Search results

Following recent high-profile audit failures, concern has been expressed that auditors are not demonstrating sufficient skepticism when exercising professional judgment. In particular, client assumptions and estimations relating to hypothetical valuations in financial reporting are not being challenged. This paper seeks to address the issue by advancing a decision-making framework aimed at guiding auditors beyond regulatory reductionist thinking towards an enhanced understanding of the cognitive processes which shape professional judgment in forming a reliable audit opinion.

Drawing on the normative philosophical and theological teachings of Bernard Lonergan, the authors' decision-making framework embodies reflective thinking and the data of consciousness to highlight the central role played by enquiry in the dynamics of understanding, judgment and decision-making. Such enquiry elicits challenge of the management bias inherent in hypothetical valuations.

Auditing through a Lonerganian lens allows auditors to reflect on their approach to objective decision-making by offering a set of cognitive tools to enhance the enquiry essential for nurturing professional skepticism.

This paper contributes to the literature by developing the somewhat neglected discourse on the cognitive processes essential for professional skepticism and audit judgment. The authors demonstrate how Lonerganian self-appropriation intensifies an awareness of the recursive cognitive activities pertinent to objective judgment and decision-making. This awakened consciousness has the potential not only to change how auditors question evidence to make informed judgments and decisions, but also to normalize the practice of challenge.

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues have become the cornerstone of investment decisions in firms today. With that, publicly traded ESG indices (like the BSE ESG 100 index in India) have come into existence. The existing literature signifies that ESG generates financial implications and induces stability. The current study aims to test whether the firms listed on the ESG index (ESG-sensitive firms) face less financial distress than those not listed on such an index.

The study applies panel data difference-in-differences (DID) regression by considering ESG as an unstaggered treatment to 74 non-financial firms listed on India's Bombay Stock Exchanges (BSE) 100 index. In total, 42 firms are ESG treated as they got listed on the BSE ESG 100 index, formed in 2017. The remaining 32 firms form the control group. The confidence intervals and standard errors are estimated using clustered robust errors and the Donald and Lang method.

Listing on the ESG index matters for financial stability; differences in financial distress are significant on financial distress. ESG-sensitive firms face less financial distress than non-ESG firms (or firms not perceived as ESG-sensitive). The results are consistent across two financial distress measures, Altman z-scores for emerged and emerging markets. Thus, the DID in distress status between ESG-sensitive and non-ESG firms matter.

The study creates vibrant implications for practitioners using ESG to reduce financial distress.

The study is one of its kind to test the treatment effects of ESG on firm value and quantify treatment effects on financial distress.

In this research, we explore the adverse impact of foreign ownership on operational security, a critical operational implication of the liability of foreignness (LOF).

The empirical analysis is based on a multi-country dataset from the World Bank Enterprises Survey, which contains detailed firm-level information from over 8,902 firms in 82 emerging market countries. We perform a series of robustness checks to further confirm our findings.

We find that a high ratio of foreign ownership is associated with an increased likelihood of security breaches and higher security costs. Our results also indicate that high levels of host countries’ institutional quality and firms’ local embeddedness can mitigate such vulnerability in operational security.

This study is one of the first to uncover the critical operational implication of the LOF, indicating that a high ratio of foreign ownership exposes firms to operational security challenges.