Shareholder governance, bondholder governance, and managerial risk-taking

We examine the relation between the overall corporate governance structure and managerial risk-taking behavior. We find that the overall governance structure has a significant impact on how managers make decisions on investment policy: strong bondholder governance motivates more low-risk investments such as capital expenditure and lower high-risk investments such as R&D expenditures, whereas weak shareholder governance (entrenched managers) leads to more R&D expenditures. Moreover, we find that the effects of governance on investment policy differ significantly between speculative and investment-grade firms. For speculative firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to more capital expenditures and low R&D investments. For investment-grade firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to low capital expenditures and an insignificant impact on R&D investments. Furthermore, financing and investment covenants exhibit strong binding power to deter risky investments. Finally, a more dependent (or a less independent) board is associated with low capital expenditures and high R&D investments.     

Board diversity and corporate propensity to R&D spending

Drawing on collective contributions and group performance perspectives, this paper examines the role of board diversity in firms' R&D investment decisions. Building on a fault-line argument about a team's demographic attributes, this study also decomposes the impact of demographic and cognitive diversity on R&D spending. The study sample contains UK data of non-financial companies covering the period between 2005 and 2018. We employ panel data analysis techniques and control for potential endogeneity issues through the application of the two-step system Generalised Method of Moments (GMM) estimations. The findings demonstrate a positive and significant relationship between board diversity and level of corporate R&D spending. The findings also show cognitive diversity as significantly positively associated with corporate R&D investments. Demographic diversity, however, has an insignificant relationship with corporate spending on R&D. The results further show that demographic diversity negatively moderates the relationship between cognitive diversity and spending on R&D. Our main findings document that the board's attributes as a group significantly influence decisions of strategic importance such as, investment in R&D projects. The findings on sub-dimensions of board diversity imply that as compared to demographic diversity, functional/cognitive diversity is more relevant to strategic decisions and related outcomes. The study has practical implications for shareholders in documenting the importance of board diversity, and policy implications for regulators in highlighting the separate roles of behavioural and cognitive diversity in shaping firms' strategic investment decisions.     

Corporate governance and cash holdings: Evidence from worldwide board reforms

Using staggered board reforms as a quasi-natural experiment and a difference-in-differences approach, this study examines the impact of corporate governance on cash holdings in 41 countries. We find that board reforms are followed by significant reductions in cash holdings. This effect is more pronounced for firms with weaker pre-reform corporate governance and for firms from countries with weaker institutional environments. Analysis of cash spending suggests that, following board reforms, firms are more likely to use cash to increase R&D expenditures, dividend payouts, and share repurchases, but not to increase capital or acquisition expenditures. Finally, the results indicate that enhanced corporate governance following board reforms leads to higher (lower) cash (dividend payouts) values, consistent with the view that board reforms strengthen corporate governance.     

The Effects of Private Investments in Public Equity on R&D Investment in Small and Medium-Size Enterprises

This paper provides evidence that small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) use a portion of private investments in public equity (PIPEs) for current research and development (R&D) investment, hold the rest in liquidity reserves such as cash assets and working capital, and ultimately use these reserves to smooth R&D investment. That is, PIPEs may have a direct effect on R&D investment and an indirect or smoothing effect using liquidity reserves. This paper also shows that innovative SMEs such as venture businesses, inno-biz firms, and management innovative firms are more likely to use PIPEs for R&D investment than are noninnovative SMEs. The implications of this paper are that PIPEs can be used as an important source of external financing to fund R&D investment and can be particularly valuable for R&D investment in innovative SMEs.     

Employment protection legislation and R&D investment

This paper examines how employment protection legislation influences corporate R&D investment. With a sample of 113,228 observations across 23 OECD countries from 2001 to 2018, I document that firms in strong employment protection legislation have lower R&D expenditure and investment efficiency. In addition, I find that the effect of employment protection on R&D expenditure is stronger in financially constrained firms but the effect of employment protection on R&D investment efficiency is stronger in financially unconstrained firms.     

Corporate Governance and Its Impact on R&D Investment in Emerging Markets

Corporate R&D activities are inherently risky but also difficult to monitor. Against this background, we examine the impact of ownership concentration and legal shareholder rights protection on corporate R&D investments in emerging markets. Based on a comprehensive sample of publicly listed firms from 24 countries, we find that R&D intensity is lower in firms with (strategic) block ownership, and this effect is more pronounced in countries with stronger shareholder rights protection. This suggests that, similar to the situation in developed economies, dispersed ownership, which allows shareholders to diversify their investment risks, is beneficial for corporate R&D and that this effect is intensified by more developed institutions.     

Do board interlocks increase innovation? Evidence from a corporate governance reform in India

We examine the effect of board interlocks on patenting and R&D spending for publicly traded companies in India. We exploit a corporate governance reform to address the endogeneity of board interlocks through exogenous changes mandated by the reform requiring a subset of firms to adjust their board structure. We rely on two difference-in-differences frameworks, comparing firms affected by the reform to unaffected firms as well as comparing within the set of firms that did not have to adjust their board structure those that still experienced an exogenous increase of their network size as a result of the reform to those that did not experience a change in their network size. We find that board interlocks have significant positive effects on both R&D and patenting. The evidence suggests that the impact on R&D is induced by information transmission through interlocks. The effect on patenting is driven by firms extending patent protection by patenting inventions abroad that they have already patented in India.     

R&D investment and distress risk

This paper proposes that besides volatility, R&D can increase firms' distress risk through another channel. Unlike capital investment, R&D is more inflexible and subject to high adjustment costs. Moreover, R&D intensive firms face severe financial constraints and are more likely to suspend/discontinue R&D projects. Therefore, firms' distress risk increases with their R&D intensity. Using a large panel of US companies over the 1980 to 2011 period, I find a robust empirical relation between R&D and distress risk, primarily among financially constrained firms. Moreover, the effect of R&D on distress risk is magnified during economic downturns. I also find that firms that have been previously successful in R&D or firms with high analyst coverage can mitigate the relationship between R&D and distress risk.     

Equity compensation and the sensitivity of research and development to financial market frictions

When financial market frictions exist, executives may have to decide which investment activities to reduce when internal funds decrease. Expenditures on research and development (R&D) may be particularly vulnerable because of the long-term nature of innovative activity. We find that equity compensation is associated with lower levels of firm R&D expenditures. Rewarding executives to incur more risk has little effect on R&D expenditures, but rewarding executives for higher returns reduces R&D expenditures and makes R&D expenditures more sensitive to financial market frictions. In contrast, cash compensation reduces the sensitivity of R&D expenditures to financial market frictions.     

Cash flow uncertainty,financial constraints and R&D investment

Based on the data from Chinese listed companies of Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets between 2005 and 2016, we systematically examine the relationship between cash flow uncertainty and R&D investment, and further research the moderating effect of financial constraints on the association between the two. Our empirical results find that R&D investment decisions tend to be more conservative and cautious due to cash flow uncertainty, which is not conducive to innovation efficiency. Firms with higher cash flow uncertainty invest more cautiously in R&D innovation, whereas firms with lower cash flow invest more boldly in R&D innovation. Financial friction may exacerbate the negative impact of cash flow uncertainty on innovation activities. Strategic cash holding can help firms better deal with the risks caused by cash flow uncertainty. In provinces with high marketization, the market competition intensifies, resulting in more significant cash flow uncertainty.     

The effect of R&D on future returns and earnings forecasts

Prior studies attribute the future excess returns of research and development activity (R&D) firms to either compensation for increased risk or to mispricing. We suggest a third explanation and show that neither the level of R&D investment nor the change in R&D investment explains future returns. Rather, the positive future returns that prior studies attribute to R&D investment are actually due to the component of the R&D firm??s realized return that is unrelated to R&D investment but present in R&D firms. Our results suggest that the excess returns of R&D firms are part of the larger value/growth anomaly. In addition, we show that while future earnings are positively associated with current R&D, errors in earnings expectations by investors and analysts are not related to R&D investment.     

Style investing and firm innovation

We document that transient, dedicated and quasi-indexed institutional investors exhibit a high degree of within-group heterogeneity with respect to their investment styles (i.e., growth, value, and balanced). We find that growth institutional investors enhance firm innovation in terms of R&D expenditures, R&D intensity, quantity and quality of patents and patent radicalness while value institutional investors impede innovation. Balanced investors have no significant association with innovation. Findings are consistent with style investing literature that growth and value styles are substitutes. Using investment styles, we present evidence that reconcile literature’s mixed findings on how transient and dedicated investors affect R&D and innovation, and why quasi-indexed investors, the largest group among all investors, have an insignificant effect. We also show that the effect of institutional investors depends on the firm’s relative level of innovativeness.     

Peer effects in R&D investment based on interlock network: Evidence from China

Different from extant literature on peer effects within industries or locations, this study aims to investigate whether and why the R&D investment of a focal firm is influenced by that of interlocked peer firms. Using instruments based on intransitivity, we identify positive interlock-based peer effects in R&D investment. Firm-pair evidence corroborates the existence of peer effects by showing that interlocks render similar R&D policies and exogenous policy-induced fractures of interlocks lead to diverging R&D investments. Further analysis indicates that the interactive effects are more salient among firms with access to greater peer information and more severe information asymmetry, suggesting that peer effects are consistent with the information theory. Moreover, peers from different industries/places and focal firms with orientation to the differentiation strategy, embodying greater supply and demand of heterogeneous information, are associated with stronger peer effects. Finally, corporate patent outcomes and Tobin's Q positively react to peers' R&D investment, a sign that the interlock-based peer effects are beneficial to the performance of the focal firm.     

Auditor specialization in R&D and clients’ R&D investment-q sensitivity

While research and development (R&D) activities contribute to economic growth via technological innovations, they impose significant uncertainty and agency costs. In this study, we examine the governance role of R&D specialist auditors in affecting clients’ R&D investment decisions. Using a sample of U.S. firms during 2001–2016, we find that R&D specialist auditors’ clients make more efficient investments in the form of a higher R&D investment-q sensitivity. We also find that the reduction in discretionary adjustments of R&D expenses moderates the results. Further, when clients are audited by R&D specialists, their R&D investments are more closely linked to innovative output in subsequent years. Collectively, our results suggest that an auditor’s specialized knowledge induces clients to make better economic decisions.     

Venture capital investment and the performance of entrepreneurial firms: Evidence from China

We examine the contributions of venture capital investment to entrepreneurial firms in China. Based on a panel dataset of Chinese manufacturing firms, we investigate the performance and R&D activities of venture capital-backed (VC-backed) and non-VC-backed firms during the period 1998 to 2007. We explore whether VC-backed firms in China generally outperform their non-VC-backed counterparts, and if so, whether this outperformance is mainly attributed to the ex-ante screening or ex-post monitoring efforts of venture capitalists (VCs). We then determine whether the different types of VCs and investment approaches affect the ex-post monitoring efforts of VCs, and consequently, the performance and R&D activities of the VC-backed firms. Our analysis shows that VC-backed firms outperform non-VC-backed firms in terms of profitability, labor productivity, sales growth, and R&D investment. First, VCs select firms with higher profitability, labor productivity, and sales growth, as well as firms that invest more in R&D activities. Moreover, the differences in profitability and labor productivity are significantly magnified after VC entry. After receiving investment from VCs, firms on average achieve magnified higher ROS, ROE, and labor productivity compared to non-VC-backed firms. However, no evidence demonstrates the magnified improvement in sales growth or R&D investment of the VC-backed firms after the venture investment is made. We distinguish the screening and value added effects by using propensity score matching. We also use instrumental variables to determine whether the post-investment performance improvements of the firms are driven by the venture capital investment. Finally, we find different types of VCs and investment approaches affect the performance of the firms after the investment is made. Foreign VCs add more value to the firms they invest in compared to domestic VCs. Firms backed by syndicated investment perform better and invest more in R&D after the investment is made compared to those backed by non-syndicated investment and non-VC-backed firms.     

Legal shareholder protection and corporate R&D investment

This paper investigates the effects of shareholder protection law on corporate R&D investment. I find that the institutional protection of shareholder benefits reduces both underinvestment and overinvestment in R&D projects. Legal shareholder rights significantly increase R&D investment for firms that may underinvest, but reduce R&D for firms that may overinvest. Shareholder protection further enhances the growth of firms in R&D intensive industries, and promotes the economic growth of innovative countries. The results consistently show that enforcing stronger legal shareholder protection can help firms achieve an overall more efficient capital allocation to productive R&D investment.     

Corporate responsibility towards employees and innovation: Evidence from an emerging market

Against a background of rising labor costs and the need to build a harmonious labor–capital relationship in China, this paper focuses on non-pecuniary incentives for employees and discusses the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) towards employees on innovation performance. The empirical results show that CSR towards employees significantly promotes corporate innovation, and that this effect remains robust after accounting for alternative proxies and endogeneity issues. In addition, the positive effect of CSR towards employees on innovation is more significant for firms in high-tech industries, with high levels of R&D inputs and high valuation of employee collaboration. Further analysis indicates that CSR towards employees does not promote R&D investment, but does significantly improve innovation efficiency and the marginal output of R&D investment and reduces the turnover rate of management-level staff with production and R&D backgrounds, which is conducive to stability of the innovation team. In addition, this paper also finds that for companies with high R&D expenditures, CSR towards employees significantly eases the sensitivity between executive turnover and performance, which helps executives resist pressure arising from a decline in short-term performance. The findings of this paper have implications for improving labor–capital relations and enhancing firm innovation capabilities.     

Do major customers promote firms’ innovation?

This study examines whether and how a concentrated supply chain relationship affects a firm’s innovation decisions. Using data from Chinese listed firms in the manufacturing industry, we find that a concentrated customer base constrains a firm’s R&D investment, where a 1% increase in customer concentration is associated with a 0.011% decrease in R&D investment. To establish causality, we use the instrumental variable method, the reverse causality model, and the Granger causality test to re-examine the relationship and arrive at a consistent conclusion. Results from mechanism analysis suggest that a concentrated customer base constrains the internal fund availability and that the negative relationship between customer concentration and firms’ innovation is less pronounced for firms with more external financial support. Additional analysis reveals that the negative effect of customer concentration mainly affects R&D investment expenditure and that customer concentration also constrains innovation output in China. Overall, our paper reveals the dark side of close customer-supplier relationships and provides new insights into how supply chain relationships affect firms’ innovation decisions.     

Variety expansion,preference shocks,and financial intermediaries

We investigate the effect of lifetime uncertainty on economic growth by incorporating preference shocks into a variety-expansion model and comparing financial autarky and financial intermediaries. In this economy, long-term investment facilitates the promotion of R&D investment and the creation of new differentiated goods. Our results suggest that when risk aversion is high, an increase in number of differentiated goods slows down R&D investment through a decrease in the price index. Further, if the risk of early withdrawal and the liquidation cost of long-term investment are high, financial intermediaries have significant effects on the growth of variety.