Financial Intermediary Versus Production Approach to Efficiency of Marketing Distribution Systems and Organizational Structure of Insurance Companies

An examination of the efficiency of the marketing distribution channel and organizational structure for insurance companies is presented from a framework that views the insurer as a financial intermediary rather than as a “production entity” which produces “value added” through loss payments. Within this financial intermediary approach, solvency can be a primary concern for regulators of insurance companies, claims‐paying ability can be a primary concern for policyholders, and return on investment can be a primary concern for investors. These three variables (solvency, financial return, and claims‐paying ability) are considered as outputs of the insurance firm. The financial intermediary approach acknowledges that interests potentially conflict, and the strategic decision makers for the firm must balance one concern versus another when managing the insurance company. Accordingly, we investigate the efficiency of insurance companies using data envelopment analysis (DEA) having as insurer output an appropriately selected (for the firm under investigation) combination of solvency, claims‐paying ability, and return on investment as outputs. These efficiency evaluations are further examined to study stock versus mutual form of organizational structure and agency versus direct marketing arrangements, which are examined separately and in combination. Comparisons with the “value‐added” or “production” approach to insurer efficiency are presented. A new DEA approach and interpretation is also presented.     

Valuing Companies with Cash‐Flow@Risk

The classic DCF approach to capital budgeting—the one that MBA students in the world's top business schools have been taught for the last 30 years—begins with the assumption that the corporate investment decision is “independent of” the financing decision. That is, the value of a given investment opportunity should not be affected by how a company is financed, whether mainly with debt or with equity. A corollary of this capital structure “irrelevance” proposition says that a company's investment decision should also not be influenced by its risk management policy—by whether a company hedges its various price exposures or chooses to leave them unhedged. In this article, the authors—one of whom is the CFO of the French high‐tech firm Gemalto—propose a practical alternative to DCF that is based on a concept they call “cash‐flow@risk.” Implementation of the concept involves dividing expected future cash flow into two components: a low‐risk part, or “certainty equivalent,” and a high‐risk part. The two cash flow streams are discounted at different rates (corresponding to debt and equity) when estimating their value. The concept of cash‐flow@risk derives directly from, and is fully consistent with, the concept of economic capital that was developed by Robert Merton and Andre Perold in the early 1990s and that has become the basis of Value at Risk (or VaR) capital allocation systems now used at most financial institutions. But because the approach in this article focuses on the volatility of operating cash flows instead of asset values, the authors argue that an internal capital allocation system based on cash‐flow@risk is likely to be much more suitable than VaR for industrial companies.     

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.     

智能财务分析与诊断机器人的开发及实证检验——来自我国A股上市公司的经验证据

近年来,随着人工智能技术的发展,金融、财务、投资、审计与会计的智能化问题引起广泛关注。本文应用人工智能技术,依据财务分析的基本理论和方法,结合中国上市公司财务特征,率先尝试开发了"智能财务分析与诊断机器人",用于评价上市公司的综合财务绩效。该款智能机器人具有"速度快""智能化程度较高""专业能力较强""相对公正客观"和"实用性较强"五大特点。本文应用该款机器人设计了两个投资决策实验,个股和组合实验结果均表明该款智能机器人能有效地评价和区分上市公司的财务绩效类型。根据其输出的综合绩效,买入高绩效型股票或组合,或买入绩效成长型的股票或组合,具有显著的超额收益;买入高绩效型股票或组合,比买入绩效成长型的股票或组合,具有更高和更稳定的超额收益。可见,基于人工智能的财务分析与诊断机器人具有稳健和有效的择股能力。     

Economic growth potential creating a real put and the resulting valuation of the firm

What do innovative new firms in our dynamic economy do to the value of existing firms? Using Schumpeter’s creative destruction idea, we expand the valuation model to incorporate these dynamics. Our model shows that these dynamics should have a greater effect on smaller firms, those in closer to perfect product market competition and those with less financial market following, as they get less market feedback for warning of new competition. This additional consideration in valuation is named the “real put” as it is an optionagainst value. Simply stated, it is an amount subtracted from a firm’s market value of capitalized earnings, plus any growth potential (that might create destructive competition against other producers) to get its net value. Following Schumpeter, new entrepreneurs and larger firms that mimic existing entrepreneurs are the innovators of new products and services. They create the real put against value in their potential competitors. We empirically test this using Morningstar’s “moat” classification of firms. We find firms with “wider moats” meaning greater product market power have much lower delisting rates that indicate smaller puts against value being exercised. While we are not the first in finance to view Schumpeter’s ideas, this is the first paper to consider its direct effect on valuation.     

Playing to their strengths? Evidence that specialization in the private equity industry confers competitive advantage

The paper examines whether private equity (PE)-backed buyouts have higher post-buyout operating profitability than comparable companies as a result of the alleged superior governance mechanism of private equity (“The Jensen hypothesis”) and whether relative investment specialisation by industry or stage provides the PE firm with a competitive advantage over its peers (“The advantages-to-specialization hypotheses”). A sample of 122 UK buyouts over the period 1995–2002 and a matched sample of non-PE-backed UK companies are constructed to test the three hypotheses. We find that over the first 3 post-buyout years (i) operating profitability of PE-backed companies is greater than those of comparable companies by 4.5%, consistently with the Jensen hypothesis; (ii) industry specialization of PE firms adds 8.5% to this premium, consistently with the industry-specialization hypothesis; (iii) stage (buyout) specialization does not impact profitability but may provide a spur to growth, inconsistently with the stage-specialization hypothesis. Finally, initial profitability of the PE-backed company plays a major role in post-buyout profitability, suggesting that skill in investment selection and financial engineering techniques may be more important than managerial incentives in generating higher PE company performance.     

Can corporate governance deter management from manipulating earnings? Evidence from related-party sales transactions in China

This study investigates whether good governance structures help constrain management's opportunistic behaviors (in the form of transfer pricing manipulations) in one of the world's most dynamic economies. Our data are a unique sample of 266 companies listed on the Shanghai stock exchange that disclose gross profit ratios on related-party transactions. We find that firms with a board that has a higher percentage of independent directors or a lower percentage of “parent” directors (i.e., directors who are representatives of the parent companies of the listed firms), or have different people occupying the chair and CEO positions, or have financial experts on their audit committees, are less likely to engage in transfer pricing manipulations. Overall, our research findings reveal that the quality of corporate governance is important in deterring the use of manipulated transfer prices in related-party sales transactions.     

Defining groups of companies under the European Insolvency Regulation (recast): On the scope of EU group insolvency law

This article examines the general scope of application of the provisions on insolvency regarding members of a “group of companies”, as included in Chapter V of the European Insolvency Regulation (recast) (“Recast EIR”), in order to review whether that scope is appropriate to deal with the different group structures in which business may be conducted. With the definition for a “group of companies” playing a paramount role in determining the scope of these provisions, the article includes a thorough analysis of the current definition for a “group of companies” as included in the Recast EIR. Based upon a teleological approach, the article argues in favour of an independent, broad and flexible interpretation of “group of companies”, in order to include a large number of groups within the scope of the Recast EIR's provisions regarding group insolvencies.     

中国OFDI技术创新效应的传导机制——基于资本要素市场扭曲视角的分析

本文尝试构建一个中国OFDI(对外直接投资)技术创新效应传导机制理论框架,并对资本要素市场扭曲影响OFDI技术创新效应的作用机制和结果进行拓展分析。研究表明:近年来中国企业OFDI对技术创新具有正向效果,且OFDI企业可以通过从劳动密集型向资本密集型的转型升级、提高管理效率以及生产效率这三个重要途径实现其技术创新能力的跃升;现阶段中国资本要素市场扭曲现象会显著抑制企业OFDI技术创新效应,作用机制是,资本要素市场扭曲作为干扰外部摩擦因子,通过降低企业资本要素密集度和生产效率等渠道抑制企业OFDI技术创新效果。本文进一步提出构建知识产权金融化建议,包含知识产权股权化、知识产权证券化和知识产权流动性机制等内容,以此引导更多金融资源和人力资源参与企业技术创新活动。     

数字金融发展是否存在马太效应？——贫困户与非贫困户的经验比较

数字普惠金融发展是否存在马太效应,贫困户和非贫困户之间的收入不平等是否会因此而加剧值得深入研究。基于中国劳动力动态调查和北京大学数字普惠金融指数,从数字金融的覆盖广度和使用深度来考察数字金融发展是否存在马太效应及其作用机制。结果表明:贫困户可借助数字金融平滑生存型消费和积累发展型要素,但效果并不显著,而非贫困户在有效利用数字金融功能防范风险、平滑消费、积累要素的同时,还能休闲娱乐,数字金融发展的马太效应明显;不同数字金融产品的马太效应具有显著差异,数字征信的效应最大,数字信贷、数字支付次之;数字金融发展对不同收入差距类型的影响具有显著异质性,对经营性收入差距的影响最为明显。本文为研究数字普惠金融提供了新的视角,可为未来数字金融缩小收入差距政策的制定提供有益参考。     

The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Trend

Corporate Social Responsibility, or “CSR,” has recently become a subject of study by financial economists. While there is no shortage of anecdotal evidence to support all variety of positions, broad‐based statistical evidence about the CSR movement is in short supply. This article presents some new empirical evidence that aims to answer three related questions about CSR: First, are corporations increasing their “investment” in what is considered socially responsible behavior? Second, does corporate investment in social responsibility affect a company's financial performance and shareholder value? Third, why do companies invest in CSR: to increase shareholder value, or to uphold a “moral” commitment to non‐investor stakeholders and “society”? Using a social responsibility metric that measures the net CSR strengths (i.e., strengths less concerns) of each S&P 500 and Domini 400 company, the authors report that the average net CSR for both indexes decreased during the 15‐year period (1991‐2005) of the study—though the Domini 400, as might be expected, experienced a smaller decline. The authors also report that corporate strengths have increased, on average, but at a slower rate than the “concerns,” which suggests that corporate CSR efforts may be aimed at a moving target with steadily rising expectations and requirements. Second, the authors report that companies with more CSR strengths or fewer CSR weaknesses produced higher ROA over the same 15‐year period. The authors' findings here suggest a “circular” causality in which profitable companies are more likely to invest in CSR initiatives to begin with, but then find their performance further improved by such investment. Third, the authors' findings suggest that most companies devote resources to CSR initiatives as a means of maximizing long‐run value rather than out of a prior commitment to stakeholders. More specifically, the study shows that companies appear to invest more heavily to build CSR strengths than to eliminate CSR concerns. And as the authors conclude, this behavior is consistent with a strategy of using CSR as a form of “risk management” that promotes corporate strengths in order to limit the potential negative effects of—perhaps by diverting attention from—their weaknesses.     

中国OFDI技术创新效应的传导机制——基于资本要素市场扭曲视角的分析

本文尝试构建一个中国OFDI(对外直接投资)技术创新效应传导机制理论框架,并对资本要素市场扭曲影响OFDI技术创新效应的作用机制和结果进行拓展分析。研究表明:近年来中国企业OFDI对技术创新具有正向效果,且OFDI企业可以通过从劳动密集型向资本密集型的转型升级、提高管理效率以及生产效率这三个重要途径实现其技术创新能力的跃升;现阶段中国资本要素市场扭曲现象会显著抑制企业OFDI技术创新效应,作用机制是,资本要素市场扭曲作为干扰外部摩擦因子,通过降低企业资本要素密集度和生产效率等渠道抑制企业OFDI技术创新效果。本文进一步提出构建知识产权金融化建议,包含知识产权股权化、知识产权证券化和知识产权流动性机制等内容,以此引导更多金融资源和人力资源参与企业技术创新活动。     

Reward meritocracy or nepotism: The case of independent financial advisors appointed by Chinese listed companies

As independent financial advisors, securities firms are the core intermediaries in major asset reorganization (MAR) of listed companies. Furthermore, they play the dual roles of transaction and authentication. Based on this institutional background, this paper studies how listed companies choose between industry experience (“meritocracy”) and relationships (“nepotism”). Using the MAR of A-share listed companies from 2008 to 2013 as the sample, this paper shows that higher transaction costs (i.e., greater demand for the transaction function of advisors) are related to the higher possibility of advisors with weaker relationships and more industry experience being hired. It also shows that higher suspicion of tunneling (i.e., greater demand for the signal of fairness associated with advisors’ authentication function) is related to the higher possibility of advisors with weaker relationships being hired, but it is not significantly related to whether advisors have more or less industry experience. This paper also shows that reputation has a certain governance effect on the negative consequences of relationship. For the most part, listed companies reward meritocracy but not nepotism when appointing independent financial advisors.     

数字金融、家庭相对收入及脆弱性——兼论多维“鸿沟”的影响

数字金融发展是否有利于提升家庭相对收入并降低家庭脆弱性值得深入研究。基于宏微观匹配数据,本文从相对收入及脆弱性视角考察了数字金融的增收效应及其微观作用机理,并分析了多维“鸿沟”的影响。研究表明,数字金融发展,尤其是使用深度的提升,有利于提升家庭相对收入水平、降低脆弱性。微观作用机制在于,数字金融发展能够有效提升家庭金融可得性和使用性,并促进潜在投资行为和就业创业活动。进一步分析发现,数字金融发展虽然体现了普惠特征,但并未明显打破空间限制,对城镇等发达地区及具有数字设备、受过金融教育等家庭的相对收入及脆弱性展现出更强的作用;对贫困户、无数字设备等家庭的相对收入作用不显著,充分体现了破除多维“鸿沟”的紧迫性。本文为进一步优化数字金融缩小收入差距、降低家庭脆弱性的政策提供了参考。     

TO PURCHASE OR TO POOL: DOES IT MATTER?

The recent decision by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to eliminate pooling accounting for acquisitions raises several important questions: Does the choice of “purchase” or “pooling” affect firm valuations? How do differences in goodwill and its amortization affect cash flow and price/earnings multiples? How has the market reacted to purchase and pooling acquisition announcements? The authors' new research suggests that the market already judges mergers and acquisitions based on fundamental economics, not on GAAP earnings. In a study of 1,442 large acquisitions in the 1990s, the authors find that, in the first month after the announcement of pooled transactions, the acquirer's stock fell by an average of almost 4%. By contrast, the market reaction to purchase acquisitions was extremely favorable, with a 3% positive abnormal return in the first month. But what about the ongoing effect of goodwill amortization on values? In the second part of their two-part study, the authors report that the P/E multiples of acquirers reporting increases in goodwill amortization increase significantly following the acquisitions, and that the increases in P/E are large enough to offset the negative impact of goodwill amortization on earnings. Moreover, the authors also tested for and were unable to find any evidence of a market bias against balance sheet goodwill as an indicator of future amortization charges. The authors thus conclude that changes in accounting for acquisitions should not be a concern for acquirers, and that the elimination of pooling should have no lasting impact on corporate strategic decisions or M&A activity. Nevertheless, they do suggest that companies with significant goodwill would benefit from making their amortization transparent in their financial statements by, for example, breaking out amortization from depreciation on their income statements.     

The Role of Corporate Sustainability and Its Consistency on Firm Financial Performance: Canadian Evidence*

This paper investigates the impact of corporate sustainability and the consistency of corporate sustainability efforts on firm financial performance in Canada. Using data on 266 Canadian companies over the 2007–2017 period, we find a significantly positive association between corporate sustainability performance and firm financial performance. In addition, we find that companies that perform consistently well on sustainability (i.e., consistent performers) achieve better financial performance compared to inconsistent performers. Thus, far from their being net costs/expenses, our results indicate that corporate sustainability performance and consistency in sustainability performance both provide net benefits and significantly impact financial performance positively, implying that corporate sustainability not only helps address the needs of the current and future generations but also has a positive effect on the corporate bottom line. Taken together, our results suggest that not only does corporate sustainability have a positive effect on firm performance, but better financial performance may be achieved through a committed—rather than a “tokenism”—approach to corporate sustainability.     

An analysis of the literature on systemic financial risk: A survey

This article presents an analysis of the literature on systemic financial risk. To that end, we analyze and classify 266 articles that were published no later than September 2016 in the databases Scopus and Web of Knowledge; these articles were identified using the keywords “systemic risk”, “financial stability”, “financial”, “measure”, “indicator”, and “index”. They were evaluated based on 10 categories, namely, type of study, type of approach, object of study, method, spatial scope, temporal scope, context, focus, type of data used, and results. The analysis and classification of this literature made it possible to identify the remaining gaps in the literature on systemic risk; this contributes to a future research agenda on the topic. Moreover, the most influential articles in this field of research and the articles that compose the mainstream research on systemic financial risk were identified.     

HOW DO CFOs MAKE CAPITAL BUDGETING AND CAPITAL STRUCTURE DECISIONS?

This paper summarizes the findings of the authors' recent survey of 392 CFOs about the current practice of corporate finance, with main focus on the areas of capital budgeting and capital structure. The findings of the survey are predictable in some respects but surprising in others. For example, although the discounted cash flow method taught in our business schools is much more widely used as a project evaluation method than it was ten or 20 years ago, the popularity of the payback method continues despite shortcomings that have been pointed out for years. In setting capital structure policy, CFOs appear to place less emphasis on formal leverage targets that reflect the trade‐off between the costs and benefits of debt than on “informal” criteria such as credit ratings and financial flexibility. And despite the efforts of academics to demonstrate that EPS dilution per se should be irrelevant to stock valuation, avoiding dilution of EPS was the most cited reason for companies reluctance to issue equity. But despite such apparent contradictions between theory and practice, finance theory does seem to be gaining ground. For example, large companies were much more likely than their smaller counterparts to use DCF and NPV techniques, while small firms still tended to rely heavily on the payback criterion. And a majority of the CFOs of the large companies said they had “strict” or “somewhat strict” target debt ratios, whereas only a third of small firms claimed to have such targets. What does the future hold? On the one hand, the authors suggest that we are likely to see greater corporate acceptance of certain aspects of financial theory, including the use of real options techniques for evaluating corporate investments. But we are also likely to see further modifications and refinements of the theory, particularly with respect to smaller companies that have limited access to capital markets.     

Prestige,Promotion, and Pay

We develop a theory in which financial (and other professional services) firms design career structures to “sell” prestigious jobs to qualified candidates. Firms create less prestigious entry-level jobs, which serve as currency for employees to pay for the right to compete for the more prestigious jobs. In optimal career structures, entry-level employees (“associates”) compete for better-paid and more prestigious positions (“managing directors” or “partners”). The model provides new implications relating job prestige to compensation, employment, competition, and the size of the financial sector.