Search results

This study investigates the relationship between the Chief Executive Officer's (CEO) overconfidence and financial reporting complexity in Iran, a context characterized by weak corporate governance and heightened managerial discretion.

The sample consists of 1,445 firm-year observations from 2010 to 2021. CEO overconfidence (CEOOC) is evaluated using an investment-based index, specifically capital expenditures. Financial reporting complexity (Complexity) is measured through textual features, particularly three readability measures (Fog, SMOG and ARI) extracted from annual financial statements. The ordinary least squares (OLS) regression is employed to test the research hypothesis.

Results suggest that CEOOC is positively related to Complexity, leading to reduced readability. Additionally, robustness analyses demonstrate that the relationship between CEOOC and Complexity is more distinct and significant for firms with lower profitability than those with higher profitability. This implies that overconfident CEOs in underperforming firms tend to increase complexity. Also, firms with better financial performance present a more positive tone in their annual financial statements, reflecting their superior performance. The findings remain robust to alternative measures of CEOOC and Complexity and are consistent after accounting for endogeneity issues using firm fixed-effects, propensity score matching (PSM), entropy balancing approach and instrumental variables method.

This study adds to the literature by delving into the effect of CEOs' overconfidence on financial reporting complexity, a facet not thoroughly investigated in prior studies. The paper pioneers the use of textual analysis techniques on Persian texts, marking a unique approach in financial reporting and a first for the Persian language. However, due to the inherent challenges of text mining and feature extraction, the results should be approached with caution.

The insights from this study can guide investors in understanding the potential repercussions of CEOOC on financial reporting complexity. This will assist them in making informed investment decisions and monitoring the financial reporting practices of their invested companies. Policymakers and regulators can also reference this research when formulating policies to enhance financial reporting quality and ensure capital market transparency. The innovative application of textual analysis in this study might spur further research in other languages and contexts.

This research stands as the inaugural study to explore the relationship between CEOs' overconfidence and financial reporting complexity in both developed and developing capital markets. It thereby broadens the extant literature to include diverse capital market environments.

This study aims to investigate the impact of pollution control bonds (PCBs) on overinvestment within utility firms.

This empirical study analyzes a data set comprising 215 US energy firms observed from 2011 to 2021, using the ordinary least square regression with standard errors adjusted for firm-level clustering.

The study reveals a negative relationship between PCBs and overinvestment, indicating that PCBs are an effective tool in curbing excessive investment. Additionally, it demonstrates that chief executive officer (CEO) overconfidence diminishes the influence of PCBs on overinvestment. These findings remain robust across various metrics for measuring overinvestment and CEO overconfidence, as well as when alternative estimation methods are used. These results align with insights derived from agency theory and upper echelon theories.

Regulators are encouraged to actively promote the use of PCBs as a financing tool for environmentally focused initiatives. To achieve this, regulatory bodies should enhance their presence within the utility sector, particularly in regions grappling with higher pollution levels. This requires the implementation of strategic policies and regulatory frameworks aimed at mitigating excessive investments. Simultaneously, policymakers should take proactive measures to introduce financial instruments designed to optimize investment efficiency, thus facilitating eco-friendly projects.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper holds the distinction of being the first to examine the impact of a specific type of green bond, namely, PCBs, on overinvestment. Furthermore, it contributes to the literature on personality traits, particularly within the context of the upper echelon theory, by investigating the moderating influence of CEO overconfidence.

The role of chief executive officer (CEO) personal characteristics in shaping corporate policies has attracted increasing academic attention in the past two decades. In this review, the authors synthesize extant research on CEO attributes by reviewing 232 articles published in 29 journals from the accounting, finance and management literature. This review provides an overview of existing findings, highlights current trends and interdisciplinary differences in research approaches and identifies potential avenues for future research.

To review the literature on CEO attributes, the authors manually collected peer-reviewed articles in accounting, finance and management journals from 2000 to 2021. The authors conducted in-depth analysis of each paper and manually recorded the theories, data sources, country of study, study period, measures of CEO attributes and dependent variables. This procedure helped the authors group the selected articles into themes and sub-themes. The authors compared the findings in various disciplines and provided direction for future research.

The authors highlight the role of CEO personal attributes in influencing corporate decision-making and firm outcomes. The authors categorize studies of CEO traits into three main research themes: (1) demographic attributes and experience (including age, gender, culture, experience, education); (2) CEO interactions with others (social and political networks) and (3) underlying attributes (including personality, values and ideology). The evidence shows that CEO characteristics significantly affect a wide range of specific corporate policies that serve as mechanisms through which individual CEOs determine firm success and performance.

CEO selection is one of the most crucial decisions made by corporations. The study findings provide valuable insights to corporate executives, boards, investors and practitioners into how CEOs’ personal characteristics can impact future firm decisions and outcomes that can, in turn, inform the high-stake process of CEO recruitment and selection. The study findings have significant practical implications for corporations, such as contributing to executive training programs, to assist executives and directors attain a greater level of self-awareness.

Building on the theoretical foundation of upper echelons theory, the authors offer an integrated theoretical framework to consolidate existing empirical research on the impacts of CEO personal attributes on firm outcomes across accounting and finance (A&F) and management literature. The study findings provide a roadmap for scholars to bridge the interdisciplinary divide between A&F and management research. The authors advocate a more holistic and multifaceted approach to examining CEOs, each of whom embodies a myriad of personal characteristics that comprise their unique identity. The study findings encourage future researchers to expand the investigation of the boundary conditions that magnify or moderate the impacts of CEO idiosyncrasies.

This study aims to explain the cognitive bias of overconfidence and portray the different ways in which overconfident top managers may affect firm outcomes. This paper outlines their opportunities and risks and how these managers are surrounded by contextual factors.

This study draws on a systematic overview of the current literature on senior executives' overconfidence and empirical studies investigating its impact on strategic outcomes.

This study identifies the opportunities and risks of overconfident top managers in firms and considers the contextual factors that influence firm outcomes. The results provide three important managerial implications for interactions with overly confident top managers.

These findings help us understand top managers' overconfidence. Organizations receive guidance on how to constrain inappropriately confident top managers who are detrimental to their businesses.

This study contributes to a better understanding of overconfidence among top managers, illustrates associated opportunities and risks and provides recommendations for controlling and dealing with top managers characterized by this cognitive bias.

The main purpose of this paper is to look at the link between chief executive officer (CEO) behavior and corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement with the moderating role of bank risk-taking behavior.

Based on a 13-year data set (2007–2019), the authors applied the feasible generalized least squares with panel data to test the hypotheses.

The findings reveal a positive and significant link between CEO behavior and CSR engagement. Based on these findings, it can be argued that the characteristics of the CEO of the banks would improve the CSR strategies. Furthermore, the study suggests a moderating effect of bank risk-taking in the link between psychological bias and corporate social responsibility engagement (CSR engagement).

As CEO behavioral characteristics are essential to understanding CSR practice, boards of directors should consider the behavioral traits of dominant and overconfident CEOs while designing CSR practices.

If the bank behaves in a socially responsible manner, direct and indirect stakeholders may be able to evaluate the level of risk-taking in more detail.

This research highlights the importance of CEO behavior characteristics for CSR, which is a crucial application that supports the upper echelons theory; and fills a gap in literature research. It is one of the few studies examining the interaction between risk-taking, CEO behavior and CSR engagement.

Overconfidence bias is considered to be a very influential decision-making bias in the business environment. This paper aims to identify the susceptibility of management accountants to overconfidence-related overplacement bias and to determine its pervasiveness among these professionals.

Two international samples of management accountants were surveyed using overplacement bias elicitation questions. The hypothesis that bias susceptibility varies between management accountants in different hierarchical employment positions was tested employing binary logistic regression.

Management accountants are found to be susceptible to overplacement bias, yet its pervasiveness among the samples is similar to other sample populations in comparable studies. Management accountants in the position of Chief Financial Officer (CFO) were found to be more susceptible to overplacement bias than their colleagues in other management accountant and business management positions.

The use of convenience sampling represents a limitation of the research.

The findings confirm that there is a need for syllabi and continual professional development projects to educate management accountants on this bias. CFOs are especially at risk of being overconfident, which may not be in the best interest of the business.

This is the first paper to assess overplacement bias in management accountants as a group of decision-makers, especially within the context of their increasing involvement in business decision-making.

There is growing interest in how hubris bias shapes managerial and entrepreneurial judgments and decisions and, in turn, firm strategy and performance. Based on a 44-years dataset of articles reaching the beginning of 2023, the authors offer a synthesis of hubris research published within business journals.

The authors implement a mixed-method approach offering a content representation of 600 peer-reviewed articles extracted from Scopus. The authors conduct a bibliometric investigation – employing Excel, VOSViewer and Biblioshiny software – and perform a qualitative review.

The analysis unveils four thematic clusters: hubris bias in financial policies (Cluster 1), hubris bias in restructuring deals (Cluster 2), hubris bias in entrepreneurial contexts (Cluster 3) and hubris bias in strategic decision-making (Cluster 4). Moreover, the authors infer that hubris research in business predominantly developed from three disciplinary perspectives – finance, entrepreneurship and strategic management – and progressed with limited interdisciplinary dialogue.

The authors call practitioners' attention to the impact of the hubris bias in forming financial, entrepreneurial and strategic choices. Managers get conscious of the risks of hubristic choices; hence, they implement organizational practices that move forward with unbiased (or less biased) judgments and decisions.

The authors offer an up-to-date and comprehensive view of hubris research in business. Furthermore, the authors provide an integrative framework and a research agenda.

This study sheds new light on the personality trait and provides evidence regarding the relation between narcissism and desirable accounting practices, specifically the impact of CEO narcissism on accounting conservatism.

The authors test the relation between CEO narcissism and accounting conservatism for a sample of 907 US companies and their corresponding CEOs for the period between 2010 and 2018. The authors apply three established models of accounting conservatism and measure executives' narcissism using a non-intrusive approach ubiquitous in the literature.

The authors find that CEO narcissism is associated with speculative accounting practices in the form of timely recognition of positive news and more prudent financial reporting of anticipated negative news. The authors provide the first empirical evidence that, despite its well-known negative effects on corporate financial reporting, executive narcissism can also produce positive outcomes.

While managerial overconfidence has received much attention, the effects of executives' narcissism are still widely unexplored (Chatterjee and Hambrick, 2007). The authors thus contribute to the literature by investigating the relationship between CEOs' narcissism and accounting conservatism. The authors conjecture CEO narcissism should have a twofold effect on prudent financial reporting. On the one hand, CEOs' narcissism should be associated with low levels of unconditional conservatism due to excessively fast good news recognition. On the other hand, narcissistic executives should be associated with early recognition of negative news and hence with higher levels of conditional conservatism.

This study investigates the current trends in CEO compensation by applying a bibliometric technique from the Scopus database.

The bibliometric analysis examines CEO compensation trends through the Scopus database. Frequency analysis is conducted using Microsoft Excel, while data visualisation is performed using VOSviewer. Finally, citation metrics are carried out using Harzing's Publish or Perish.

The results reveal that research into CEO compensation has been consistently increasing since 1976. This study identifies the most popular publication trends, the most active institutions, the top funding institutions, annual publication growth, document and source type, publishers, subject area, author co-citations, highly cited articles, top publishing countries, and keyword co-occurrences. Notably, Arizona State University in the United States (US) is the leading institution with the most prominent publications on CEO compensation. The US is the most active country involved in CEO compensation research.

The current research only derived articles from the Scopus database. Nonetheless, the findings provide an in-depth comprehension of the meaning of “CEO compensation” and present the outline of the research trends on the concept, thus significantly facilitating further studies.

The findings can assist researchers in comprehending and classifying the drivers of CEO compensation previously identified and proven in past studies. Additionally, the findings also create opportunities for new researchers to study CEO compensation.

This study is among the pioneering research investigating CEO compensation-related publications and utilising the Scopus database from an international perspective. This study also offers a historical view of CEO remuneration, a summary of the most significant nations, journals, and writers on the topic, and an outline of how CEO remuneration studies have changed over time. These contributions will enable other researchers to focus on this subject.

This paper aims to review empirical research on the relationship between institutional ownership (IO) and board governance (85 studies).

Based on agency and upper echelons theory, the heterogeneous monitoring function of specific types and the nature of institutional investors on board composition, compensation and chief executive officer (CEO) characteristics will be focused.

The author found that most studies have referred to archival studies, analyzed the impact of board governance on IO, focused on CEO characteristics, neglected IO heterogeneity and advanced regression models to address endogeneity concerns. In line with the theoretical framework, the relationship between total IO and board governance is heterogeneous. However, specific types such as foreign, dedicated and pressure-resistant institutions represent active monitoring tools and push for increased board governance.

The author provided useful recommendations for future research from a content and methodological perspective, e.g. the need for analyzing the impact of IO on sustainable board governance and other characteristics of top management team members, e.g. the chief financial officer.

As many regulatory bodies implemented regulations to promote shareholder rights and board governance, this literature review highlights the connections of both corporate governance mechanisms. Managers should conduct a careful and timely investor analysis and change the composition and compensation of the board of directors in line with institutional investors’ preferences.

This analysis makes useful contributions to prior research by focusing on IO and board governance, whereas the author structured the heterogeneous variables and results within the structured literature review. The authors guides researchers, regulatory bodies and business practice in this corporate governance topic.