Is Entrepreneurship Only About Entering A New Business

To most people entrepreneurship is solely about innovation and entering a new venture. For example, Hisrich and Peters (2002) define entrepreneurship as “the process of creating something new with value by devoting the necessary time and effort, assuming the accompanying financial, psychic, and social risks, and receiving the resulting rewards of monetary and personal satisfaction and independence.†According to Kuratko and Welsch (1994) “Many people now regard entrepreneurship as „pioneership? on the business frontier.†Bygrave (1994) begins with Schumpeter?s definition of an entrepreneur and continues to argue that only a few businesses would have the potential to fit Schumpeterian definition on entrepreneurship, destroying the existing economic order by introducing new product and services. Instead, he argues that “the vast majority of new businesses enter existing markets.†To him, an entrepreneur is “someone who perceives an opportunity and creates an organization to pursue it†and the entrepreneurship involves “all the functions, activities, and actions associated with perceiving opportunities and creating organizations to pursue them.†In all these discussions, exiting from a market is not considered as part of entrepreneurial activities

Sovereign Wealth Funds: An Exploratory Study of Their Behavior

Sovereign wealth funds have recently moved to the front and center of discussion, both within the investment world and the political arena. In this paper we evaluate the differences and common features of these funds. Utilizing an ownership database, we probe the ownership, geographic, and industry concentration of the funds deployed by these entities. We also compare and contrast the main features of two of the largest sovereign wealth funds

Models for valuation of corporate social responsibility

We develop valuation models that consider firms’ expenses on corporate social responsibility activities and show that, under certain circumstances, CSR expenditures create value for the firm. We also test our models by simulations and confirm that, with the variables we chose, being socially responsible would mostly pay off

How do shares of Canadian multinationals perform compared to those of their domestic counterparts

This paper investigates the impact of corporate international diversification on the shareholders of Canadian firms. The results indicate that, within the context of Canada, multinationals outperform their purely domestic counterparts. Specifically, we find that the shareholders of Canadian multinationals earn significantly higher abnormal returns. This holds true despite the finding that these shareholders are also exposed to a higher degree of systematic risk. Further, these results indicate that both the abnormal returns and the degree of systematic risk are increasing functions of the degree of international involvement

Comparing the performance of a managed portfolio to the performance of a benchmark portfolio

Decomposing excess return into asset allocation and security selection components is ambiguous when the return is expressed in terms of asset classes. We present two methods for eliminating this ambiguity

Random Cost Functions and Production Decisions

Cost Functions; Cost; Production

Corporate International Diversification: Evidence From Canada

This paper investigates the impact of corporate international diversification on the shareholders of Canadian firms. The results indicate that, within the context of Canada, multinationals outperform their purely domestic counterparts. Specifically, we find that the shareholders of Canadian multinationals earn significantly higher abnormal returns. This holds true despite the finding that these shareholders are also exposed to a higher degree of systematic risk. Further, these results indicate that both the abnormal returns and the degree of systematic risk are increasing functions of the degree of international involvement

Credit Risk Management: A Survey of Practices

Purpose – Proposes to investigate the current practices of credit risk management by the largest US-based financial institutions. Owing to the increasing variety in the types of counterparties and the ever-expanding variety in the forms of obligations, credit risk management has jumped to the forefront of risk management activities carried out by firms in the financial services industry. This study is designed to shed light on the current practices of these firms. Design/methodology/approach – A short questionnaire, containing seven questions, was mailed to each of the top 100 banking firms headquartered in the USA. Findings – It was found that identifying counterparty default risk is the single most-important purpose served by the credit risk models utilized. Close to half of the responding institutions utilize models that are also capable of dealing with counterparty migration risk. Surprisingly, only a minority of banks currently utilize either a proprietary or a vendor-marketed model for the management of their credit risk. Interestingly, those that utilize their own in-house model also utilize a vendor-marketed model. Not surprisingly, such models are more widely used for the management of non-traded credit loan portfolios than they are for the management of traded bonds. Originality/value – The results help one to understand the current practices of these firms. As such, they enable us to make inferences about the perceived importance of the risks. The paper is of particular value to the treasurers intending to better understand the current trends in credit risk management, and to academics intending to carry out research in the field

Sustainable Finance: A New Paradigm

We argue that our current approach to shareholder wealth maximization is no longer a valid guide to creation of sustainable wealth: An emphasis on short-term results has had the unintended consequence of forcing many firms to externalize their social and environmental costs. An unwavering faith in markets\u27 ability to efficiently uncover long-term value implications of short-term results has created many unacceptable outcomes. Given the social and environmental challenges ahead, such practices and their unacceptable outcomes cannot be sustained. Therefore, a shift in paradigm is called for. We propose a sustainable value creation framework, within which all social and environmental costs and benefits are to be explicitly accounted for