No abstract

This study examines the impact of financial flexibility on the investment and performance of 1,068 East Asian firms over the period 1994-2006. We show that firms can attain financial flexibility, primarily through conservative leverage policies and less commonly by holding large cash balances. Financial flexibility appears to be an important determinant of investment and performance, mainly during the 1997-1998 crisis. In particular, firms that are financially flexible prior to the crisis (i) have a greater ability to take investment opportunities, (ii) rely much less on the availability of internal funds to invest, and (iii) perform better than less flexible firms during the crisis. Our analysis covering the post crisis period does reveal any important investment differentials between flexible and inflexible firms. Finally, we provide evidence that financial flexibility is more likely to play a decisive role in determining corporate investment and performance than traditional measures of financial constraints (e.g. firm size, dividend payout, firm age and business group affiliation) during abnormal periods of the economic cycle.

PurposePrior research shows that managers with lower ability release less accurate management earnings forecasts and have more earnings restatements, lower earnings persistence and lower quality accruals estimations. Yet, whether the impact of managerial ability (MA) on financial reporting can be extended to the narrative section of firms' financial disclosures needs to be theoretically and empirically examined. The authors theorize in this paper that managers with low ability opportunistically inflate the tone to increase outsiders' perceptions of their ability. The authors also examine the relation between MA and the informativeness of tone to predict future firm performance and explain investors' reaction at earnings announcement.Design/methodology/approachThe authors collect 24,000 earnings press releases of 1,149 distinct firms between 2004 and 2013. Content analysis is used to proxy the tone of the disclosures. The authors use the score developed by Demerjian et al. (2012) to measure MA. The authors then employ panel data regressions to examine the impact of MA on disclosure tone.FindingsThe authors find that low-ability managers inflate the disclosure tone to positively influence labor market's perceptions about their ability. This effect is magnified for younger and shorter-tenured managers, for firms with more intense monitoring and during bear markets. The authors also find that the tone of earnings press releases of low-ability managers results in a lower stock price reaction. Supplementary analyses show that the results do not only hold for the tone, but also can be extended to other linguistic features such as the numerical intensity and the readability of earnings press releases. The results are robust to alternative library specifications and other corporate disclosures such as CEO letters to shareholders or 10-K filings.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper shows that managers worry about how firm performance influences the labor market assessment of their ability. In particular, the authors find that managers of low ability are willing to opportunistically manipulate the content of corporate disclosures to improve this perception and build their reputation.Originality/valueThe authors contribute by providing theoretical and empirical evidence on how managers attempt to steer assessments of their ability by manipulating corporate disclosures. Consistent with prior business research suggesting that one's ability is a key feature that affects managers' propensity to engage in ethical practices, such as tax avoidance or manipulation of financial information, this study shows that less able managers tend to inflate the tone of the earnings announcements and that this ability-driven bias is likely to be magnified by career concerns.

No abstract

This article studies the financial reward for environmental performance of firms in the energy sector. Because of their substantial impact on environment, energy sector firms convey a particular status in the environmental-financial performance question, as compared with firms outside this sector. We use the environmental scores compiled by Kinder, Lyndenberg, and Domini Research and Analytics to construct two portfolios that differ in their environmental performance. We find that, between 2000 and 2011, energy sector firms with good environmental performance financially outperform energy sector firms with poor environmental performance. A portfolio strategy with a long (short) position in energy sector firms with good (poor) environmental performance generates an annual abnormal return of 9.624% after correcting for market, size, book-to-market and momentum risks. For firms outside the energy sector, the performance of the two portfolios is statistically insignificant. Using the VIX index, we also show that the market does not reward environmental performance of energy sector firms in periods of high financial uncertainty.