Search results

Family firms play an important role in the working of the Canadian economy; despite their importance to the economic activities and job creation it is observed that family businesses have lower survival rates than non‐family firms, some argue that this can possibly be attributed (amongst other factors) to the lack of training. Most of the training activities in Canadian family businesses tend to be limited, and it is argued that family firms tend to perceive training more as an expense than an asset that enhances future growth and development of the business. This paper introduces a training framework and a coherent strategy that provides key elements of a national training agenda for Canadian small family firms, including the role of various relevant organizations.

Our paper explores the evolution in the reporting of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for 115 Canadian firms (51 cross-listed on U.S. stock exchanges) throughout the seven year period of 1999–2006, which was the period before and after SOX and Bill 198 were enacted, resulting in a period of increasing pressure for CSR and CSR disclosure (Ballou, Heitger, & Landes, 2006). We examined CSR scores for Canadian firms listed only on Canadian stock exchanges and for Canadian firms cross-listed on U.S. exchanges. During this period, our analysis shows an overall decrease in CSR scores for all Canadian firms in our sample, and for both our subsamples of firms: Canadian firms cross-listed on U.S. stock exchanges and Canadian firms listed only on Canadian exchanges. Our analysis suggests that as a result of increased scrutiny facilitated by the regulatory changes, CSR disclosures become more transparent and comprehensive: CSR Strengths and CSR Weaknesses Scores both declined after 2002 resulting in an overall decline in Total CSR scores. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

We analyze corporate governance mechanisms in Canadian and US firms. We show that despite similarities in governance practices in both countries, there are differences in the efficacy of these mechanisms. In particular, the performance of Canadian firms is less sensitive to ownership structure than that of US firms. Differences are also found in the performance implications of incentive pay. Our study suggests that country-specific governance trends persist among Canadian firms cross-listed in the United States. These findings may explain why Canadian firms which are cross-listed in the United States continue to trade at a discount compared to their US counterparts.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of US dollar exchange rate risk on the value of Canadian non‐financial firms.

The sample, from the Compustat database, includes all non‐financial Canadian firms with sales over $100 million. The study segregates firms into hedging and non‐hedging groups and applies statistical techniques to test if hedging enhances value.

The results demonstrate that Canadian firms that have higher levels of US$ sales tend to use derivatives more frequently through higher levels of US$ exposure. Firms that have both US sales and assets appear less likely to use hedging. Firms with an American subsidiary and use financial instruments to hedge have higher values. When operational hedging is used with financial hedging, it is a value enhancing activity increasing their market‐to‐book by 14 per cent and market value‐to‐sales by 40 per cent. Incremental impact of these two hedging strategies is to enhance value by 7 per cent.

The sample from Compustat captures large capitalization Canadian firms but ignores about 75 per cent of Canadian firms. There is a bias towards larger firms. Some hedging items are not disclosed on financial statements. A survey would enhance and complement these results.

The paper finds that it is important for Canadian firms that have exports denominated in US dollars to hedge their exposure. The full value of hedging is reaped by using both operational and financial hedges.

This study is the first that examines US dollar risk management by Canadian firms.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate if there is a differential effect of corporate governance mechanisms on firm risk in Canadian companies cross-listed on US markets and Canadian companies not cross-listed (Canadian only companies).

Using a sample comprised of all Canadian companies included in the S&P/TSX Composite Index for the period 2009–2014, this study applies OLS and fixed effect regressions to investigate the effect of corporate governance mechanisms on firm risk. Interaction variables between governance mechanisms and the cross-listing status are used to examine if this effect is different for cross-listed firms.

Results indicate that the effect of board characteristics such as size, independence and proportion of female directors remains the same in both cross-listed and not cross-listed firms. CEO duality and insider equity ownership impact firm risk only in cross-listed companies, while institutional shareholdings, environmental, social and governance disclosure and family control affect firm risk in Canadian only firms. Overall, the empirical results indicate that some governance mechanisms impact firm risk only in firms that cross-list, while others are well-suited for Canadian only firms.

This study suggests that some of the differences between Canadian companies that cross-list and the Canadian companies that do not cross-list in US stock markets may change the impact of governance mechanisms on firm risk. Therefore, these findings have important implications for the design of governance mechanisms in Canadian firms. Since some of these differences are common to other economies, the conclusions can be extended to companies in other countries with similar governance structures.

Although previous studies have investigated the effect of governance mechanism on firm risk, this is the first paper that studies the differential effect for companies that cross-list in US markets. Specifically, differences in the ownership structure, firm control and in the regulatory and institutional environment, may explain this differential effect. Unlike most of the previous studies that focus on the effect of individual governance mechanisms, this study uses several mechanisms and their interactions at the same time.

The purpose of this paper is to examine cash dividends and stock repurchases in Canada from 1988 to 2006 and their relationship with earnings.

The study uses logistic regressions to examine the likelihood of paying dividends and the timing of repurchases and OLS regressions to examine the level of payout.

The fraction of dividend‐paying firms declines from 1988 to 2001 and then slightly rebounds until the end of the sample period in 2006. Firm size, profitability, investment opportunities, and catering incentives explain the likelihood of paying dividends. Unlike US firms, Canadian repurchase‐only firms do not become important payers in terms of either the percentage of firms or the level of payout. Dividend‐only firms pay out significant amounts of cash. Firms with both regular dividends and regular repurchases pay out the largest amount. The payout of different groups of payers is determined by their earnings. Testing firms with both regular dividends and regular repurchases reveals that earnings, undervaluation, and availability of cash explains the timing of repurchases but earnings mainly explains the level of repurchases.

Canadian data are unavailable after 2006, which precludes investigating the potential implications of the financial crisis beginning in 2007.

This is the first paper to analyze the evolution of the relationship between payout and earnings in Canada.

In the past few years, process orientation (PO) as an integral part of enterprise system (ES) implementation has been the center of attention among practitioners and academics. The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the role of PO in ES implementation through an empirical study of Canadian and US firms.

A comparative analysis of ES implementation was performed based on the data collected from a sample of large Canadian and US firms. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted to identify the factors associated with constructs of the research model. Moreover, path analysis approach was employed to conduct comparative analysis across the two samples.

The findings indicate that PO significantly reduces the challenges of ES implementation. Moreover, PO has been shown to have a positive effect on the successful implementation and utilization of ES under certain conditions. However, the level of PO at different phases is observed to have diverse effects on different aspects of ES implementation as a result of opposite forces of change. In addition, the path analysis confirms the validity of measurement of PO at three phases of ES implementation.

No database of managers who have been involved in all three phases of ES implementation exists; hence, the respondents are asked to answer the questionnaire only if they are involved in all three phases of ES implementation. This places a limitation on the respond rate.

This paper is the first paper that measures PO at three phases of ES implementation and explores the effect of PO on different dimensions of ES implementation. This approach provides a novel insight into understanding of the role of PO in ES implementation. This paper offers two major contributions toward a further understanding of the business processes in organizations. The first contribution of this paper is the development of measurement systems for assessing the level of PO and various dimensions of ES implementation. The second major contribution of this paper is unveiling the role of PO in ES implementation through the comparative analysis across Canadian and US firms.

The purpose of this study is to investigate if non-US/non-Canada (international) equity listings in the Canadian stock exchanges increased with the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Canada. A question of interest is whether the adoption of common global accounting standards (IFRS) was beneficial in attracting international firms to the Canadian exchanges.

The authors use difference-in-difference ordinary least square methodology to conduct inter-country (between Canada and the USA) and intra-country (between the Toronto Stock Exchange [TSX] and the TSX Venture Exchange [TSXV]) tests to investigate whether there is increased listings of international firms on Canada’s exchanges associated with mandatory adoption of IFRS in Canada compared to such listings in the American exchanges.

The authors did not find evidence of a relative increase in listings by international firms on the TSX and the TSXV after Canadian adoption of IFRS, but they did find that listings by international firms on the TSX, Canada’s primary exchange, increased when the authors include the year before mandatory Canadian adoption as part of the IFRS adoption period. The authors also find that international listings from outside the North American, European and Australasian regions increased on the TSXV, consistent with IFRS adoption making the smaller Canadian exchange more attractive to listers from these regions.

With the increasing use of IFRS throughout the world, US regulators, the US Congress and other capital market participants seek to understand the costs and benefits of potential IFRS adoption in the USA. The authors contribute to this debate by examining the effect of Canada’s adoption of IFRS on growth in international stock listings in the Canadian stock exchanges.

This empirical study investigates productivity performance of Canadian (n = 43) and US (n = 95) manufacturers in the automotive parts industry (SIC 3714) that have implemented the total quality management (TQM) philosophy. We identify three different categories of productivity measures: financial, customer related, and internal business related. TQM firms indicate improved performance on various productivity measures. Statistically significant differences exist between the two countries on some of the measures. The correlation analysis suggests that, to be customer oriented, a TQM firm must focus on improving internal business processes. Unlike the US sample, the Canadian sample did not show a significant positive correlation between financial measures, and the customer oriented or internal business related measures.

The purpose of this paper is to encourage accounting regulators to address diversity in practice in the reporting of environmental liabilities. When Canada changed to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in 2011, Canadian regulators asked the IFRS Interpretations Committee to interpret whether the discount rate to value environmental liabilities should be a risk-free discount rate. Old Canadian GAAP, and current US GAAP, allow for a higher discount rate, resulting in commensurately lower liabilities. International regulators refused to address this issue expecting no diversity in practice in Canada.

The focus is on a sample of Canadian oil and gas and mining firms. These domestic industries play a major role internationally and have significant environmental liabilities. The method is empirical archival, tracking firm characteristics and discount rate choice on transition to IFRS.

There is significant diversity in practice. About one-third of the sample firms choose a higher discount rate, avoiding a major increase in environmental liabilities on transition to IFRS. The evidence suggests that these firms have relatively larger environmental liabilities and that the discount rate decision is a strategic choice.

The sample is based on one country and may only be reflecting local anomalies that have no broader implications.

Diversity in practice in accounting for environmental liabilities is not acceptable. Accounting regulators should act to create consistent and comparable reporting practice.

Firms and managers facing larger environmental liabilities can choose to minimize environmental liabilities under IFRS, while it is the general public and society at large that bear the ultimate risk.

The paper pushes forward the debate on whether recognized environmental liabilities should reflect the interests of equity investors, or if other investors and stakeholders should be taken into account.