Crafting a public image: An empirical study of the ethics of ghostwriting

Ghostwriting is viewed by some as a necessary element for crafting an effective public image. Defenders of ghostwriting see no ethical dilemma in the practice because the audience knows the speechgiver is not necessarily the speechwriter. Alernatively, those regarding ghostwriting as unethical view the practice as deceitful. This group argues that the audience does not recognize the employment of a speechwriter and thus a speechgiver relies on the words of another to fortify personal ethos. This article examines several positions regarding the ethics of ghostwriting and discusses an empirical study testing three major positions found in ghostwriting literature. Findings from the study indicate that respondents do recognize the use of speechwriters by certain individuals in certain circumstances.Linda A. Riley is a College Associate Professor in the Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration and Economics at New Mexico State University. She also serves as the Director of the Center for Economic Development Research and Assistance in the College of Business Administration and Economics.Stuart C. Brown is Assistant Professor of Rhetoric and Professional Communication in the English Department at New Mexico State University.     

Bringing the Future Forward: The Effect of Disclosure on the Returns-Earnings Relation

This paper studies how firm disclosure activity affects the relation between current annual stock returns, contemporaneous annual earnings and future earnings. Our results show that firms with relatively more informative disclosures "bring the future forward" so that current returns reflect more future earnings news. We also find that changes in disclosure activity are positively related to changes in the importance of future earnings news for current returns. These results suggest that a firm's disclosure activity reveals credible, relevant information not in current earnings, and that this information is incorporated into the current stock price.     

Risk and Market Segmentation in Financial Intermediaries' Returns

This study examines both the quantity and price of risk exposure for different segments of financial intermediaries. Overall, we find evidence of market segmentation in the U.S. financial services industry. Specifically, we find that securities firms, consistently over the sampling period 1974–1994, had the most market risk exposure with the lowest market risk premium. Banks' market risk fluctuated over the sampling period. Banks increased their market risk-taking after the shift in monetary target in October 1979 and the announcement of the risk-based capital requirements in July 1988. The banks' market risk became the highest and insignificantly different from securities firms'. The results are consistent with the moral hazard argument; that is, banks took on more risk to take advantage of government guarantees as their charter value declined. Banks were subject to relatively high interest rate risk premium. However, in response to increased interest rate volatility and decreased charter value after October 1979, banks (while they increased their market risk exposure) lowered their interest rate risk exposure to an insignificant level. The results suggest that the federal safety net may have been perceived by the market as covering only market risk but not interest rate risk. Overall, we find little evidence of interest rate risk exposure, suggesting the prevalence of hedging programs using interest rate derivatives. The interest rate risk premiums, unlike the risk exposure, differ across financial intermediaries.     

The Informational Efficiency of the Equity Market As Compared to the Syndicated Bank Loan Market

The loan market is a hybrid between a public and a private market, comprised of financial institutions with access to private information about borrowing firms. We test whether this is reflected in informationally efficient price formation in the loan market vis-a-vis the equity markets, and reject this private information hypothesis. We also reject a liquidity hypothesis which suggests that equity markets always lead loan markets, despite bank lenders' access to private information, because of greater liquidity in equity markets. We further test, and reject, an asymmetric price reaction hypothesis that states that loan returns are more sensitive to negative information whereas equity returns respond symmetrically to both positive and negative information. We find evidence most consistent with an integrated markets hypothesis that suggests that both the equity and syndicated bank loan markets are highly integrated such that information flows freely across markets. This is particularly true when the equity market makers are also loan syndicate members.      

Testing for Vertical Fiscal Externalities

The purpose of this paper is to design a test of whether the vertical external effects associated with tax base sharing among local and regional governments have become internalized via the intergovernmental transfer system. Such tests are important in the sense that the income tax rates chosen by different levels of government will generally be correlated, even if the resource allocation is optimal from society's point of view. By using panel data for the Swedish local and regional public sectors, the results imply that an increase in the regional income tax rate induces the municipalities in the region to decrease their income tax rates. In addition, we are able to reject the null hypothesis that the vertical external effects have become internalized.     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">Measuring the market response to going concern modifications: the importance of disclosure timing</Emphasis>

Auditor going concern modifications (GCMs) are intended to provide market participants with information related to financial distress, and prior research suggests that the disclosure of a GCM elicits a substantial negative market reaction from investors. In this study, we investigate the market reaction to GCMs in a contemporary disclosure regime and consider whether the observed market reaction is confounded by other material disclosures. We find that the majority of GCMs are issued concurrently with earnings announcements (EAs) and that EAs in the year of new GCMs elicit large negative cumulative abnormal returns (CARs). We also find that CARs surrounding GCMs are significantly more negative when GCMs are disclosed with EAs versus following EAs. We then evaluate whether GCMs convey distress that is incremental to EA disclosures by measuring i) the market reaction to GCMs disclosed following EAs, and ii) whether EA CARs are substantially more negative for companies disclosing GCMs with EAs as opposed to after EAs. In both cases, we find that the incremental market response to GCMs is statistically weak and much smaller in economic magnitude than is suggested by prior research. Finally, we find that management disclosures in EAs, rather than the presence of a GCM, appear to convey information that investors use to anticipate bankruptcy. Taken together, these findings suggest that GCMs are confounded by other significant disclosures and that the informational benefits of GCM reporting are significantly smaller than previously thought.     

Leadership succession planning for today’s digital transformation economy: Key factors to build for competency and innovation

Digital transformation is rapidly changing the competitive landscape and the war on talent for today’s organizations. As part of this economy, organizations and their HR units must continuously reevaluate leadership structures and practices that exploit core competencies while allowing for innovation (i.e., leadership ambidexterity) and incorporate big data with predictive analytics. In this vein, understanding how HR executives can create better solutions around this problem remains sparse. Specifically, what frameworks can HR executives apply to identify potential alignment failures in leadership succession planning in light of newer emerging markets? What internal decision-making traps need to be recognized? Finally, what specific forms of data and evidence must test these plans for relevance and recharge and renew the talent-to-strategy pipeline? In this article, we examine these questions by reviewing the gaps in the literature and identifying through our four-step model how organizations can incorporate ambidexterity-building as a leadership succession planning practice.