Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationships between CEO ownership, stock option compensation, and risk taking. The authors include important CEO power variables as moderators.

The paper uses a longitudinal regression analysis. In addition, the paper includes interactional plots for further interpretation.

The results indicate that CEO ownership reduces risk taking, while there is a partial support that stock options increase risk taking. CEO tenure is a powerful moderator that decreases risk taking in both CEO ownership and CEO stock option scenarios. Board independence, counter to the hypothesis in this paper, may encourage risk taking.

The findings in this paper provide support for the inclusion of CEO power variables in CEO compensation studies. However, the study examines large publicly traded companies; thus, all findings may not be applicable to small- and medium-sized companies.

Scholars have encouraged more complex CEO compensation models and the authors have examined both main effect and interaction models.

Organizations worldwide are faced with the challenge of motivating and retaining employees. In addressing this challenge, organizations may use a variety of incentive pay practices to align employee behavior with organizational objectives. The purpose of this paper is to empirically identify the incentive pay practice configurations or bundles adopted by private sector firms across 14 different countries from several geographic regions. The patterns of incentive pay configuration adoption for each country are evaluated.

Cluster analysis, ANOVA, and multilevel random-intercept logistic modeling are utilized on firms from the 2009 CRANET HRM survey.

Phase I of this study empirically identifies four different configurations (contingent rewarder, incentive minimizer, incentive maximizer, and profit rewarder) derived from three incentive pay practices (individual bonus, team bonus, and profit sharing practices) that firms adopt. Phase II evaluates adoption rates by country and finds striking differences in incentive configurations that firms avoid or adopt. Some countries have clear adoption preferences (e.g. Denmark, Sweden, Japan, and France). In other countries firms employ a variety of incentive bundles (e.g. USA, UK, and Germany) and seem to be less constrained by country-based institutional factors.

Incentive practices are typically studied independent of the configuration of practices that firms select. This research helps us understand the typical bundles in use.

Organizations worldwide are faced with the need to motivate employees. This research maps the incentive bundles preferred in each of 14 countries.

Employees in different countries come to work with expectations about pay and these shape their perceptions of incentive fairness.

Research on incentives has tended to focus independently on specific practices and ignore the reality that organizations generally select multiple practices. This research identifies the combinations of incentive practices generally used and does so with firms from 14 countries from various world regions. These results also offer a map of the incentive bundles preferred in each country.

This chapter provides a comprehensive survey of the contributions of the Austrian school of economics, with specific emphasis on post-WWII developments. We provide a brief history and overview of the original theorists of the Austrian school in order to set the stage for the subsequent development of their ideas by Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek. In discussing the main ideas of Mises and Hayek, we focus on how their work provided the foundations for the modern Austrian school, which included Ludwig Lachmann, Murray Rothbard and Israel Kirzner. These scholars contributed to the Austrian revival in the 1960s and 1970s, which, in turn, set the stage for the emergence of the contemporary Austrian school in the 1980s. We review the contemporary development of the Austrian school and, in doing so, discuss the tensions, alternative paths, and the promising future of Austrian economics.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the performance of accounting researchers in winning competitive Australian Research Council (ARC) grants, when compared with researchers from the medical, engineering and law professions, during a period of heightened questioning of accounting methods, bounded by the end of the dot.com boom in 2001 and the global financial crisis in 2008. Protection and expansion of a profession's core knowledge through effective research is regarded as a hallmark of ongoing professional recognition and success in winning ARC grants is one indicator of the strength of this research. Reasons for the absolute and relative performance of accounting researchers in winning ARC grants are explored.

ARC statistics for the 2000‐2008 period were analysed, along with additional data from the relevant professional associations and the Commonwealth Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

The results indicate that Australian accounting researchers are performing poorly in absolute and relative terms when compared with their professional peers. Some evidence exists that accounting research cultures seem to flourish in only a handful of universities, and that accounting academics are overloaded with teaching to the detriment of research.

The study adds to the growing interest in the value added by accounting research to the accounting profession, the corporate sector and society at large. While the publishing record of Australian accounting researchers appears healthy, when compared with their accounting peers overseas, they perform poorly in winning competitive grants relative to researchers from other professions. This may be a timely wakeup call to the accounting profession that the social acceptance of accounting knowledge should not be taken for granted.

This paper aims to investigate the political cost hypothesis and the effects of political sensitivity-induced governance in the US bond market by using yield spreads from bonds issued by a diverse sample of US government contractors.

Fixed effects regression analysis is used to test the relation between the political sensitivity of government contractor firms and their cost of debt.

Results illustrated that government contractors with greater political sensitivity are associated with larger yield spreads, indicating that bondholders require a premium when firms endure the costs of increased political oversight and the threat of outside intervention, reducing the certainty of future income. However, despite the overall positive impact of political sensitivity on bond yield spreads on average, the authors found that the additional government oversight is associated with lower spreads when the firm is facing greater repayment risk.

Despite the benefits of winning a government contract, this paper identifies a direct financial cost of increased political sensitivity because of additional firm oversight and potential intervention. Importantly, it also finds that this governance is valued by bondholders when faced with increased risk. Firms must balance their desire for government receipts with the costs and benefits of dependence on those expenditures.

This paper contributes to the literature in its exploration of political sensitivity as an important determinant of the cost of debt for corporate government contractors. Specifically, the authors document a significant risk premium in bond pricing because of the joint effects of the visibility and importance of government contracts to the firm.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether accounting researchers in Australia more proactively pursued government‐sponsored Australian Research Council (ARC) research funding in the post‐Enron period than researchers in other commerce‐related disciplines.

The study measures disciplinary research activity using successful Australian Research Council Linkage and Discovery grants for the period 2000 to 2008. The study identifies the number of grants received, the total dollar amount funded, the number of participating institutions, individual researchers and (where applicable) partnering organisations. Using these criteria, the study compares the success of accounting with that of banking and finance, economics and business and management.

The study highlights accounting's failure to attain comparable levels of research funding relative to other commerce‐related disciplines (both in terms of grants and dollars), even given the public profile of accounting events post‐Enron. The study reveals a significantly higher “elite institution effect” exists in accounting and lower levels of academic and commercial partnerships when compared to other disciplines. The study examines potential reasons for the lack of ARC funding won by accounting researchers.

The persistently low level of representation of accounting researchers among ARC grant winners during this period appears counterintuitive to the traditional “professional model” that links university‐based disciplinary members with practitioners. Why accounting, as a high‐profile profession diverges from this model should be of concern to researchers, universities and the accounting profession.

The study's use of comparative ARC data extends and contextualises earlier studies that have sought to examine the state of accounting research in Australia.