Considering specific contextual differences (in laws, governance attributes, and CEO pay policies) found between the Anglo-American and the European corporate governance models and controlling for institutional attributes, ownership structures, and firm's features characterizing the two settings, we aim to explore if there is a link between CEO pay slice (CPS) and corporate social responsibility (CSR). We follow Bebchuk et al. (2011) to measure CPS. We consider sustainability indicators as proxy to capture CSR. Sustainability indicators are gathered from Global Reporting Initiative of sustainability standards (GRI's) report. Data cover the period 2010-2017 and consist of 1,440 U.S.-Canadian and Spanish-French firm-year observations. American and Canadian (Spanish and French) firms are considered as to refer to the Anglo-American (European) corporate governance model. Durbin-Wu-Hausman test is ruled to address endogeneity problem of dual variables and supports consistent null hypotheses of fixed effects model. Underthe agency theory's "bright side" paradigm, univariate and multivariate cross-country analysis supports that CPS is positively associated with firm's initiatives to engage in CSR and that sustainability is more pronounced under stronger investor protection, strict law enforcement, and higher corporate governance quality. Robustness checks reveal that (a) the deferred CPS-CSR causal effect seems higher for option-based compensation than that for stock-based compensation and (b) within the options (stocks) rewards, unvested options (restricted stocks) are the most effective to enhance firm's CSR practices.
Purpose -This paper attempts to investigate the relationships between the board of directors' characteristics and earnings management being a proxy of earnings quality in two separate countries, France and Canada. Specifically, it aims to investigate how certain contextual features affect differently earnings management behavior, and to reveal which factors are the most prominent incentives of management discretion in both cases. Design/methodology/approach -The paper uses a performance matched discretionary accruals (PMDA) measure as a proxy for earnings management. Three separate panel-regressions are then performed on a full sample, comprising a French sub-sample and a Canadian sub-sample, to detect board characteristics and institutional features' impacts on the PMDA. Regressions are based on a panel of 180 French and Canadian listed firms' data over the period 2006-2008. Findings -Evidence shows that CEO stock ownership, independent monitoring and institutional investor's property are strong earnings management determinants in both the French and Canadian frameworks. Nevertheless, leadership structure and board size seem to be neutral. Furthermore, French firms show specific earnings management incentives which are related to high ownership concentration, low equity widespread and high contractual debt costs. Dominant minority ownership and capital market forces are the key earnings management incentives in the Canadian context. These findings are robust to alternative sensitivity tests. Research limitations/implications -Even though the findings answer some questions, earnings management incentives are still to be decided. Future research could further highlight the impact of contractual, legal, cultural, ethical and political country-specific factors related to financial reporting. Originality/value -This paper investigates how an effective board of directors is able to provide a monitoring mechanism to ensure high quality of earnings. Moreover, it builds on cross-country variations in corporate governance features and contextual-specific factors to reveal earnings management behavior's incentives in two separate environments, namely French and Canadian ones. The underlying promise is that poor corporate governance (weak board monitoring), high ownership concentration, and intensive financial market forces create incentives that largely influence manager's willingness to report earnings that don't reflect a firm's true performance.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of board diversity on corporate social responsibility (CSR). The aim is twofold; does board diversity has any effect on CSR, do structural and demographic differences between one-tier and two-tier board models may impact this effect? Design/methodology/approach This paper applies a panel generalized method of moments estimator to a sample of 2,544 non-financial listed firms from 42 countries over the period of 2013–2017. Findings The findings reveal that board diversity leads to effective CSR. By distinguishing between diversity among boards from diversity within boards, the results display the effects of the specific variables that make up the manner and latter’s constructs within unitary and two-tier board structures. Specifically, this paper reveals that tenure, ideology and educational level (gender and nationality) predominantly appear to drive a firm’s CSR within one (two)-tier boards settings. These results remain consistent when robustness tests are ruled. Practical implications The study provides managers, investors and policymakers with knowledge about how among and within board diversity attributes favor the decision-making process around CSR. The evidence is useful for companies in setting the criteria to identify directors who can support their strategic decisions. It benefits, moreover, academics in better understanding firms’ CSR determinants and practices under different corporate board models. Social implications Examining how different sets of board diversity affect firms’ CSR given divergences between one-tier and two-tier board structure is a useful and informative endeavor for all community actors. Originality/value Unlike prior studies that identify the limited scope of diversity, the study is the first to examine the effect of broader dimensions of board diversity on CSR under both one-tier and two-tier board settings. This paper provides a contribution to a greater understanding of the impacts underlying board models and different attributes of board diversity on CSR. This new understanding will help to improve predictions of different features of board diversity impacts on decision-making processes around organizational outcomes.
PurposeThe optimal contracting view assumes that compensation arrangements should not reward performance upward that is beyond the management's control. Critics to this view assert, however that unearned compensation boom may be suggestive of pay for luck. Hence, the authors ask if CEOs' incentive pay is sensitive to lucky as to purely corporate performance. If such, one could question: Are CEOs rewarded for luck? Do institutional features matter for CEOs pay‐for‐luck? How does systematic incentive effect sensitive to luck's nature? Accepting the premises of both contacting and skimming agency's approaches, this paper aims to answer these questions.Design/methodology/approachGeneral and separate ordinary least squares (OLS) and instrumental variables (IV) estimations have been run to estimate the general sensitivity of CEOs' pay, respectively, to performance and luck. These estimations are based on a sample of 300 publicly traded firms covering four countries from the Anglo‐American and Euro‐Continental corporate governance models for the period 2004 to 2008.FindingsIn support of the paper's theorizing, it was found that CEOs pay to be positively related to outside contingencies as well as to shareholders' interests. Positive pay sensitivity to exogenous shocks, which we label systematic incentive effect, shows that management take advantage of lucky external events. Further analyses show, moreover, two stylized facts. First, this effect is asymmetric as executives are rewarded more for good luck than penalized for bad luck. Second, it is less generous under stronger corporate governance, higher investor rights protection, and stricter law enforcement rules. The latter institutional factors seem to be overwhelmingly influential variables in explaining the differences in such effect across countries.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper contributes to the CEO compensation research by: showing that a simple contracting view can mislead shareholders about the effective CEOs' skills and efforts; and filling the lack of consensus within the empirical literature as to whether pay for luck depends on institutional features such as the law enforcement level, the degree of investors' right protection, and the corporate governance system's quality.Originality/valueThe paper's findings offer insights to shareholders, pay consultants, and regulators about the effects that unobservable macroeconomic shocks can have towards the design and the efficiency of a CEO pay contract. The findings help, however, academics understanding the international pay gap's causes.
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether or not there is a link between CEO incentive-based compensation and earnings management and to examine how institutional environment's features influence such link. Design/methodology/approach – To test the predictions, the authors use a panel of 1,500 American, Canadian, British, and French firm-year observation over the period 2004-2008. Findings – The authors find a significant association between earnings management and CEO incentive-based compensation. Moreover, the analysis provides evidence that institutional factors are strong determinants of this association. Specifically, the results show that firms from countries within the Anglo-American corporate governance model, which provides greater protection of shareholder rights, ensures strict enforcement of law, and scores high on board oversight, tend to have lower level of earnings management. The analysis shows however, that beside the formal corporate governance quality, it is relevant to consider weaker shareholder protection and lower law enforcement indexes to explain earnings management in firms from countries within the Euro-Continental corporate governance model. Originality/value – This paper is the first to provide insights regarding the extent to which CEO incentive rewards imply management discretion and to indicate how much institutional features matter. The analysis contributes to two distinct strands of research. It extends prior research on the association between executive compensation and earnings management and adds to the literature demonstrating a relationship between institutional factors and financial decisions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.