Corporate social responsibility and financial fraud: evidence from China

This paper investigates the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on corporate financial fraud in China. We find that CSR scores are negatively associated with fraudulent financial activities, suggesting that CSR firms are less likely to engage in financial fraud. The results also indicate that the negative relation is more significant for CSR performance than CSR disclosure. Additionally, we demonstrate that the negative effect of CSR is more pronounced for firms with voluntary CSR practices, continuous CSR engagements, financial pressure and internal control weaknesses. Overall, we find that CSR is an ethical behaviour that reduces financial misconduct.     

Politically Connected CEOs,Corporate Governance,and the Post‐IPO Performance of China's Partially Privatized Firms

The authors' study provides suggestive evidence of the negative effects of politically connected CEOs on the corporate performance and governance of publicly listed companies in China. Newly listed Chinese companies with politically connected CEOs are more likely to have boards that are populated by current or former government bureaucrats, and that generally exhibit low degrees of professionalism, as indicated by fewer directors with relevant professional backgrounds. At the same time, the operating and stock‐return performance of such firms has failed to match that of their politically unconnected counterparts. Thus, the authors' study provides more support for the argument that bureaucrats and politicians extract resources from listed SOEs under their control to fulfill objectives that are not consistent with firm value maximization. Expressed in more general terms, the main finding of the study is that the constraints on property rights faced by Chinese SOEs—namely the non‐transferability of state ownership and the right of the government to appoint CEOs—appear to have significantly negative effects on firm performance as well as board professionalism and governance. Removing these constraints will likely have to be a critical part of any future reforms that aim to improve the productivity of listed Chinese companies.     

Performance of State-Owned Enterprises During Public Elections: The Case of Korea

State-owned enterprises (SOEs) pursue multiple goals to maximize public welfare. Therefore, governments must evaluate both their economic efficiency and their social effectiveness. However, government performance evaluation (GPE) of SOEs may be affected by political motives. This paper investigates whether SOEs are fairly evaluated by governments during political events. Using Korean data, we find no significant relation between public elections (presidential and national assembly elections) and the financial performance of SOEs. However, the GPE scores of SOEs are significantly lower in years in which a public election is held than in other years. In addition, the GPE of SOEs can be an important determinant of whether or not to replace CEOs. This research sheds light on the political use of the GPE for SOEs.     

Corporate social responsibility: An umbrella or a puddle on a rainy day? Evidence surrounding corporate financial misconduct

We examine the way a fraudulent firm's pre‐ and post‐misconduct corporate social responsibility engagement is associated with its stock performance to investigate the reputational role of corporate social responsibility (CSR). In the short term, firms with good CSR performance suffer smaller market penalties upon the revelation of financial wrongdoing, supporting the buffer effect, as opposed to the backfire effect, of a good social image. We also find that the misbehaving firms’ post‐misconduct CSR efforts are negatively associated with delisting probabilities, and positively with stock returns. These findings support the argument that increasing post‐crisis CSR engagement can be an effective remedy for a damaged reputation.     

Powerful CEOs,cash bonus contracts and firm performance

We investigate whether powerful chief executive officers (CEOs) influence the conditions of their cash bonus contracts. Specifically, we examine (i) the association between CEO power and the proportion of ex-ante cash bonus to base salary (bonus ratio), (ii) the association between CEO power and the relative use of non-financial to financial performance targets in cash bonus contracts, and (iii) the performance consequences of incorporating non-financial targets in cash bonus contracts. Results show that powerful CEOs are associated with greater ex-ante bonus ratios and higher proportions of non-financial performance targets compared to less powerful CEOs. Furthermore, the use of quantitative and corporate social responsibility (CSR)-related non-financial performance targets is positively associated with subsequent firm performance, and the use of undefined non-financial performance targets is negatively associated with subsequent firm performance. These results are robust to alternative econometric specifications and variable definitions.     

How does corporate social responsibility affect financial performance,financial stability,and financial inclusion in the banking sector? Evidence from Pakistan

This paper examines the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on the financial performance, financial inclusion, and financial stability of the banking sector, focusing on annual data for 20 Pakistani commercial banks for the period 2008–2017. The results suggest that CSR, as well as age and size, has a positive impact on all three factors. However, high levels of leverage reduce financial inclusion and financial stability, while financial inclusion is also negatively associated with the tangibility of assets.     

Do corporate boards matter during the current financial crisis?

This study examines the impact of corporate boards on firm performance during the current financial crisis. Using buy-and-hold abnormal returns over the crisis to measure firm performance, we find that board independence, as traditionally defined, does not significantly affect firm performance. However, when we redefine independent directors as outside directors who are less connected with current CEOs, a measure we call strong independence, there is a positive and significant relationship between this measure and firm performance. Second, outside financial experts are important for firm performance. We find that the positive impact of outside financial experts on firm performance is more significant than that of strong independence. Overall, our results suggest that firm performance during a crisis is a function of firm-level differences in corporate boards.     

Social Capital,Trust, and Firm Performance: The Value of Corporate Social Responsibility during the Financial Crisis

During the 2008–2009 financial crisis, firms with high social capital, as measured by corporate social responsibility (CSR) intensity, had stock returns that were four to seven percentage points higher than firms with low social capital. High‐CSR firms also experienced higher profitability, growth, and sales per employee relative to low‐CSR firms, and they raised more debt. This evidence suggests that the trust between a firm and both its stakeholders and investors, built through investments in social capital, pays off when the overall level of trust in corporations and markets suffers a negative shock.     

Bank political connections and performance in China

We examine the effects of bank’s political connection on bank performance and risk in China. We use hand-collected information on CEOs’ professional background to identify their political affiliations, and find that banks whose CEOs have former government experiences have higher return on assets, lower default risk, and lower credit risk. Additionally, politically connected banks have disproportionally higher performance when the CEOs previous worked in the same city where the current bank’s headquarter locates, had past banking experiences, spend more on entertainment and travel costs, and have higher previous administrative rankings (e.g., at the provincial or state level). These results suggest that politically connected banks have better access to lending to politically connected firms, which are high yield assets and more likely to be bailed out when in distress. Our results offer a mechanism of political rent seeking, consistent with the institutional environment of China’s banking and political system.     

Corporate social responsibility overinvestment in mergers and acquisitions

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been advocated by scholars and practitioners whereas overinvestment in CSR can destroy value. This paper investigates how CSR overinvestment influences firm value in the context of mergers and acquisitions (M&As). Specifically, we examine the shareholder wealth and financial performance of firms who bid on targets with CSR overinvestment. The results suggest that firms purchasing CSR-overinvesting targets experience significant declining market reactions to the M&A announcements and deteriorating financial performance following the M&A transactions. We further show significant improvement in CSR ratings and CEO pay among acquirers purchasing CSR-overinvesting targets. Moreover, the adverse effects of CSR-overinvesting targets on M&A outcomes are more pronounced for the acquiring firms with weak corporate governance or with retiring CEOs. Our findings suggest that a firm makes a value-destroying M&A with a CSR-overinvesting target probably for the benefit of improved CSR and CEO gains. This study provides evidence for the agency view of CSR investment in the context of M&As.     

Social Capital,Trust, and Corporate Performance: How CSR Helped Companies During the Financial Crisis (and Why It Can Keep Helping Them)

The authors summarize the findings of their study, published recently in the Journal of Finance, that shows that CSR investments can help companies when they perhaps need it most—that is, during sharp downturns when overall trust in companies and markets declines. Companies with high‐CSR rankings experienced stock returns that were five to seven percentage points higher than their low‐CSR counterparts during the 2008–2009 financial crisis, and even larger excess returns during the Enron crisis of 2001–2003. High‐CSR companies during the crisis also reported better operating performance, higher growth, higher employee productivity, and greater access to debt markets—while continuing to generate higher shareholder returns as late as the end of 2013. Many of these operating improvements continued well into the post‐crisis period, though at more modest levels. As the authors view their findings, the ‘social capital’ built up by corporate CSR programs complements effective financial capital management in increasing shareholder wealth mainly by limiting companies' downside risk. CSR is seen as not only reducing systematic as well as firm‐specific risk, but as also providing protection against overall ‘loss of trust.’ The social capital created by CSR programs is said to provide a kind of insurance policy that pays off when investors and the overall economy face a severe crisis of confidence.     

Political connections,tax benefits and firm performance: Evidence from China

This paper investigates the different effects of political connections on the firm performance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and privately owned enterprises. Using data on Chinese listed firms from 1999 to 2007, we find that private firms with politically connected managers outperform those without such managers, whereas local SOEs with connected managers underperform those without such managers. Moreover, we find that private firms with politically connected managers enjoy tax benefits, whereas local SOEs with politically connected managers are prone to more severe over-investment problems. Our study reconciles the mixed findings of previous studies on the effect of political connections on firm performance.     

Governance and bank characteristics in the credit and sovereign debt crises – the impact of CEO power

The global financial sector recently suffered from two interrelated crises: the credit crisis and the sovereign debt crisis. A common question is whether the recent experience with the credit crisis has helped in dealing with the sovereign debt crisis. We study more specifically whether banks with powerful CEOs perform better or worse than other banks, and if there is any difference in this relationship between the two crises. Using unique hand-collected data for 378 large global banks, we find that CEO power has a significant positive relation to bank profitability and asset quality, but also to insolvency risk, during the sovereign debt crisis. Thus, strong CEOs do not appear to be detrimental to bank performance. Our results also support the idea that deposit insurance may have contributed to the credit crisis.     

Are red or blue companies more likely to go green? Politics and corporate social responsibility

Using the firm-level corporate social responsibility (CSR) ratings of Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini, we find that firms score higher on CSR when they have Democratic rather than Republican founders, CEOs, and directors, and when they are headquartered in Democratic rather than Republican-leaning states. Democratic-leaning firms spend $20 million more on CSR than Republican-leaning firms ($80 million more within the sample of S&P 500 firms), or roughly 10% of net income. We find no evidence that firms recover these expenditures through increased sales. Indeed, increases in firm CSR ratings are associated with negative future stock returns and declines in firm ROA, suggesting that any benefits to stakeholders from social responsibility come at the direct expense of firm value.     

Auditors' Response to Political Connections and Cronyism in Malaysia

This paper extends the literature on the role of political economy in financial reporting and auditing by testing two hypotheses. The first hypothesis predicts that there will be a greater increase in audit effort and audit fees for Malaysian firms with political connections, as a result of the Asian financial crisis, than for non‐politically connected firms because these firms have a higher risk of financial misstatements. The second hypothesis predicts that the audit fees of politically connected firms will decline when capital controls are introduced by the government as a ploy to financially assist politically connected firms to rebound from the crisis, and thus reduces the risk of financial misstatements. The results show that there is a greater increase in audit fees for firms with political connections than for non‐politically connected firms as a result of the Asian financial crisis. However, there is a decline in audit fees for politically connected firms after the capital controls are implemented.     

Mandatory CSR disclosure,monitoring and investment efficiency: evidence from China

This study investigates the effect of mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure on firms’ investment efficiency in China. Using the CSR regulation that mandates a group of listed firms to disclose stand‐alone CSR reports after 2008 as a natural experiment, we find that firms subject to the mandatory CSR regulation have decreased investment inefficiency subsequent to the mandate, especially in cases of overinvestment. This effect is more pronounced for firms with a control‐ownership wedge, state‐owned enterprises (SOEs), and firms having lower institutional ownership. Further analyses find that the reduction of overinvestment is much more significant in industries with high pollution and that the reduction in investment is not due to the CSR spending siphoning off capital used in other projects. We argue that mandatory corporate social responsibility disclosure improves monitoring over firms in China, especially when firms are characterised as having severe agency problems.     

Star CEOs or Political Connections? Evidence from China's Publicly Traded Firms

This paper studies China's “star CEOs” defined as members of the National People's Congress (NPC) or the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and “politically connected” CEOs who have previous government or military experience. We evaluate the effect of “star CEOs” and “politically connected” CEOs on firm performance and CEO compensation. We find that announcement date returns, CEO compensation and incentives are all higher in firms that appoint “star CEOs”. However, the mechanism explaining these various premiums is largely political connectedness of these star CEOs. Our study finds only modest evidence that star‐CEO status directly determines firm performance. Our analysis strongly suggests that compensation and performance premiums are mostly driven by CEO political connections, as opposed to CEO talent/star effects.     

Using corporate social responsibility performance to evaluate financial disclosure credibility

Due to the paucity of immediate and direct information about financial disclosure credibility, it is often difficult for investors to assess the credibility of financial disclosures (e.g. whether reported earnings are biased). Given this situation, the present study proposes and finds that investors use additional cues, such as information about corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance, to form overall impressions about management's honesty, credibility, and trustworthiness. Similar to other findings in the halo effect literature, we find that these overall impressions subsequently influence both investors' assessments of financial disclosure credibility and the prices they are willing to pay for a company's stock. The findings support the theoretical framework on financial disclosure credibility by (1) showing that management credibility is an important tool that investors use to assess disclosure credibility and (2) suggesting that management credibility is a multidimensional latent construct for which CSR performance can be one of several relevant indicators.     

Corporate social responsibility and CEO confidence

This study examines the relationship between firm corporate social responsibility (CSR) and CEO confidence. Research shows that CSR has a hedging feature. Research also shows that more confident CEOs underestimate firm risks, which, in turn, leads them to undertake relatively less hedging. Consistent with this, we find that CEO confidence is negatively related to the level of CSR. Closer analysis shows that this effect is stronger in the institutional aspects of CSR, such as community and workforce diversity, rather than in the technical aspects of CSR, such as corporate governance and product quality. Our results are robust to different competing explanations, including narcissism, which refers in this context to CEOs who engage in CSR to attract attention and alternative proxies for CSR and CEO confidence.     

Are CEOs judged on their companies' social reputation?

How consequential is social reputation for a CEO's career? We find that the CEOs of those firms with greater strengths (controversies) on corporate social responsibilities (CSR) are more (less) likely to serve on external boards, and they hold more (fewer) outside directorships. CEOs lose board seats after the media expose their companies in negative environmental and social news. More nuanced analyses show that workplace diversity and supply-chain human rights are most consequential among the social and environmental dimensions of CSR. Our study demonstrates that CEOs are judged on their companies' social reputation in the director labor market. Our results also suggest that social reputation plays an important role in promoting CSR.