Narratives in managers’ corporate finance decisions

This article uses the extended case method to explore senior executives’ corporate finance decisions. We quantified firm’s finance practices using a mail survey, and then – to resolve puzzles in managers’ decision processes – conducted face‐to‐face interviews with chief finance officers of large listed firms. The interviews identified six themes as consistent influences on finance decisions: pressures imposed by clienteles; constraints on resources; risk management; heuristics; real options; and sustainability. We conclude that managers are logical and rational in their decisions, but employ a wider range of criteria than assumed in conventional finance theories.     

How SmithKline Beecham makes better resource-allocation decisions

Major resource-allocation decisions are never easy. For a pharmaceuticals company like SmithKline Beecham, the problem is this: How do you make good decisions in a high-risk, technically complex business when the information you need to make those decisions comes largely from the project champions who are competing against one another for resources? In 1993, the company experimented with ways of depoliticizing the process and improving the quality of decision making. In most resource-allocation processes, project advocates develop a single plan of action and present it as the only viable approach. In SB's new process, the company found an effective way to get around the all-or-nothing thinking that only reinforces the project-champion culture. Project teams were required--and helped--to create meaningful alternatives to current development plans. What would they do with more money? With less? With none at all? In another important departure from common practice, SB separated the discussion of project alternatives from their financial evaluations. In doing so, SB was able to avoid the premature evaluations that kill both creativity and the opportunity to improve decision making. The new process at SB has allowed the organization to spend less time arguing about how to value its R&D projects and more time figuring out how to make them more valuable. In the end, the company learned that by tackling the soft issues around resource allocation--such as information quality, credibility, and trust--it had also addressed the hard ones: how much to invest and where to invest it.     

The joint influence of financial risk perception and risk tolerance on individual investment decision‐making

The increasing complexity of the investment environment has accelerated the need for better quality financial advice services. Central to quality advice is advisers’ accurate assessment of their clients’ risk characteristics. Typically a client's risk characteristic is assessed by measuring the client's risk tolerance but not risk perception. To assess whether this practice fails to fully capture the client's risk profile, we explore both risk tolerance and risk perception in the investment decision‐making context. Using Australian online survey data of financial adviser clients (n = 364), our results reveal that risk tolerance influences risky‐asset allocation directly and indirectly through risk perception. These results thus clarify the joint role of both risk constructs in the investment making decision and highlight the importance of assessing both in the provision of client financial advice services. Importantly, our results validate a new comprehensive risk perception measure applicable in the financial advice context.     

What you don't know about making decisions

Most executives think of decision making as a singular event that occurs at a particular point in time. In reality, though, decision making is a process fraught with power plays, politics, personal nuances, and institutional history. Leaders who recognize this make far better decisions than those who persevere in the fantasy that decisions are events they alone control. That said, some decision-making processes are far more effective than others. Most often, participants use an advocacy process, possibly the least productive way to get things done. They view decision making as a contest, arguing passionately for their preferred solutions, presenting information selectively, withholding relevant conflicting data so they can make a convincing case, and standing firm against opposition. Much more powerful is an inquiry process, in which people consider a variety of options and work together to discover the best solution. Moving from advocacy to inquiry requires careful attention to three critical factors: fostering constructive, rather than personal, conflict; making sure everyone knows that their viewpoints are given serious consideration even if they are not ultimately accepted; and knowing when to bring deliberations to a close. The authors discuss in detail strategies for moving from an advocacy to an inquiry process, as well as for fostering productive conflict, true consideration, and timely closure. And they offer a framework for assessing the effectiveness of your process while you're still in the middle of it. Decision making is a job that lies at the very heart of leadership and one that requires a genius for balance: the ability to embrace the divergence that may characterize early discussions and to forge the unity needed for effective implementation.     

Impact of intelligent decision aids on expert and novice decision-makers' judgments

Businesses have invested tremendous resources into intelligent decision aid development. A good match between user and aid may improve the expert decision‐maker's decision quality. However, novices may be prone to poorer decision‐making if intelligent decision aids are more expert than the user. The present paper provides an empirical test of the impact of decision aids on subjects with differential expertise levels. The results support the contention that intelligent decision aids aggravate bias in novices’ decision‐making but mitigate bias in experts’ decision‐making processes. Intelligent decision aids may be best viewed as complements to expert decision‐makers during complex problem analysis and resolution.     

Benchmarking Risk Management Within the International Water Utility Sector. Part I: Design of a Capability Maturity Methodology

Risk management in the water utility sector is becoming increasingly explicit. However, due to the novelty and complexity of the discipline, utilities are encountering difficulties in defining and institutionalising their risk management processes. In response, the authors have developed a sector specific capability maturity methodology for benchmarking and improving risk management. The research, conducted in consultation with water utility practitioners, has distilled risk management into a coherent, process‐based framework. We identified eleven risk management processes, and eight key attributes with characterise the extent to which these processes are defined, controlled and institutionalised. Implementation of the model should enable utilities to more effectively employ their portfolio of risk analysis techniques for optimal, credible and defensible decision making.     

Strategic Market Entry Project

Successful risk management is critical to top level decision makers in any organization, involving fundamental strategic policy and planning to identify and allocate scarce resources to projects or activities that generate sustainable competitive advantage and maximize available long‐term growth opportunities, or even survival. This article describes a flexible group project wherein students of risk management and insurance (RMI) may gain additional exposure and experience with applications of fundamental strategic management theory in the context of their particular RMI major coursework. The Project may be a useful tool in helping RMI students further develop their research and presentation skills, as well as enhance critical strategic decision making; exposure to cultural, regional or globalization issues; application of fundamental strategic management concepts; and knowledge of current events. While this Project was developed primarily for RMI students, students across business disciplines also may benefit from participation.     

The meta‐governance of risk and new technologies: GM crops and mobile telephones

The stylistic shift from government to governance in the regulation of risks associated with new technologies is often portrayed as an attempt to reach a deeper consensus over public controversies and to avoid future risk management failures. Stakeholder involvement in decision‐making through more inclusive and learning styles is seen as increasingly necessary in order to correct the steering deficit of the state, to rebuild trust in state institutions, and to obviate problems caused by uncertainty and different value perspectives in risk assessments. In this paper we scrutinise this model of risk and governance in the light of recent developments in the UK, focusing in particular on the regulation of genetically modified crops and mobile telecommunications technology. We conclude that the shift to governance is best understood in terms of the accommodative response of the state to a number of new challenges: primarily posed by the changing role of the private sector; by pressures on government to engender public trust in the face of shifting social values; and by the related difficulty in taking decisions with confidence and legitimacy. There is a perceived need within government for a more deliberative approach to regulation and standard‐setting, achieved by a creative combination of managed scientific order and the establishment of deliberative cooperative institutions. However the creation of deliberative mechanisms and institutions is not an easy passage, especially if it is accelerated by uncontrollable political events. Indeed, we caution against romantic interpretations of governance as indicating a uniform popular trend towards the democratisation of state decision‐making, despite the very real opportunities for reform that it affords. Rather, we suggest that a more plausible account is provided by seeing governance as a form of adaptive management necessitated by a series of interlocking economic and social changes, and responses to successive risk management crises.     

Reliability rating and reflective questioning: a case study of extended review on Australia's risk assessment of Bt cotton

The governance of emerging technologies is frequently constructed around risk assessment processes. However, when risk assessment as a decision‐making tool is applied to controversial fields such as genetic modification, stem cell research and nano‐scaled science and technology, inherent uncertainties and conflicting social values arise to challenge the adequacy of traditional approaches. In this paper, I propose a framework through which risk assessments may be exposed to a process of ‘extended review’, incorporating both natural and social science quality criteria and modes of reflection. I call this framework ‘Reliability Rating and Reflective Questioning’. The framework is developed through a detailed case study review of a particular risk assessment document. The case study risk assessment reviewed in this paper is that performed by an Australian governmental authority on the impact of genetically modified ‘Bt’ cotton on non‐target organisms. Through highlighting errors, misrepresentations, assumptions and embedded value judgements within the risk assessment document, I argue that the framework of ‘Reliability Rating and Reflective Questioning’ can serve as a useful tool for gauging and improving the quality of risk assessment, especially when used as a decision‐making tool for emerging technologies with high levels of uncertainty and strongly conflicting values.     

ESG Investing in Graham & Doddsville

The author describes how and why the world's best “business value investors” have long incorporated environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations into their investment decision‐making. As the main source of value in companies has increasingly shifted from tangible to intangible assets, many followers of Graham & Dodd have delivered exceptional investment results by taking an “earnings‐power” approach to identifying high‐quality businesses—businesses with enduring competitive advantages that are sustained through significant ongoing investment in their core capabilities and, increasingly, their important non‐investor “stakeholders.” While the ESG framework may be relatively new, it can be thought of as providing a lens through which to view the age‐old issue of “quality.” Graham & Dodd's 1934 classic guide to investing, Security Analysis, and Phil Fisher's 1958 bestseller, Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits, both identify a number of areas of analysis that would today be characterized as ESG. Regardless of whether they use the labels “E,” “S,” and “G,” investors who make judgments about earnings power and sustainable competitive advantage are routinely incorporating ESG considerations into their decision‐making. The challenge of assessing a company's sustainable competitive advantage requires analysis based on concepts such as customer franchise value, as well as intangibles like brands and intellectual property. For corporate managers communicating ESG priorities, and for investors analyzing ESG issues, the key is to focus on their relevance to the business. In this sense, corporate reporting on sustainability issues should be viewed as analogous to and an integral part of financial reporting, with a management focus on materiality and relevance (while avoiding a “promotional” approach) that is critical to credibility.     

The Role of Visual Attention in the Managerial Judgment of Balanced‐Scorecard Performance Evaluation: Insights from Using an Eye‐Tracking Device

This paper investigates the role of visual attention in managerial judgments during balanced‐scorecard performance evaluations. Using the Locarna eye tracker to establish the amount of time managers spent focused on visual cues, we found that managers who look more at strategically linked performance measures are more likely to make decisions consistent with the achievement of their subordinates’ strategic objectives. When aware of strategy, managers focused more on strategically linked performance measures than on nonlinked measures. The presentation format of the strategy information did not significantly affect this focus. Our findings indicate that awareness of strategically linked performance measures, but not their presentation, appears to be important in helping managers to make better decisions. This study contributes to the management accounting literature by generating useful insights into the impact of visual attention on judgments and decision‐making processes.     

DO STRATEGY AND MANAGEMENT MATTER IN MUNICIPAL ORGANISATIONS?

In Sweden, a large share of public services are organised, produced and delivered by municipalities, large and small, rich and poor. Contextual conditions (size and location) and economic conditions (efficiency and wealth) differ considerably among these service‐providing organisations. The question raised in this paper is whether a municipality's economic situation is a direct consequence of the contextual situation or the organisation's strategy and management – that is: Do strategy and management matter? Our analysis rests on a resource‐based view of organisation strategy. Both quantitative and qualitative observations have been made. First, cost savings data from 50 municipalities were examined for patterns and relationships between contextual and economic conditions. Second, about 100 representatives – municipal executive board members and leading officials – from 20 municipalities with different characteristics were interviewed. In this paper we outline an analytical framework and propose that sound and sustainable provision of municipal service depends on whether organisational decision‐making is in harmony with work methods and objectives. The results indicate that strategy and management do matter. Among the municipalities included in our study, we identify four prevalent basic strategies. Strategy tends to coincide with the economic situation rather than the contextual situation. A low‐performing municipality tends to have a predominantly outward orientation in its decision‐making, whereas a higher‐performing municipality makes decisions with both inward and outward orientation.     

Emotion,affect, and risk communication with older adults: challenges and opportunities

Recent research suggests that emotion, affect, and cognition play important roles in risk perception and that their roles in judgment and decision‐making processes may change over the lifespan. This paper discusses how emotion and affect might help or hinder risk communication with older adults. Currently, there are few guidelines for developing effective risk messages for the world's aging population, despite the array of complex risk decisions that come with increasing age and the importance of maintaining good decision making in later life. Age‐related declines in cognitive abilities such as memory and processing speed, increased reliance on automatic processes, and adaptive motivational shifts toward focusing more on affective (especially positive) information mean that older and younger adults may respond differently to risk messages. Implications for specific risk information formats (probabilities, frequencies, visual displays, and narratives) are discussed and directions for future research are highlighted.     

How well-run boards make decisions

In the aftermath of seismic debacles like those that toppled Enron and WorldCom, corporate boards have been shaken up and made over. More directors are independent these days, for instance, and corporations now disclose directors' salaries and committee members' names. Research shows that most of the changes are having a positive effect on companies' performance. They are primarily structural, though, and don't go to the heart of a board's work: making the choices that shape a firm's future. Which decisions boards own and how those calls are made are largely hidden from the public. As a result, boards are often unable to learn from the best governance practices of their counterparts at other companies. This article pulls back the curtain and provides an inside look. Drawing on interviews with board members and executives at 31 companies, along with a close examination of three boardroom decisions, the author identifies several formal processes that can help companies improve their decision making: creating calendars that specify when the board and the standing committees will consider key items; drafting charters that define the decisions committees are responsible for; and developing decision protocols that divvy up responsibilities between directors and executives. The author also identifies a number of informal decision-making principles: Items that are strategically significant and touch on the firm's core values should go to the board. Large decisions should be divided into small pieces, so the board can devote sufficient attention to each one. Directors must remain vigilant to ensure that their decisions are effectively implemented. The CEO and either the nonexecutive chair or the lead director should engage in ongoing dialogue regarding which decisions to take to the full board and when. And directors should challenge assumptions before making yes-or-no decisions on management proposals.     

Integrating Systemic Risk into Modern Portfolio Theory and Practice

Conventional wisdom holds that the performance of investment managers should be measured against some broad market index such as the S&P 500. The broad market averages provide a useful benchmark because they are assumed to be beyond the influence of investment managers and provide a way of capturing what financial economists call “systematic risk,” which is the part of total risk that cannot be avoided through portfolio diversification. But one clear limitation of such an approach to performance evaluation is that by focusing on risks and rewards at the portfolio level only, it fails to consider risks and rewards at a systemic level, where the performance of all portfolios is increasingly likely to be affected. The author begins by making the case that the performance evaluation and collective decision‐making of investment managers could have the effect of increasing the level of systematic risk in both the markets and the real economy. Then, after suggesting that the strength or weakness of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) frameworks can have substantial effects on overall market returns, he discusses a number of efforts currently underway to integrate ESG factors into portfolio‐level decision‐making. The author closes by urging asset owners to take the following three steps to help bridge the gap between investment decision‐making and ESG consequences: (1) acknowledge the connection between investment decision‐making and systems‐level risks and rewards; (2) determine which systemic frameworks are most appropriate and useful for their purposes; and (3) implement investment practices that allow them to manage systemic‐level risks and rewards while simultaneously achieving competitive financial returns in their portfolios. With the help of new measurement and management tools, asset owners can strengthen systemic frameworks, communicate the importance of ESG performance to their investees and investors, and align their efforts with those of governmental and non‐governmental organizations to limit systemic risk.     

Bank loan loss provision decisions: Empirical analysis of Taiwanese banks

By adopting the stochastic frontier model, this study follows Anandarajan, Hasan, and Lozano-Vivas (2005) and examines the efficiency frontier of the Loan Loss Provision (LLP) model in the Taiwanese banking industry during the period 1997–2004. The determinants of the inefficiency LLP are also analyzed. The main results are as follows. (i) The overall efficiency LLP index was 0.3282, indicating 67.18 per cent inefficiency of LLP decision making, similar to one major finding of the study by Anandarajan et al (2005), which suggests that inefficiency does exist for the LLP decision making. (ii) The LLP estimator is significantly and positively correlated with default loan loss. (iii) Large firms are generally subject to an especially close scrutiny by financial analysts and are thus highly motivated to maintain their credibility. In addition, they are more financially transparent relative to small firms and are more efficient in LLP decision making. (iv) Banks with higher non-interest expenses are inclined to manage LLP inefficiently.     

The Impact of Ambiguity on Managerial Investment and Cash Holdings

Standard finance theory suggests that managers invest in projects that, in expectation, produce returns that justify the use of capital. An underlying assumption is that managers have the information necessary to understand the distributional properties of the pay‐offs underlying the decision. This paper examines firm investment behavior when managers are likely to find it more challenging to develop expectations of pay‐offs, namely during periods of increased macroeconomic ambiguity. In particular, we examine how macroeconomic ambiguity – proxied by the variance premium (Drechsler, 2010 ) and the dispersion in forecasts of corporate profits from the Survey of Professional Forecasters (Anderson et al., 2009 ) – impacts managerial capital investment and cash holdings. Consistent with ambiguity theory, we find that macroeconomic ambiguity is negatively associated with capital investment and positively associated with cash holdings. These results are robust to alternative explanations related to risk, investor sentiment and economic conditions. Moreover, consistent with recent theoretical real options literature, we find that ambiguity reduces the value of investment opportunities, while risk increases the value of such opportunities. Overall, these findings provide initial empirical evidence on the economic distinction between ambiguity and risk with respect to managerial investment and cash holdings.     

Learning to organise risk management in organisations: what future for enterprise risk management?

This paper identifies recurring issues in the regulation of new technologies through an historical review of the risk management of automobiles in the 1800s. Parallels are drawn between the regulation of early automobiles and that of the regulation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UASs) today. It is found that many of the regulatory challenges facing UASs are analogous to those which faced the automobile industry more than a century and half ago and that the need for informed and objective decision making in policy development is reinforced. A systems engineering approach, based on general systems theory and decision‐based design principles, is then proposed as a means for improving the objectivity, transparency and rationality in the risk management decision making process. An example risk management decision making scenario is given within the context of a small UAS operating over a populated area. The results obtained from this case study illustrate how even simple analysis can support the decision making process and highlights some of the potential challenges in the regulatory approach currently applied to UASs.     

Ethical assessment in radioactive waste management: a proposed reflective equilibrium‐based deliberative approach

Radioactive waste management facility siting has often been surrounded by political controversy. By attempting to overcome accusations of technocracy, radioactive waste management organisations are reframing the problem in terms of socio‐technical issues requiring the integrative assessment of complex scientific, political and ethical issues and establishing analytic‐deliberative decision‐making processes involving public and stakeholder involvement. One important aspect of a publicly supportable radioactive waste management strategy is that adequate ethical assessment is incorporated throughout the process. There are, however, certain incompatibilities between pluralistic public and stakeholder‐led engagement processes and the types of ethical justification stemming from normative ethical theory and the input of ethical expertise. An evaluation of previous work on ethics by the UK Committee on Radioactive Waste Management highlights some of the pitfalls of utilising these types of ‘top‐down’ inputs in a primarily ‘bottom‐up’ decision‐making process. This paper then proposes the development of a new approach inspired by John Rawls's concept of ‘reflective equilibrium’, to better bridge the divide between pluralistic analytic‐deliberative decision‐making and ethical assessment.