Although over‐optimistic disclosures have been found to increase the likelihood of shareholder litigation, this finding has been largely ignored in the context of newly appointed CEOs’ disclosure choices. Addressing this gap, our study examines the variation in CEOs’ tone management strategies in their early years of tenure, here as stimulated by their ex ante litigation concerns (in addition to the well‐documented career concerns). Based on a textual analysis of the 10‐K filings of US nonfinancial firms during 1993–2022, we use the abnormal tone of earnings‐related disclosures to measure strategic tone—a linguistic tool used by managers to influence the perceptions of capital market participants. We find that high litigation concerns are, on average, associated with a greater downward tone management (or over‐pessimism) in CEOs’ early years, even after controlling for the ‘big bath’ phenomenon, as well as a tendency to manage earnings upward on account of career concerns. Furthermore, this over‐pessimism is found to be uninformative about future earnings or operating cash flow. This suggests that managers employ this over‐pessimistic strategy in response to their high litigation risk exposure rather than to inform market participants about their firms’ prospects. Finally, we document that a rich firm information environment—which renders low information asymmetry between firms and outside stakeholders (thus attenuating CEOs’ information advantage)—dampens new CEOs’ tendency to adopt this particular disclosure strategy.
{"title":"Tone Management and Litigation Concerns in CEOs’ Early Years","authors":"Pratik Goel, Oveis Madadian, Wouter Torsin","doi":"10.1111/abac.12337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12337","url":null,"abstract":"Although over‐optimistic disclosures have been found to increase the likelihood of shareholder litigation, this finding has been largely ignored in the context of newly appointed CEOs’ disclosure choices. Addressing this gap, our study examines the variation in CEOs’ tone management strategies in their early years of tenure, here as stimulated by their <jats:italic>ex ante</jats:italic> litigation concerns (in addition to the well‐documented career concerns). Based on a textual analysis of the 10‐K filings of US nonfinancial firms during 1993–2022, we use the abnormal tone of earnings‐related disclosures to measure strategic tone—a linguistic tool used by managers to influence the perceptions of capital market participants. We find that high litigation concerns are, on average, associated with a greater downward tone management (or over‐pessimism) in CEOs’ early years, even after controlling for the ‘big bath’ phenomenon, as well as a tendency to manage earnings upward on account of career concerns. Furthermore, this over‐pessimism is found to be uninformative about future earnings or operating cash flow. This suggests that managers employ this over‐pessimistic strategy in response to their high litigation risk exposure rather than to inform market participants about their firms’ prospects. Finally, we document that a rich firm information environment—which renders low information asymmetry between firms and outside stakeholders (thus attenuating CEOs’ information advantage)—dampens new CEOs’ tendency to adopt this particular disclosure strategy.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142185440","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Analyses of the practical relevance of costing methods are based on a narrow range of evaluative factors, progressively distancing themselves from the technical essence of these methods. This article examines how a better understanding of the foundational technical underpinnings can enrich the analysis of the practical relevance of a costing method. To do this, we draw on interventionist research in a French cancer centre, where the costing method, prescribed and transposed from private management methods, is widely criticized by its users and rarely analyzed in‐depth. From a theoretical point of view, the results of this article propose a model for analyzing the practical relevance of a costing method. By progressively modifying the calculation techniques of this costing method, the application of this model to the costing method studied highlights four criteria for the technical analysis of the practical relevance of this method, two of which have already been identified in the literature (cost traceability and causality), and two of which have not yet been identified (exhaustiveness of cost centres and cost/value articulation). These four criteria represent the characteristics of this method by which any change in its calculation technique also modifies its practical relevance. From a methodological point of view, this article also shows how a better knowledge of the elements of practical relevance of a costing method can facilitate the success of interventionist research in management accounting. To this end, we propose a three‐step interventionist research approach for analyzing the practical relevance of a costing method.
{"title":"How to Analyze the Practical Relevance of Costing Methods? The Example of Hospital Cost Accounting in France","authors":"Laurent Mériade","doi":"10.1111/abac.12338","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12338","url":null,"abstract":"Analyses of the practical relevance of costing methods are based on a narrow range of evaluative factors, progressively distancing themselves from the technical essence of these methods. This article examines how a better understanding of the foundational technical underpinnings can enrich the analysis of the practical relevance of a costing method. To do this, we draw on interventionist research in a French cancer centre, where the costing method, prescribed and transposed from private management methods, is widely criticized by its users and rarely analyzed in‐depth. From a theoretical point of view, the results of this article propose a model for analyzing the practical relevance of a costing method. By progressively modifying the calculation techniques of this costing method, the application of this model to the costing method studied highlights four criteria for the technical analysis of the practical relevance of this method, two of which have already been identified in the literature (cost traceability and causality), and two of which have not yet been identified (exhaustiveness of cost centres and cost/value articulation). These four criteria represent the characteristics of this method by which any change in its calculation technique also modifies its practical relevance. From a methodological point of view, this article also shows how a better knowledge of the elements of practical relevance of a costing method can facilitate the success of interventionist research in management accounting. To this end, we propose a three‐step interventionist research approach for analyzing the practical relevance of a costing method.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"69 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142185439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
IAS 19 revised (IAS 19(R)) abolished the corridor approach and replaced the expected rate of return (ERR) on pension plan assets with the discount rate. While the abolition of the corridor method did not have a significant impact on UK firms, which were historically using a different method to recognize actuarial gains or losses, the elimination of the ERR was anticipated to have a major impact. We examine whether the elimination of the ERR had real economic consequences for UK firms around the publication and implementation dates of IAS 19(R). Our findings suggest that UK firms shifted pension investments away from equities following the publication and implementation of IAS 19(R). In addition, we find evidence that firms with higher pension deficits and firms that used higher ERRs reduced equity investments to a greater extent following the publication of IAS 19(R); interestingly, firms with larger differences between the expected and actual rates of return on pension plan assets reduced equity investments to a greater extent only following the implementation of IAS 19(R). These findings may be of interest to regulators in the context of standard‐setting, investment professionals, and other stakeholders.
{"title":"Does the Publication or the Implementation of IAS 19(R) Have Real Economic Consequences?","authors":"Justin Chircop, Paraskevi Vicky Kiosse","doi":"10.1111/abac.12330","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12330","url":null,"abstract":"IAS 19 revised (IAS 19(R)) abolished the corridor approach and replaced the expected rate of return (ERR) on pension plan assets with the discount rate. While the abolition of the corridor method did not have a significant impact on UK firms, which were historically using a different method to recognize actuarial gains or losses, the elimination of the ERR was anticipated to have a major impact. We examine whether the elimination of the ERR had real economic consequences for UK firms around the <jats:italic>publication</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>implementation</jats:italic> dates of IAS 19(R). Our findings suggest that UK firms shifted pension investments away from equities following the publication and implementation of IAS 19(R). In addition, we find evidence that firms with higher pension deficits and firms that used higher ERRs reduced equity investments to a greater extent following the publication of IAS 19(R); interestingly, firms with larger differences between the expected and actual rates of return on pension plan assets reduced equity investments to a greater extent only following the implementation of IAS 19(R). These findings may be of interest to regulators in the context of standard‐setting, investment professionals, and other stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142185441","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jan van Helden, Tjerk Budding, Patricia Gomes, Mario Hesse, Carine Smolders
This paper investigates COVID‐19 business support in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Portugal. Simple and generally applicable programs for wage and fixed‐cost support are predominant. From a financial resilience perspective, support programs can be seen as coping responses to the crisis through attempts at bouncing back to the situation before the virus outbreak. This also holds for the dynamics of the support during the pandemic, where governments balanced the desire to return to normal economic circumstances that called for stricter access conditions, and the need to provide support for a longer‐lasting pandemic that required the opposite. Bouncing‐forward responses, such as setting up new post‐shock configurations, were largely absent, which is likely to be due to the need for quick and adequate responses that gave limited time for critical reflection. The impacts of business support on the number of bankruptcies and employment figures were positive. Unemployment and fiscal impacts diverged among the four countries, and it is suggested that governmental structure was influential: unitary states performed better than federal states. The paper also reflects on the lessons learned from COVID‐19 for support in future crises, like the recent energy crisis, and points to an increasing attention to information‐sharing within the government system, but also notes limited progress in critical thinking.
{"title":"Financial Resilience Perspective on COVID‐19 Business Support: A Comparative Study of Four European Countries","authors":"Jan van Helden, Tjerk Budding, Patricia Gomes, Mario Hesse, Carine Smolders","doi":"10.1111/abac.12331","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12331","url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates COVID‐19 business support in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Portugal. Simple and generally applicable programs for wage and fixed‐cost support are predominant. From a financial resilience perspective, support programs can be seen as coping responses to the crisis through attempts at bouncing back to the situation before the virus outbreak. This also holds for the dynamics of the support during the pandemic, where governments balanced the desire to return to normal economic circumstances that called for stricter access conditions, and the need to provide support for a longer‐lasting pandemic that required the opposite. Bouncing‐forward responses, such as setting up new post‐shock configurations, were largely absent, which is likely to be due to the need for quick and adequate responses that gave limited time for critical reflection. The impacts of business support on the number of bankruptcies and employment figures were positive. Unemployment and fiscal impacts diverged among the four countries, and it is suggested that governmental structure was influential: unitary states performed better than federal states. The paper also reflects on the lessons learned from COVID‐19 for support in future crises, like the recent energy crisis, and points to an increasing attention to information‐sharing within the government system, but also notes limited progress in critical thinking.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142185443","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Using a sample of 54,964 firm‐year observations of US public firms during the period 2001 to 2020, we investigate how managerial ability affects corporate debt choice. We find evidence that managerial ability is negatively associated with the use of bank debt. This finding remains robust to a battery of robustness tests, including alternative measures of managerial ability and debt choice, various econometric specifications, and a range of endogeneity tests. Using the sudden death of the CEO as an exogenous shock to managerial ability, our difference‐in‐differences regression suggests a negative causal relationship between managerial ability and reliance on bank debt. Further, using advanced machine learning models, we identify that managerial ability is a highly influential variable in predicting firms’ debt choices. Our cross‐sectional tests indicate that this relationship is more pronounced in the presence of higher information opacity, weaker corporate governance, and poor financial conditions. In additional tests, we show that firms with more able managers use more unsecured debt and public debt. Taken together, our findings suggest that managerial ability matters in shaping corporate debt choice.
{"title":"Managerial Ability and Debt Choice","authors":"Md Samsul Alam, Mostafa Monzur Hasan, Nurul Alam, Md Shahidul Islam","doi":"10.1111/abac.12334","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12334","url":null,"abstract":"Using a sample of 54,964 firm‐year observations of US public firms during the period 2001 to 2020, we investigate how managerial ability affects corporate debt choice. We find evidence that managerial ability is negatively associated with the use of bank debt. This finding remains robust to a battery of robustness tests, including alternative measures of managerial ability and debt choice, various econometric specifications, and a range of endogeneity tests. Using the sudden death of the CEO as an exogenous shock to managerial ability, our difference‐in‐differences regression suggests a negative causal relationship between managerial ability and reliance on bank debt. Further, using advanced machine learning models, we identify that managerial ability is a highly influential variable in predicting firms’ debt choices. Our cross‐sectional tests indicate that this relationship is more pronounced in the presence of higher information opacity, weaker corporate governance, and poor financial conditions. In additional tests, we show that firms with more able managers use more unsecured debt and public debt. Taken together, our findings suggest that managerial ability matters in shaping corporate debt choice.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141882857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Devon Erickson, Bradley P. Lindsey, Jayson Talakai
In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016‐02, which effectively requires the capitalization of all leases longer than one year. However, due to concerns that leasing classifications capture economic differences among leases, the new standard maintains separate classifications of operating and finance leases on the balance sheet, and the bright‐line tests required under SFAS 13 effectively remain. In this paper, we shed light on the FASB's decision to maintain lease classifications in the new leasing standard by examining the relative valuation implications of operating and finance lease liabilities under ASU 2016‐02 and whether these valuation coefficients changed under this new standard. We find that the valuation coefficient on operating lease liabilities differs from that on finance lease liabilities, suggesting that separately reporting these lease liabilities provides value‐relevant information. We also examine the relative valuation implications of as‐if‐capitalized operating lease liabilities and finance lease liabilities under SFAS 13, and we again find that the valuation coefficients differ across these lease classifications, suggesting that the FASB's decision to retain these classifications preserved value‐relevant information used by investors under SFAS 13. Finally, we find that the valuation coefficient on operating lease liabilities increased under ASU 2016‐02 relative to under SFAS 13, consistent with the incomplete revelation hypothesis (Bloomfield, 2002). Our paper reinforces the importance of separating operating and finance lease liabilities to provide useful information for valuation and supports the FASB's decision to maintain separate lease liability classifications under ASU 2016‐02.
{"title":"The Valuation Differences between Operating and Finance Lease Liabilities in US Firms","authors":"Devon Erickson, Bradley P. Lindsey, Jayson Talakai","doi":"10.1111/abac.12333","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12333","url":null,"abstract":"In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016‐02, which effectively requires the capitalization of all leases longer than one year. However, due to concerns that leasing classifications capture economic differences among leases, the new standard maintains separate classifications of operating and finance leases on the balance sheet, and the bright‐line tests required under SFAS 13 effectively remain. In this paper, we shed light on the FASB's decision to maintain lease classifications in the new leasing standard by examining the relative valuation implications of operating and finance lease liabilities under ASU 2016‐02 and whether these valuation coefficients changed under this new standard. We find that the valuation coefficient on operating lease liabilities differs from that on finance lease liabilities, suggesting that separately reporting these lease liabilities provides value‐relevant information. We also examine the relative valuation implications of <jats:italic>as‐if‐capitalized</jats:italic> operating lease liabilities and finance lease liabilities under SFAS 13, and we again find that the valuation coefficients differ across these lease classifications, suggesting that the FASB's decision to retain these classifications preserved value‐relevant information used by investors under SFAS 13. Finally, we find that the valuation coefficient on operating lease liabilities increased under ASU 2016‐02 relative to under SFAS 13, consistent with the incomplete revelation hypothesis (Bloomfield, 2002). Our paper reinforces the importance of separating operating and finance lease liabilities to provide useful information for valuation and supports the FASB's decision to maintain separate lease liability classifications under ASU 2016‐02.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141776790","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Crises such as COVID‐19 cause uncertainty that intensifies the pressure on public sector auditors, prompting them to question their established practices and routines. At the same time, stakeholders demand higher levels of assurance of public spending during crises. Using sensemaking as a theoretical framework, our paper explores how auditors changed the way they perform auditing activities in response to the uncertainty and instability stemming from the COVID‐19 crisis. Our qualitative survey of auditors of Italian municipalities shows that before the crisis auditors focused on compliance; however, in the face of time and information shortcomings as a result of the crisis, auditors collaborated more with municipalities. After the crisis, in an attempt to reclaim independence, auditors withdrew collaboration. At the same time, they imagined a different future in which they would implement auditing processes in a way that made clear their independence. The paper contributes to the literature on auditing by shedding light on how auditors make sense of their role and the activities performed during the main phases of crises. Moreover, it advances theoretical understanding by elucidating how sensemaking processes are developed throughout the main phases of a crisis. At a practical level, this study may help auditors envisage how to adjust their roles and activities at times of crisis in ways that maintain high audit quality levels.
{"title":"Auditors’ Sensemaking During Crises: The Case of the COVID‐19 Pandemic in Italian Local Public Administrations","authors":"Simona Caramia, Pasquale Ruggiero, Riccardo Mussari","doi":"10.1111/abac.12332","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12332","url":null,"abstract":"Crises such as COVID‐19 cause uncertainty that intensifies the pressure on public sector auditors, prompting them to question their established practices and routines. At the same time, stakeholders demand higher levels of assurance of public spending during crises. Using sensemaking as a theoretical framework, our paper explores how auditors changed the way they perform auditing activities in response to the uncertainty and instability stemming from the COVID‐19 crisis. Our qualitative survey of auditors of Italian municipalities shows that before the crisis auditors focused on compliance; however, in the face of time and information shortcomings as a result of the crisis, auditors collaborated more with municipalities. After the crisis, in an attempt to reclaim independence, auditors withdrew collaboration. At the same time, they imagined a different future in which they would implement auditing processes in a way that made clear their independence. The paper contributes to the literature on auditing by shedding light on how auditors make sense of their role and the activities performed during the main phases of crises. Moreover, it advances theoretical understanding by elucidating how sensemaking processes are developed throughout the main phases of a crisis. At a practical level, this study may help auditors envisage how to adjust their roles and activities at times of crisis in ways that maintain high audit quality levels.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141737803","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The proportion of exchange‐listed firms with negative earnings has increased to over 40% in recent years. Previous research shows that the valuation of these loss firms is comparably difficult due to their uncertain future earnings path. Given these valuation issues, we argue that the stocks of loss firms should be particularly prone to mispricing such that simple firm value proxies might allow the prediction of subsequent stock returns. Supporting this hypothesis empirically, we find that book‐to‐market and revenue‐to‐price positively predict the cross‐section of loss firms’ stock returns. In particular, these value effects are significantly stronger compared to gain firms. Our further analyses support a behavioural mechanism for the empirical observations as the return predictability is disproportionately strong around earnings announcements and as analysts are too optimistic for loss firms with low values of book‐to‐market and revenue‐to‐price. Our analyses on short selling and option trading indicate that sophisticated investors are aware of the documented return predictability, but limits to arbitrage prevent an immediate correction of mispricing.
{"title":"The Valuation of Loss Firms: A Stock Market Perspective","authors":"Hannes Mohrschladt, Susanne Siedhoff","doi":"10.1111/abac.12324","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12324","url":null,"abstract":"The proportion of exchange‐listed firms with negative earnings has increased to over 40% in recent years. Previous research shows that the valuation of these loss firms is comparably difficult due to their uncertain future earnings path. Given these valuation issues, we argue that the stocks of loss firms should be particularly prone to mispricing such that simple firm value proxies might allow the prediction of subsequent stock returns. Supporting this hypothesis empirically, we find that book‐to‐market and revenue‐to‐price positively predict the cross‐section of loss firms’ stock returns. In particular, these value effects are significantly stronger compared to gain firms. Our further analyses support a behavioural mechanism for the empirical observations as the return predictability is disproportionately strong around earnings announcements and as analysts are too optimistic for loss firms with low values of book‐to‐market and revenue‐to‐price. Our analyses on short selling and option trading indicate that sophisticated investors are aware of the documented return predictability, but limits to arbitrage prevent an immediate correction of mispricing.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":" 100","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141365389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rasha Ashraf Abdelbadie, Nils Braakmann, Aly Salama
We investigate the influence of skilful utilization of social interaction dynamics on creating reputations for UK Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) during public funding cuts and scrutiny. The paper employs a content analysis method and follows an empirical design with a unique sample of 148 UK HEIs. To gauge reputation, we rely on participatory data from the Guardian newspaper's 2014–15 environmental and ethical performance ratings for the People & Planet University League. Multiple regression analysis is applied to address the research hypotheses. The results indicate that open, accountable, and transparent sensemaking in sustainable development (SD) practices over the years is the predominant dynamic for enhancing HEIs’ reputation. This paper underscores the need to consider the institutional logics perspective as a theoretical foundation for a comprehensive understanding of the link between sustainability disclosure and an institution's reputation, image, and public goodwill within the higher education (HE) context. HEIs’ leadership should invest in SD and its associated disclosure practices. Policy‐makers and accounting regulators should establish consistent and comparable reporting requirements for sustainable performance within the HE sector. This paper is the first to empirically examine the direct impacts of HEIs’ compliance with sustainability duties on organizational performance.
{"title":"Do Social Interaction Mechanisms Affect University Reputation? Evidence from the UK Higher Education Sector","authors":"Rasha Ashraf Abdelbadie, Nils Braakmann, Aly Salama","doi":"10.1111/abac.12323","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12323","url":null,"abstract":"We investigate the influence of skilful utilization of social interaction dynamics on creating reputations for UK Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) during public funding cuts and scrutiny. The paper employs a content analysis method and follows an empirical design with a unique sample of 148 UK HEIs. To gauge reputation, we rely on participatory data from the Guardian newspaper's 2014–15 environmental and ethical performance ratings for the People & Planet University League. Multiple regression analysis is applied to address the research hypotheses. The results indicate that open, accountable, and transparent sensemaking in sustainable development (SD) practices over the years is the predominant dynamic for enhancing HEIs’ reputation. This paper underscores the need to consider the institutional logics perspective as a theoretical foundation for a comprehensive understanding of the link between sustainability disclosure and an institution's reputation, image, and public goodwill within the higher education (HE) context. HEIs’ leadership should invest in SD and its associated disclosure practices. Policy‐makers and accounting regulators should establish consistent and comparable reporting requirements for sustainable performance within the HE sector. This paper is the first to empirically examine the direct impacts of HEIs’ compliance with sustainability duties on organizational performance.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"11 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141104395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study draws on archival sources to investigate the ways in which management control may contribute to and support organizational resilience by analyzing crises from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Apollo (1961–1972) and Space Shuttle (1972–2011) programs. Both programs suffered significant events with tragic consequences. A fire killed three astronauts during a launch rehearsal test of Apollo 1. During the Space Shuttle program, the Challenger broke apart shortly after launch, and the Columbia disintegrated upon re‐entering Earth's atmosphere; both tragedies resulted in the death of all seven crew members. NASA's recovery from the three disasters and subsequent achievements exemplifies organizational resilience. This study analyzes and discusses how management control contributed to such efforts, which enabled the space programs to rise like a phoenix from the ashes of crises which could have very well led to the abandonment of the United States’ spacefaring endeavours.
{"title":"Like a Phoenix from the Ashes: Management Control and Organizational Resilience During NASA's Apollo and Space Shuttle Programs","authors":"Basil P. Tucker, Hank C. Alewine","doi":"10.1111/abac.12325","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12325","url":null,"abstract":"This study draws on archival sources to investigate the ways in which management control may contribute to and support organizational resilience by analyzing crises from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Apollo (1961–1972) and Space Shuttle (1972–2011) programs. Both programs suffered significant events with tragic consequences. A fire killed three astronauts during a launch rehearsal test of Apollo 1. During the Space Shuttle program, the Challenger broke apart shortly after launch, and the Columbia disintegrated upon re‐entering Earth's atmosphere; both tragedies resulted in the death of all seven crew members. NASA's recovery from the three disasters and subsequent achievements exemplifies organizational resilience. This study analyzes and discusses how management control contributed to such efforts, which enabled the space programs to rise like a phoenix from the ashes of crises which could have very well led to the abandonment of the United States’ spacefaring endeavours.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"38 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140975800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：