An empirical investigation of the influence of collaboration in Finance on article impact

We investigate the impact of collaborative research in academic Finance literature to find out whether and to what extent collaboration leads to higher impact articles (6,667 articles across 2001-2007 extracted from the Web of Science). Using the top 5 % as ranked by the 4-year citation counts following publication, we also follow related secondary research questions such as the relationships between article impact and author impact; collaboration and average author impact of an article; and, the nature of geographic collaboration. Key findings indicate: collaboration does lead to articles of higher impact but there is no significant marginal value for collaboration beyond three authors; high impact articles are not monopolized by high impact authors; collaboration and the average author impact of high-impact articles are positively associated, where collaborative articles have a higher mean author impact in comparison to single-author articles; and collaboration among the authors of high impact articles is mostly cross-institutional

Bank Structure Conference Impact Study

Banking, Financial structure, Bank regulation, Impact study, G20, G28,

An empirical analysis of corporate takeover defences and earnings management: evidence from the US

This study explores the impact of corporate takeover defences on the extent of earnings management in the US. Theoretically, it is not obvious whether takeover defences alleviate or exacerbate earnings management. Four well-known corporate takeover defences are examimed: blank check preferred stock, poison pills, classified boards and dual class stock. In spite of their similarity as takeover defences, the empirical evidence indicates that they do not influence the degree of earnings management in the same way. Specifically, blank check preferred stock does not have a significant impact on earnings management. Poison pills and classified boards are found to reduce earnings management, on average, by 1.9% and 1.5% respectively. On the contrary, dual class stock exacerbates earnings management by increasing the degree of abnormal accruals by 2.6% on average. The results are robust even after controlling for firm size, profitability, financial distress, growth opportunities and information asymmetry.

Sixty years of research leadership: contributing authors and institutions to the journal of finance

Leading authors, Leading institution, Research leadership, G00, N0,

Staggered boards, accounting discretion and firm value

Motivated by agency theory, this study investigates how staggered boards influence accounting discretion. The results indicate that staggered boards do affect accounting discretion. In fact, the impact of staggered boards on accounting discretion is substantially larger (about seven times stronger) than the effect of all other corporate governance provisions combined. Firms with a staggered board exercise less income inflating accounting discretion. Further evidence reveals that accounting discretion has a benign effect on subsequent firm value. Yet, the presence of staggered boards reduces significantly the favourable effect of accounting discretion on subsequent firm performance. The evidence is robust to a large number of control variables including other governance provisions. The evidence is in line with the notion that staggered boards improve managers’ job security, reduce managerial myopia, and thus induce managers to exercise less short-term transitory accounting discretion.

Board independence and market reactions around news of stock option backdating

Board Independence, Option Backdating, G3, G34,