Manuscript Type: EmpiricalResearch Question/Issue: The paper examines whether corporate governance differences affect firms' stock repurchasing behavior. Previous hypotheses on stock repurchases, well-supported by US data, are based on assumptions of managerial autonomy that might not be descriptive in corporate governance systems characterized by influential controlling shareholders such as the Swedish. Firm-level corporate governance arrangements may also affect firms' incentives to repurchase stock. Research Findings/Insights: Stock-repurchasing patterns among Swedish firms differ from those previously observed among US firms. The findings indicate that Swedish firms do not repurchase stock to distribute excess cash, signal undervaluation, or fend off takeovers. Stock repurchases are made in addition to dividends and thus do not substitute for them. Firm-level corporate governance arrangements directly affect stock repurchasing behavior. Firms without a dominant controlling owner seem to use stock repurchases to increase leverage. The existence of a dominant controlling shareholder diminishes the propensity for stock repurchases, while cross listing on a US or UK stock market increases that propensity. Theoretical/Academic Implications: The findings suggest that corporate governance differences affect stock repurchasing behavior. The agency-theoretical view of the firm, on which the leading hypotheses on stock repurchases are based, accurately predicts stock repurchases only in certain institutional and governance settings. Practitioner/Policy Implications: The study suggests that differences in national and firm-level corporate governance must be taken into account in order to accurately assess outcomes of regulatory reforms and/or harmonization attempts.
Purpose Arising societal issues challenge corporate social responsibility. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how corporations account for arising issues under different institutional settings: the stakeholder oriented corporate governance model of Germany is hypothesized to produce a different response than the more state dominated Swedish welfare model. Design/methodology/approach This paper takes the reported CSR response of the largest corporations in Germany and Sweden, in relation to the 2015 European refugee crisis, as its case. In total, 157 annual reports are investigated by means of text analysis for statements in relation to the European refugee crisis. Findings Empirically, German corporations are more prone to communicate on this emerging issue, and deploying corporate resources to an emerging societal crisis. Based on that finding, this study concludes that the German model is more in line with international CSR-discourse than the Swedish. Research limitations/implications This study has implications for institutional theory perspectives on CSR accounting-related issues. By comparing two economies that would be characterized as “coordinated market economies” a somewhat different set of topics becomes apparent. Further considering country context could be useful when expanding the debate on CSR accounting. Originality/value This study is the first to empirically investigate corporate diplomacy with regard to the European refugee crisis. Besides others, corporations are important societal players. Therefore, corporations bear both, the obligation to deal with arising issues and the potential to participate in public opinion-forming with regard to those issues.
Manuscript Type: EmpiricalResearch Question/Issue: This paper addresses the issue of whether controlling family shareholders are exposed to market control. The paper advances the theory that the expected performance of controlling shareholders, inferred from their track records, is constantly reflected in the market value of controlled firms. Research Findings/Insights: By using event-study methodology, we show that unexpected acts that are detrimental to minority shareholder interests performed by controlling family shareholders lead to short-term negative abnormal returns in firms that otherwise are completely unaffected by the detrimental acts, but are controlled by the same family-based business group. Theoretical/Academic Implications: The results shed new light on the significance of track records in corporate governance that have implications for research on informal corporate governance mechanisms, governance of family firms, and, possibly, comparative corporate governance. The results also have tentative implications for the understanding of the function of family-controlled business groups consisting of industrially unrelated firms by suggesting a function that has heretofore been neglected. Practitioner/Policy Implications: The results have implications for reform work in corporate governance by showing that practitioners and regulators must consider variability in non-legal corporate governance mechanisms when analyzing and attempting to change different national corporate governance systems to achieve desired effects.
The predominant approaches to comparative corporate governance view legal transfers dichotomously, seeing corporate governance systems as either converging or diverging as a result of legal reform. Drawing on legal studies, this paper proposes an alternative model using the metaphor of the staircase to conceptualize how legal transplants can meet different evaluation criteria before being considered ‘successful’. The model is empirically illustrated by the introduction of the Swedish Corporate Governance Code. It is found that different corporate governance rules when transplanted could be said to meet evaluation criteria more or less strictly. This finding has implications for our empirical and theoretical understanding of how corporate governance systems converge.
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.