Why do firms delete brands? Insights from a qualitative study

Large consumer goods firms manage and market an assortment of brands and consistently deal with strategic challenges related to brand portfolio management, such as creating or acquiring brands, growing brand equity, managing brands in the portfolio and deleting brands. There is substantial research on several areas of brand portfolio management except in the area of brand deletion. This situation exists despite the fact that deleting weak brands has important implications for a firm and its brand portfolio. Therefore, it is critical to understand why firms delete brands from their portfolios. This research applies a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis in the context of firms that adopt a ‘house of brands’ brand architecture and presents findings guided by the strategic decision-making literature.     

Corporate Lobbying and Firm Performance

Corporate lobbying activities are designed to influence legislators, regulators and courts, presumably to encourage favorable policies and/or outcomes. In dollar terms, corporate lobbying expenditures are typically one or even two orders of magnitude larger than spending by Political Action Committees (PAC), and, unlike PAC donations, lobbying amounts are direct corporate expenditures. We use data made available by the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 to examine this more pervasive form of corporate political activity. We find that, on average, lobbying is positively related to accounting and market measures of financial performance. These results are robust across a number of empirical specifications. We also report market performance evidence using a portfolio approach. We find that portfolios of firms with the highest lobbying intensities significantly outperform their benchmarks in the three years following portfolio formation.     

Vertical alliance portfolios and the business performance of small technology-based firms

This paper discusses how small technology-based firms (STBFs) effectively manage vertical alliances by choosing proper alliance structures to both manage challenges and pursue higher performance. We consider the main challenges of STBFs’ vertical alliances as opportunistic risk and coordination concern between partners, and derive four types of vertical alliance portfolios with different extents of risk and return based on the relational perspective. We then examine the impact of each portfolio on performance and the moderating effect of STBFs’ age and technological capability. The results show the portfolio focusing on bilateral alliances is not helpful for STBFs, while the others are useful. The portfolio focusing on unilateral alliances promises young firms better performance, while hybrid portfolios of unilateral and bilateral alliances are more helpful for older STBFs. In hybrid portfolios, bilateral alliance in the upstream is beneficial to specific technology-focused firms, while bilateral alliance in the downstream is recommended to STBFs whose technology covers a wider range.     

Shortfall aversion

Shortfall aversion reflects the higher utility loss of spending cuts from a reference than the utility gain from similar spending increases. Inspired by Prospect Theory's loss aversion and the peak‐end rule, this paper posits a model of utility from spending scaled by past peak spending. In contrast to traditional models, which call for spending rates proportional to wealth, the optimal policy in this model implies a constant spending rate equal to the historical peak when wealth is relatively large. The spending rate increases when wealth reaches a model‐determined multiple of peak spending. In 1926–2015, shortfall‐averse spending is smooth and typically increasing.     

FX Intervention in the New Keynesian Model

We develop an open-economy New Keynesian Model with foreign exchange (FX) intervention in the presence of a financial accelerator and shocks to risk appetite in international capital markets. We obtain closed-form solutions for optimal monetary and FX intervention policies assuming the central bank cannot commit to future policies, and we compare the solution to that under policy commitment. We show how FX intervention can help reduce the volatility of the exchange rate, of inflation, and of the output gap, thus mitigating welfare losses associated with shocks in the international capital markets. We also show that, when the financial accelerator is strong, there is a risk of indeterminacy (self-fulfilling currency and inflation movements) although FX intervention can reduce this risk and thus reinforce the credibility of the inflation targeting regime. Model simulations match well the impact of a VIX shock obtained by local projections on a panel of inflation targeting emerging markets.     

Who should sell stocks?

Never selling stocks is optimal for investors with a long horizon and a realistic range of preference and market parameters, if relative risk aversion, investment opportunities, proportional transaction costs, and dividend yields are constant. Such investors should buy stocks when their portfolio weight is too low and otherwise hold them, letting dividends rebalance to cash over time rather than selling. With capital gains taxes, this policy outperforms both static buy‐and‐hold and dynamic rebalancing strategies that account for transaction costs. Selling stocks becomes optimal if either their target weight is low or intermediate consumption is substantial.     

Optimal rebalance rules for the constant proportion portfolio insurance strategy – Evidence from China

The constant proportion portfolio insurance (CPPI) strategy is one of the most popular asset allocation strategies employed by guaranteed-return financial products investors. Rebalance disciplines play an important role in determining the CPPI performance in practice. This paper examines whether the selection of rebalance rules affects CPPI strategy performance in the context of Chinese equity markets and, if so, in what pattern, and whether an optimal parameter of rebalance exists. We find that, (1) the three alternative rebalance disciplines – time discipline, market move discipline and lag discipline – are indifferent in affecting the performance of CPPI strategy; (2) in terms of optimal parameters of each rebalance rule, the optimal rebalancing period for the time discipline is 3 trading days, the optimal trading threshold of the market move discipline 4%, and the optimal lag factor of the lag discipline 6%. These optimal parameters are not influenced by the length of investment.     

The effect of investment and withdrawal horizons on myopic loss aversion

Using unique survey data, we find that a longer investment horizon (6–10 years and 11+ years) reduces the likelihood of exhibiting myopic loss aversion (MLA) compared to an investment horizon of less than 2 years. In addition, we find that investors with higher levels of assets under management (AUM) are less likely to exhibit MLA compared to the lowest AUM quartile.     

External corporate venturing modes as new way to develop dynamic capabilities

Today, firms encounter scarce resources and rapid technology change which render formerly successful business models obsolete. Research shows that some firms perform better than others in continuously discovering, evaluating, and exploiting opportunities in volatile environments and that this is dependent on firm’s dynamic capabilities. Besides obtaining dynamic capabilities through internal R&D activities, firms have open up their innovation process to pursue dynamic capabilities outside their organizational boundaries through external corporate venturing by accessing startup's technological capabilities necessary to innovate. External corporate venturing is a means to develop new distinctive capabilities and businesses by exploring and exploiting business opportunities outside a firm’s existing boundaries. Drawing on the dynamic capability literature, we use a multiple case study approach to examine the contribution of external corporate venturing to firms’ dynamic capabilities. Our results reveal that firms indeed use corporate venturing to identify and exploit startup’s technological knowledge and competencies to increase firm’s dynamic capabilities. But our empirical data also shows that not every firm is fully profiting from all dynamic capability phases as their corporate venturing modes are not linked with each other and cumulative effects are not realized.     

Underperformance of Actively Managed Portfolios: Some Behavioral Insights

Abstract

Two glaring anomalies in investment management are apparent: (1) after fees, active portfolio managers do worse than market indices, and (2) clients continue to pay for services they don’t receive. The purpose of this paper is to offer explanations of these anomalies from a behavioral perspective. We explore some of the cognitive biases that perpetuate active management and subsequent underperformance, including herding, disposition, and endowment effects, as well as conservatism and status quo biases, overconfidence, and agency problems. Investors’ continued use of active managers despite persistent disappointing returns is attributed to being victims of framing effect, hot-hand fallacy, lack of knowledge as well as intimidation or insecurity, and status quo bias. We propose some ways that portfolio managers and investors could improve their decision making.