CEO overconfidence and labor investment efficiency

We examine the impact of CEO overconfidence on labor investment efficiency (LIE). The findings suggest that firms with overconfident CEOs are more likely to have lower LIE. The findings are robust to alternative measures of CEO overconfidence and LIE and after accounting for endogeneity and CEO experience, age, managerial ability, high tech industry, and economic recession. Further analysis shows that: i) our findings are not due to the relation between net hiring and contemporaneous non-labor investments and the difference between high- and low-skilled labor, ii) firms with more analyst following, financially constrained firms, and firms located in states with wrongful discharge laws force CEOs to invest more efficiently in labor. In contrast, firms with dominant CEOs or facing high economic policy uncertainty are less efficient in labor investments, iii) firms with overconfident CEOs exhibit higher labor cost stickiness than those of non-overconfident CEOs, and iv) a lower LIE caused by CEO overconfidence has negative impacts on a firm's future profitability.     

The blind power: Power-led CEO overconfidence and M&A decision making

The behavioral finance literature attributes failed M&As to CEO overconfidence. We investigate the source of CEO overconfidence that leads to failed M&As. Among various determinants of CEO overconfidence, we propose that power-led CEO overconfidence delivers undesirable consequences in corporate investments. Using CEO-level data, we find that CEO power increases the probability of a CEO being overconfident. We also show that power-led overconfident CEOs tend to complete more deals regardless of economic circumstances, do stock acquisitions, and make diversifying acquisitions, relative to non-overconfident CEOs. The results suggest that the findings of previous studies on M&As by overconfident CEOs could be driven by power-led overconfident CEOs.     

The effect of CEO compensation structure on the early internationalization of newly public firms

This study suggests the incentive perspective as an antecedent of early internationalization. We argue that early internationalization is a risky strategy for a CEO in a relatively young firm and that a potential agency problem arises between a CEO and shareholders in such a context. By drawing on agency theory, we theorize that the CEO compensation structure plays a critical role in the early internationalization decision. In a sample of 145 newly public U.S. firms, we find that the likelihood of early internationalization is negatively associated with the CEO’s secured cash pay and positively associated with the CEO’s equity-based compensation. In addition, we find that the positive association between equity-based compensation and the likelihood of early internationalization becomes stronger as the CEO’s tenure increases. These findings show that the interest alignment between a CEO and shareholders affects the strategic decision of early internationalization. Our study contributes to the literature on corporate governance and international business by underscoring the importance of the compensation structure as a significant driver of value-creating strategic initiatives and by identifying incentive factors that spur firms to internationalize early.     

Does organization capital matter? An analysis of the performance implications of CEO power

Chief executive officer (CEO) power reflects the ability of the CEO to influence the firm's decision-making. Whether the CEO of the firm could manage the firm’s investment assets to support maximizing the efficiency of resource allocation is an important issue. As previous studies found, organization capital is a key intangible asset that improves the firm’s production efficiency and affects long-term performance. This study explores how CEO power affects organization capital investments and how it further affects the efficiency of firm resource allocation. We use the following three variables to measure CEO power: CEO founder, CEO-only insider and CEO duality. Our results indicate that the level of CEO power can influence a firm’s value by controlling the organization capital. When the firm’s CEO is also the founder, the CEO will attempt to increase investments in organization capital to create growth opportunities for the firm, which will therefore increase the firm's value. Specifically, when the company is in financial distress, the powerful CEO's increasing in organizational capital investment will expose the company to greater risk of loss of intangible assets. This result may further increase the company's price volatility.     

CEO股票期权激励与并购决策关系研究——代理成本的中介作用和CEO过度自信的调节作用

运用美国上市银行1998—2014年的数据,将股票期权激励、代理成本、CEO过度自信与并购决策纳入统一的框架进行研究,以代理成本为中介变量,CEO过度自信为调节变量,以检验股票期权激励是否会影响并购决策,以及股票期权激励、代理成本、CEO过度自信与并购决策之间的关系。实证结果表明:CEO股票期权激励能够有效刺激其做出并购决策;代理成本对股票期权激励与并购决策的关系存在部分中介效应;CEO过度自信能显著调节股票期权激励与并购决策的关系;CEO过度自信对于股票期权激励与并购决策的关系的调节作用会通过代理成本起作用。     

CEO optimism,CEO selection,compensation, and corporate investment decision: The case of CEOs who were rehired as CEOs by another firms after turnover

What happens to CEOs after they are let go by their firm? This study is designed to investigate CEOs who are rehired as CEOs by another firms after turnover. CEOs defined as “moderately optimistic” and those who left voluntarily from their departing firms, are younger, have better prior performance, and work in larger firms are found to have a greater likelihood of being rehired as a CEO by another employer. Moreover, new-hire firms with higher growth opportunity and higher R&D expenditures are found to be significantly more willing to hire overconfident CEOs. Furthermore, more-optimistic CEOs are found to receive higher total compensation from their new-hire firms than CEOs who are less optimistic. Finally, overconfident CEOs working in firms with high growth opportunity and higher R&D show a significantly greater tendency toward increasing firm investment.     

Bank systemic risk and CEO overconfidence

This study examines the relationship between CEO overconfidence and banking systemic risk. We employ the CoVaR (Conditional Value-at-Risk) approach to measure a bank's contribution to systemic risk and compute its MES (Marginal Expected Shortfall) and SRISK (Systemic Risk index) to measure the exposure to banking systemic risk. We use a stock options based measure for CEO overconfidence and explore how managerial overconfidence could be associated with banking systemic risk. Using data for U.S. banks from 1995–2014, we find evidence that banks with overconfident CEOs have a higher contribution and exposure to systemic risk than banks with non-overconfident CEOs. We also show that the impact of CEO overconfidence contributed significantly more to systemic risk during the financial crisis of 2008–2009.     

How the CEO power and age dissimilarity shape the chair-CEO pay gap: Empirical evidence from China

Using data on China’s listed firms from 2009 to 2018, this paper investigates how the chair-CEO age dissimilarity and CEO power affect the chair-CEO pay gap from both managerial power theory and optimal contract theory. We find that CEO power and age dissimilarity have opposite effects on pay gap between the chairman and the CEO. And the cognitive conflict caused by age dissimilarity can effectively restrain the compensation-seeking behavior of CEO for non-performance compensation growth. More importantly, both the age difference and its sign have important value. When we consider age dissimilarity between the CEO and the entire board of directors, our hypotheses are still confirmed. Finally, we document that both CEO ability and co-working time between chairman and CEO could reduce the inhibition effect of age dissimilarity on compensation incentive from capability and relationship view. Overall, the results are beneficial to reform the top managers’ compensation incentive system and to improve the explicit and implicit supervision mechanisms.     

The impact of appointment-based CEO connectedness on firms’ performance and profitability

This paper investigates whether the performance variables of newly added intangible capital elements give the appointment relationship a deeper impact on the firms’ performance and profitability. We document that after correcting for endogeneity, when considering intangible capital, Total Q is a better proxy than Tobin’s Q for explaining the effect of appointment-based CEO connectedness on firm performance and profitability. Furthermore, we show that the influence of directors on company performance and profitability is more important than that of executives or managers. We also find that the stronger the appointment relationship, the worse the company’s performance and profitability. We further provide a series of alternative interpretations and robustness test evidence showing that intangible capital is more important for high technology and internet firms than industrial firms. Further, we find that the greater the number of executives appointed by the CEO, the better the firm’s research and development, but the worse the firm’s investment policy.     

海归人才有助于企业债务融资吗?——基于CEO权力视角的分析

本文以2008~2016年A股上市公司为样本,基于CEO权力视角,研究了CEO海外经历对企业债务融资成本的影响。研究发现,具备海外经历的CEO所在企业拥有更低的债务融资成本;当具有海外经历的CEO持有公司股权、在公司任职时间较长、具备较高的学历时,更能发挥对于公司债务融资成本的降低作用。本文的研究丰富了CEO海外经历对企业财务行为影响方面的研究,也为全面评估人才引进政策补充了经验证据。     

CEO and Outside Director Equity Compensation: Substitutes or Complements for Management Earnings Forecasts?

Abstract

This study examines how the equity compensation of chief executive officers (CEO) and that of outside directors affect management earnings forecasts (MFs) and the relationship between these two positions in terms of compensation. Our evidence reveals that CEO (director) equity compensation is positively associated with MF likelihood, frequency, and accuracy when director (CEO) equity compensation is not high. However, an increase in director (CEO) equity compensation is not effective in improving disclosure quality when the level of CEO (director) equity compensation is already high. These results suggest that the two incentive mechanisms act as substitutes when both are intensively used in the context of MF disclosure.     

The Effect of CEO Stock-Based Compensation on the Pricing of Future Earnings

This paper examines whether CEO stock-based compensation has an effect on the market’s ability to predict future earnings. When stock-based compensation motivates managers to share their private information with shareholders, it will expedite the pricing of future earnings in current stock prices. In contrast, when equity-compensated managers attempt to temporarily manipulate the stock price to maximize their own benefit rather than that of shareholders, the market may not fully anticipate future performance. We find that a CEO’s stock-based compensation strengthens the association between current returns and future earnings, indicating that more information about future earnings is reflected in current stock prices. In addition, we find that the positive effect is weaker for firms that have a high level of signed discretionary accruals or a low management forecast frequency. Overall, our study suggests that on average, equity-based compensation improves the informativeness of stock prices about future earnings, while opportunistic discretionary accruals or lowered earnings guidance hamper this improvement.     

“One person’s decision” or “collective voting”: Evidence of overconfident investing in Chinese listed companies

This study explores the collective voting of Chinese listed companies by examining whether the overconfidence of the board chairperson could affect the relationship between overconfidence and investment–cash flow sensitivity by the board of directors. On average, the board of directors’ overconfidence leads to increased investment–cash flow sensitivity. However, this influence is driven by state-controlled listed companies only if the chairperson is overconfident. The results suggest that the chairperson’s overconfidence may impact the relationship between the board of directors’ overconfidence and investment–cash flow sensitivity. Furthermore, the investment distortion due to the board’s overconfidence behavior may be alleviated by supervising the chairperson.     

The Value of CEO Mobility: Contextual Factors That Shape the Impact of Prior CEO Experience on Market Performance and CEO Compensation

This study examines the value that prior CEO experience has for the companies that hire such CEOs—as reflected in the firms’ subsequent market‐based performance—as well as its value for the CEO that possesses this experience—as reflected in his or her initial compensation. While we suggest that shareholders tend not to benefit from firms hiring experienced CEOs, we also argue that particular firm and industry contextual factors that shaped the prior CEO experience help ameliorate this detrimental effect. Regardless, we also suggest that prior CEO experience generally stands to benefit the CEOs, in that it brings them a compensation premium over those CEOs without such prior experience. We tested our hypotheses on a sample of 654 US CEO succession events that occurred between 2001 and 2004 and found broad support for our hypotheses. We close with a discussion of the implications of our findings for future research as well as what they mean for firms hiring experienced CEOs and for CEO careers more generally. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Liquidity,bank runs,and fire sales under local thinking

We examine the implications on banking crises when markets are populated by agents that neglect tail risks and form expectations conditioned on a favorable subset of possible states of the economy. We find that optimal bank liquidity is lower than would be the case under rational expectations, and, consequently, the banking system is more vulnerable to adverse shocks, which lead to bank runs. Asset pledgeability of surviving banks is also affected so that their capacity to raise external funds for purchasing assets of distressed banks is weakened. Further, we examine the case when asset returns are correlated through securitization. In this case adverse shocks are felt uniformly across the banking sector and banks that survive with the help of a public liquidity backstop will become risk-averse and reluctant to purchase distressed assets. Finally, we explore a government funded asset purchase program, that is implemented with an asset price target.     

How CEO narcissism affects earnings management behaviors

This study examined whether chief executive officers’ (CEOs) with narcissistic tendencies are more likely to execute earnings management behavior because of pressure to fulfill earnings thresholds. The results revealed that a CEO who exhibits high narcissism is more likely to be involved in earnings management to compensate for her/his performance. Our findings suggest that CEO narcissism directly influences financial decisions. Considering the earnings thresholds, firms with a more narcissistic CEO experience a regulatory effect on real earnings management behavior. Studies have indicated that CEOs manipulate earnings to satisfy three primary earnings thresholds: prior year’s reported earnings, zero earnings, and analysts’ forecasts. Our empirical results provide further evidence that CEOs engage in earnings management to fulfill positive earnings thresholds and analysts’ forecasts. We infer that CEOs use the abnormal production cost method as an underlying mechanism to increase reported earnings. Our findings help clarify the relationship between CEO personality traits and earnings manipulation to assist investors with decision-making.     

Doing good or choosing well? Corporate reputation,CEO reputation,and corporate financial performance

Using data from Taiwan’s top 150 listed companies over the period 2003 to 2014, our study explores the influence of CEO reputation and corporate reputation on the financial performance of companies. The analysis focuses especially on the interaction between CEO reputation and corporate reputation to identify which dimension of reputation is more relevant to firm performance. We show that, though both corporate reputation and CEO reputation have an individual impact that benefits the financial performance of the company, the impact of CEO reputation is more persistent across different time periods and more comprehensive across different industries. Furthermore, we find that CEO reputation still has a positive impact on firm performance when corporate reputation is poor, indicating that CEO reputation is more important to firm performance. To pursue better financial performance, should a company make greater effort to build a good corporate reputation, or merely recruit a CEO with a good reputation? Our suggestion here is simple: “choosing well” is better than “doing good.”     

The effects of corporate antitakeover provisions on long-term investment: empirical evidence

This paper's empirical results indicate that the average effect of antitakeover provisions on subsequent long‒term investment is negative. The interpretation of these results depends on whether one thinks that there was too much, too little, or just the right amount of long‒term investment prior to the antitakeover provision adoption. We use agency theory to devise more refined empirical tests of the effects of antitakeover provision adoption by managers in firms with different incentive and monitoring structures. Governance variables (e.g. percentage of outsiders on corporate boards, and separate CEO/chairperson positions) have an insignificant impact on subsequent long‒term investment behavior. However, consistent with agency theory predictions, managers in firms with better economic incentives (higher insider ownership) tend to cut subsequent long‒term investment less than managers in firms with less incentive alignment. Furthermore, managers in firms with greater external monitoring (due to higher institutional ownership) also tend to cut subsequent long‒term investment less than managers in firms with less external monitoring. Thus, the decrease in subsequent long‒term investment is significantly less for firms where the managers have greater incentives to act in shareholders' interests. Finally, there are interesting effects of the control variables. First, high book equity/market equity firms cut total long‒term investment more. Second, firms that were takeover targets or rumored to be takeover targets cut long‒term investment more. These results suggest that inefficient firms cut long‒term investment more when an antitakeover provision is adopted. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Riding off into the Sunset: Organizational Sensegiving,Shareholder Sensemaking,and Reactions to CEO Retirement

We test hypotheses derived from resource dependence and sensemaking/sensegiving theoretical lenses in the context of CEO succession, focusing on an under‐researched yet prevalent type of executive turnover – CEO retirement. Using event study methodology and a sample of CEO retirements from S&P 1500 firms during the 2003–12 period, we find that, all else equal, shareholders’ perceptions of organizations’ capacity to serve their interests are adversely affected when a retirement related change occurs in the leadership structure. Specifically, in line with resource dependence theory, we find that CEO retirement disclosures typically generate negative abnormal returns. Furthermore, in line with the sensemaking perspective, we find that the magnitude of shareholders’ reactions is contingent on the lexical sensegiving cues contained in the organizational narratives that are released to capital markets via executive retirement announcements. Overall, our theory and results point to CEO retirement events as consequential in the eyes of shareholders, challenging an important assumption of extant succession research. Moreover, they suggest that shareholders’ interpretation of these events is influenced by organizational sensegiving, highlighting the important role of organizational communication around succession events.     

The effects of formal and informal CEO power on debt policy persistence

We explore the general trends of debt policy persistence and how formal and informal CEO power may influence the persistence based on four dimensions of debt policy. Using a sample of Chinese listed firms during 2008–2018, we clearly identify, for the first time, that the general trends of debt policy persistence include an initial downward trend phase (of 4–5 years) and a subsequent stable trend phase. We divide CEO power into formal and informal CEO power and find that CEOs’ formal power can help to increase debt policy persistence, while the role of informal power is the opposite, providing evidence that CEO power has a double-edged effect on debt policy persistence. Further, our results show that the most important dimensions through which formal and informal CEO power have their respective effects are ownership power and financial expert power. Lastly, it is CEOs’ formal power rather than their informal power that plays a dominant role in promoting the persistence of debt policy.