Search results

The authors seek to analyze the impact of weak corporate governance by top executives of a firm on the firm's earnings reports. This research is meant to further emphasize the impact of co-opted executives on a firm, primarily through their impact on earnings management.

Using financial data from 11,473 firm-year observations, the authors utilize ordinary least squares (OLS), 2-stage IV regressions, propensity score matching (PSM) and entropy balancing to analyze the impact of a co-opted top management team on discretionary accruals and restatements.

The authors find empirical evidence that firms with weak corporate governance from top executives are more likely to manipulate reported earnings and have lower financial reporting quality. The authors also find that the effect of co-opted executives on earnings management is weaker when a chief executive officer's (CEO’s) incentives are not aligned with those of top executives, suggesting that executives prevent earnings management due to reputational concerns. Co-opted chief financial officers (CFOs) increase the magnitude of earnings management in a firm but are not solely responsible for the authors' results.

The authors' results suggest that the top executive team provides an important first defense in the prevention of earnings management and corporate wrongdoing. Co-option of the top executive team may be an important consideration when doing research into corporate governance.

The paper addresses the privacy–personalisation paradox in the post-GDPR-2018 era. As the regulation came in a bid to regulate the collection and use of personal data, its implications remain underexplored. The research question is: How do consumers perceive the matter of personal data collection for the use of highly targeted and personalised ads post-GDPR-2018? The invasion of privacy vs the benefits of highly personalised digital marketing.

To address the research question, this qualitative study conducts semi-structured interviews with 14 individuals, consisting of average users and digital experts.

This paper reports on increasing consumer vulnerability post-GDPR-2018 due to increased awareness of personal data collection yet incessant lack of control, particularly regarding the repercussions of the digital footprint. The privacy paradox remains an issue except among experts, and personalisation remains necessary, yet critical challenges arise (e.g. filter bubbles and intrusion).

Policy implications include education, regulating consent platforms and encouraging consensual sharing of personal data.

While the privacy–personalisation paradox has been widely studied, the impact of GDPR-2018 has rarely been addressed in the literature. GDPR-2018 has seemingly had little impact on instilling a sense of security for consumers; if anything, this paper highlights greater concerns for privacy as users sign away their rights on consent forms to access websites, thus contributing novel insights to this area of research.