Pass‐Through and the Prediction of Merger Price Effects

We use Monte Carlo experiments to study how pass‐through can improve merger price predictions, focusing on the first order approximation (FOA) proposed in Jaffe and Weyl [ 2013 ]. FOA addresses the functional form misspecification that can exist in standard merger simulations. We find that the predictions of FOA are tightly distributed around the true price effects if pass‐through is precise, but that measurement error in pass‐through diminishes accuracy. As a comparison to FOA, we also study a methodology that uses pass‐through to select among functional forms for use in simulation. This alternative also increases accuracy relative to standard merger simulation and proves more robust to measurement error.     

The role of sense of community and motivation in the collaborative learning: an examination of the first-year design course

International Journal of Technology and Design Education - The demand for creating collaborative learning environments in technology education highlights the needs to enhance student collaborations...     

The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s

It is difficult to get a clear picture of the relative influence of management journals because previous studies have focused on a single sub‐area in the field over a relatively restricted number of years, and/or have used inconsistent criteria to judge journal influence. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine journal influence using citations from 28 journals over the past two decades. The findings show that the top seven journals accounted for 61 percent of all of the citations in the journals included, and that the three journals that showed the greatest increase in influence over the past 20 years were AMJ, AMR, and SMJ. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Double Deflation and the Measurement of Output and Productivity in UK Manufacturing 1979–89

The objective of this paper is to examine the impact of applying double deflation methods to the measurement of productivity growth in UK manufacturing between 1979 and 1989. A number of alternative indicators of output growth are considered and it is argued that double deflated value added is the superior concept to employ for the measurement of productivity. It is shown that output measured by double deflated value added fell by 0.05% over the period between 1979 and 1989 whereas the official series indicates that output rose by 12.2% over the period. Measuring productivity as output per person employed, the double deflated value added measure indicates that between 1979 and 1989productivity increased by 34%> whereas the official series indicates an increase of 51 %. Whereas the latter may indicate a productivity miracle the former does not     

PCAOB Inspections and the Differential Audit Quality Effect for Big 4 and Non–Big 4 US Auditors*

In this study, we investigate whether the increase in regulatory scrutiny epitomized by the initial PCAOB inspection impacted audit quality differentially for Big 4 and non–Big 4 auditors to better understand the consequences of PCAOB inspections for different audit firm types. Because of competing views on the effect of PCAOB inspections, the relation between PCAOB inspections and the audit quality differential between Big 4 and other auditors is an empirical issue. Empirically, we take the endogenous choice of auditor as a given and utilize a difference‐in‐differences specification that takes into account the staggered timing of the initial PCAOB inspection for different‐sized auditors in the United States. Our results suggest that the initial PCAOB inspection improved audit quality more for Big 4 auditors than for other annually inspected or triennially inspected non–Big 4 auditors. We also examine annually and triennially inspected non–Big 4 auditors separately, and find that the pre‐post Big 4/non–Big 4 differential audit quality effect is more pronounced for the triennially inspected non–Big 4 firms. In the larger context of the highly concentrated US audit market, our findings that PCAOB inspections accentuate the Big 4/non–Big 4 audit quality differential are of potential interest to public company audit clients contemplating an auditor change, investors interested in learning about the consequences of PCAOB inspections, regulators concerned about the Big 4 dominance of the US audit market, and academics investigating audit quality differences.     

Auditor Reporting and Regulatory Sanctions in the Broker‐Dealer Industry: From Self‐Regulation to PCAOB Oversight

The financial security of the investing public relies on high‐quality service by broker‐dealers (BDs), investors' gateway to the financial markets. The SEC has long required auditors to attest to BDs' internal controls and compliance with regulations (including those privately owned). Following the unraveling of the Madoff Ponzi scheme in 2008, the SEC required auditors of all BDs to register with the PCAOB, and Congressional initiatives signaled imminent transition from private (AICPA) to public (PCAOB) oversight. We investigate whether audit quality increased following this transition by measuring whether auditors report material internal control and compliance problems for BD clients where a deficiency presumably existed (i.e., BDs sanctioned by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority for transgressions against stakeholders). Overall, we do not find increased reporting quality following the regulatory shift but do observe variation by auditor group and BD ownership. While reporting quality for global network firms (GNFs) increases slightly, lower reporting quality observed prior to the regulatory shift for specialist audit firms (having large BD portfolios but small overall size) is exacerbated afterward. This finding complements results of PCAOB inspections and other research identifying audit quality problems among small, industry‐specialized firms in non‐public client settings. Focusing on deficiencies likely more difficult to detect, we find lower reporting quality for private relative to publicly affiliated BDs prior to PCAOB oversight, and lower reporting quality for very small audit firms relative to GNFs following the regulatory shift.     

A capital assets framework for appraising and building capacity for tourism development in aboriginal protected area gateway communities

Tourism may constitute an important livelihood option and conservation incentive for communities located near protected areas (PAs). Gateway communities can benefit significantly from the development of tourism through increased employment, financial gains, infrastructure creation, cultural revitalization, and environmental protection. Yet, tourism is not a panacea for PA communities and the development of a local tourism industry often fails to deliver significant economic, social, cultural, and environmental benefits. Clearly defined frameworks for maximizing the benefits from tourism development for PA communities are needed so that tourism can more directly support community development and conservation efforts. This paper presents a framework for appraising and building community capacity for tourism development in aboriginal protected area gateway communities. The framework was developed through the analysis of qualitative results from five different research projects around seven capital assets (i.e., natural, physical and built, financial, political and institutional, social, cultural, and human capitals). Preliminary results from application and testing of the framework are also explored. The framework presented herein has significant potential for broader application in non-aboriginal, international, and non-protected area communities.     

A Comparison of Approaches for Setting Standards for Technological Products

It is widely believed that setting industry-wide standards of uniformity for technological products hastens their diffusion. In this article, Barry Rosen, Steven Schnaars and David Shani examine whether standards merely make markets less competitive, or whether they promote economic growth through the accelerated diffusion of certain new products. The authors also examine conditions which are most conducive to setting standards and reflect on alternative approaches to achieving technical standards. Finally, they ask who should set industry standards? The article presents opposing arguments for allowing industry to cooperate in the setting of standards and for letting the marketplace be the ultimate arbiter of standards—acting to weed out the weak and promote the strongest technological entry.