market outcomes and their careers. I find that acquirers whose M&As are covered by connected journalists receive significantly higher stock returns on the news article publication date. However, these acquirers’ stock prices reverse in the long term, suggesting market overreaction to news covered by connected journalists. Around M&A transactions, connected articles are correlated with increased bid competition and deal premiums. In terms of future career development, connected journalists are more likely to leave journalism and join their associated industries in the long run. Taken together, the evidence suggests that financial journalists’ personal networks promote news bias that potentially hinders the efficient dissemination of information.

We use newly digitized records from the post office to study the effects of strengthened state capacity between 1875 and 1901. Exploiting the implementation of the Pendleton Act—a landmark statute that shielded bureaucrats from political interference—across US cities over two waves, we find that civil service reform reduced postal delivery errors and increased productivity. These improvements were most pronounced during election years when the reform dampened bureaucratic turnover. We provide suggestive evidence that reformed cities witnessed declining local partisan newspapers. Separating politics from administration, therefore, not only improved state effectiveness but also weakened the role of local politics.

Privately issued money often bears default risk, which creates transaction frictions when used as a medium of exchange. The late 19th century US provides a unique context to evaluate the real effects of supplying a new type of money that is safe from default. We measure the local change in “monetary” transaction frictions with a market access approach derived from general equilibrium trade theory. Consistent with theories hypothesizing that lowering transaction frictions benefits the traded and inputs-intensive sectors, we find an increase in traded goods production, in the share of manufacturing output and employment, and in innovation.

Over the last decades, firms have been incorporating digital technologies into their operations, a process known as digitalization. Nevertheless, understanding the link between digitalization and firm performance remains challenging. We propose a new firm-level measure of digital intensity based on textual analysis of business descriptions and quarterly earnings calls. To overcome endogeneity, we use two quasi-natural experiments: the COVID-19 pandemic and shocks involving suppliers affected by U.S. natural disasters. Non-technological firms with higher pre-shock digital intensity experience higher abnormal returns, higher profitability, and higher revenue growth during the shocks. The supply chain is one of the areas through which digitalization contributes to significantly mitigate the effects of these shocks, thereby enhancing firm resilience.

We examine employee responses to CEO activism, the increasingly common practice of CEOs taking public stances on socio-political issues. CEO activism may bolster employees' identification with their organizations and strengthen shared beliefs among employees. Alternatively, CEO activism may alienate employees if CEO stances contrast with employees' ideologies. We find that employee satisfaction is higher when CEOs engage in activism that is aligned with employees’ ideologies. Furthermore, firms with CEO activism experience a net inflow of productive, ideologically-aligned inventors, which contributes to increased firm-level innovation. The improvements in employee satisfaction and innovation constitute an important channel that connects aligned CEO activism to increased firm value.

Visionary CEOs have strong beliefs about the right course of action for their firms. How should a board of directors that does not necessarily share the visionary CEO's confidence advise and monitor the CEO? We consider a model in which the board can acquire costly information about the firm's optimal strategic direction. The board not only advises the CEO on strategy, but also must approve it, and the CEO exerts effort to implement the strategy. We find that the board gathers less information when the CEO believes more strongly in his vision. Further, depending on the strength of the CEO's belief bias, the board either plays an advisory role, a monitoring role, or a rubberstamping role. The model predicts that in firms that are led by highly visionary CEOs, boards are passive in that they acquire little information and rubberstamp the visionary's proposal. Nevertheless, shareholders prefer the visionary over an unbiased manager in industries in which obtaining information about the correct course of action is difficult and costly.

We study the impact of an urban land titling program on firm investment in Shenzhen, China. We find that this program increased the investment rate for titling firms, but this positive effect only holds for politically connected firms. Further analysis suggests that the titling effect is more pronounced for those titling firms associated with greater expropriation risk. During program implementation, the connected titling firms increased their investment perhaps because, as observed, they experienced fewer disputes than non-connected titling firms.