Search results

In uncertain environments, top managers may be inadvertently affected by the anchor information and make sticky decisions. The purpose of this paper is to examine how anchoring influences international merger and acquisition (M&A) equity decisions.

Based on the data of Chinese international M&A deals from 2007 to 2018, this paper uses the Tobit regression method to examine the anchoring effects on international M&A equity decisions.

The study shows that the acquiring firm's previous international M&A equity level as a self-generated anchor has a positive impact on the focal international M&A equity level. The local market's previous international M&A equity level as an externally provided anchor has a positive impact on the focal international M&A equity level. When there are self-generated anchors and externally provided anchors, the self-generated anchoring effect is stronger than the externally provided anchoring effect. The anchoring effect is stronger when the acquiring firm enters less stable host countries.

The acquirers in a single-country context may limit the generalizability of the results, and this study does not explicitly determine whether managers' decisions are unintentional or deliberate.

The study contributes to the discussion of equity-based foreign entry mode decisions by exploring anchoring behavior in strategic decisions. It provides an empirical investigation of the different anchoring effects and draws attention to the boundary conditions surrounding anchoring.

Prior research has argued that family firms are reluctant to consider external equity as a source of financing because they fear a loss of control, which would limit their socioemotional wealth. However, prior empirical research has neglected potential contingencies that determine whether family firms’ need for control affects their equity financing decisions. The purpose of this paper is to provide first insight into this research void.

The paper builds on rational choice theory and a logit regression using secondary data.

The study shows that the effect of family firm owners’ need for control on their consideration of external equity depends on the extent to which owners expect investors to interfere with management and the extent to which decision making is affected by emotions. Hereby, the present study provides evidence that family firm owners’ decisions to use external equity are more complex than previously presumed.

This study has several limitations that provide fruitful avenues for further research. Overall, the authors list and detail seven different limitations in the paper, e.g. the narrow focus on equity financing, the use of a partial model, the fact that the authors did not conceptualize differences between different types of investors (such as high net worth individuals, private equity firms and venture capital firms) in the model and further more.

The study shows that investors need to understand the complex interplay among family firms’ need for control, expected investor interference and emotional decision making, to correctly assess their chances of success when approaching family firms for equity.

Prior empirical research has neglected potential contingencies that determine whether family firms’ need for control affects their equity financing decisions. The present paper provides first insight into this research void.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of equity market misvaluation on manager behavior. Using a sample of 535 French-listed over 2000–2018, the authors analyze whether corporate investment decision is sensitive to equity market overvaluation.

The study adopts market-to-book (M/B) decomposition developed by Rhodes-Kropf and Viswanathan (2004, RKV) that proxies for market misvaluation at the firm and industry levels. The authors conducted a long-term performance analysis via a portfolio sorting procedure and a Carhart (1997) four-factor pricing model. The authors tested the relationship between equity misvaluation, corporate investment decisions and equity issuance. The authors ran several robustness tests.

The empirical results show that equity market misvaluation affects corporate investment positively as the stock price deviates further away from its fundamental. Based on market timing theory, the authors find that corporate investment occurs in periods of high valuation motivated by equity issuance to benefit from the low cost of capital. This effect is more prominent for financially constrained firms. Consistent with the catering channel, the authors find that the misvaluation-investment nexus is more pronounced in firms with short-horizon investors. By examining the stocks’ long-term performance of misvalued firms, via a sorting portfolio procedure, the authors find that undervalued firms outperform and generate higher abnormal returns (Jensen’s alpha) than overvalued firms, suggesting that mispricing-driven investment appear to be short-lived and lead to lower return in the long term.

Corporate decision-makers and governance structures should pay attention to the rationality of the corporate investment decision in the context of equity market misvaluation. Managers who focus on maximizing the stock market value in the short-run at the expense of its long-term performance must give preference to value-creating investment, not driven by an external mechanism such as equity market mispricing. More generally, investors and portfolio managers must take into account the market mispricing process in decision-making. Nonetheless, from the portfolio sorting perspective, decision-makers must act in terms of high governance quality to mitigate suboptimal investment due to stock market mispricing (Jensen, 2005). Finally, equity market overvaluation, leading managers to invest via equity financing in particular, should be a signal to attract investors’ attention to seize the window of opportunity and embark on a short-term portfolio strategy. Such a strategy promises high returns in the short term.

This paper investigates jointly two theoretical channels: equity market timing and catering. The authors propose for the analysis three components of the M/B decomposition to dissociate market misvaluation at the firm and industry level from the fundamental component of market value (growth). This procedure provides a better understanding of the role of firm and industry misvaluation in explaining corporate investments. The authors provide evidence of the equity market misvaluation via a portfolio sorting procedure and a Carhart (1997) four-factor pricing model. The authors examine the effect of misvaluation on both the investment and the financing decisions.

This study aims to examine which categories of management control systems (MCSs) in startups are most important to external financiers. Furthermore, this paper investigates how equity and debt financiers differ in their perceptions of MCS categories and examines the relevance of MCSs for their investment decisions.

This study collects data through a cross-sectional survey sent to equity and debt financiers actively investing in startups. The results are based on survey responses from 73 financiers.

The results show that financial MCSs are considered most important, followed by strategic MCSs, while human resources MCSs are perceived as only moderately important. This paper finds significant differences in the perceived importance of MCS categories between equity and debt providers, which can be explained by differing risk profiles and monitoring needs. Although debt financiers consider financial and strategic MCSs to be less important for their portfolios’ startups than equity financiers do, debt financiers perceive MCSs as more important for their initial investment decisions.

The study sheds new light on the importance of different MCS categories in startups by analyzing external financiers’ perceptions. Overall, the empirical study provides insights that are particularly valuable for startups seeking external financing for company growth.

This research focuses on the demand from medium-sized firms to access public equity as a source of finance. The acceptance of public equity differs strongly between countries, particularly between the United Kingdom and Germany. Therefore, this research aims to identify the impact of national culture on the decision to go public in these two countries.

The theoretical framework builds on the satisficing theory of rationality, the pecking-order theory as well as Hofstede's cultural dimension theory. Using a questionnaire, over 1,000 medium-sized businesses in the United Kingdom and Germany were surveyed.

The findings demonstrate that British medium-sized firms are more open to using public equity as a source of finance than their German counterparts. The results indicate that national culture not only affects the decision to go public but also has a negative impact on uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation.

The originality of the research lies in the focus on medium-sized firms and the effects of cultural differences between the United Kingdom and Germany. No previous research has explored how culture influences the decision to go public using a dataset generated from medium-sized firms in the United Kingdom and Germany.

This paper evaluates potential methods for reducing ambiguity surrounding returns on equity to improve long-term savings decisions.

We evaluate 221 undergraduate students in the US and first assess the degree of ambiguity aversion exhibited by individuals in the sample population as they decide between a risky (known probability) option and ambiguous (unknown probability) option pertaining to their chances of winning $0 or $1 in a hypothetical lottery. Similarly, we test whether sampling historical return data through learning modules influences long-term decision making regarding asset allocation within a retirement portfolio.

Allowing participants to experience the underlying probability through sampling significantly influences behavior, as participants were more likely to select the ambiguous option after sampling. Here, we also find that participants who receive interactive learning modules – which require users to manually alter the asset allocation to produce a sample of historical return data based on the specific allocation entered in the model – increase their post-learning equity allocations by 10.1% more than individuals receiving static modules. Interestingly, we find no significant evidence of ambiguity aversion playing a role in the asset allocation decision.

We find that decision-making related to ambiguous and risky options can be substantially influenced by experiential learning. Our study supplements previous literature, providing a link between research on the effect of ambiguity on stock market participation and implementation of educational programs to improve the asset allocation decision for young adults.

This study examines the relationship between managerial overconfidence and corporate financing decisions by constructing proxies for managerial overconfidence based on the track records of earnings forecasts in Japanese listed firms. We find that managers have the stable tendency to forecast overly upward earnings compared to actual ones and that their upward bias decreases the probability of issuing equity in the public market by about 4.7 percent per one standard error, which economically has the strongest impact on financing decisions. This tendency is observed when we employ alternative measures for managerial overconfidence and other model specifications. However, in private placements, the choice to offer equity is not always avoided by managers. This implies that managers place private equity with the expectation of the certification effect

The purpose of this paper is to explore how heuristics are formed and whether herding and prospect theory act as antecedents to heuristics. The relationship is explored specifically for millennials.

The proposed relationship is explored specifically for millennials. Herding and prospect theory are modelled as antecedents to heuristics. The study uses survey data from 923 millennials from India to test the model for two financial products: equity and mutual funds. Regression analysis is used to evaluate the model.

Findings support the role of herding and prospect theory as antecedents to heuristics of millennials although to varying degrees for equity and mutual fund investments. The impact of herding on heuristics is likely to be smaller for equity investments as compared to mutual fund investments.

The findings provide insights into how heuristics are formed for millennials. The findings add to literature by beginning a new line of inquiry on how heuristics are formed. Since the model is tested on a single generation, future research can test the model on other generations. In addition, future research can also add more antecedents to our proposed model.

Findings from this study can provide financial planners and marketers with an understanding of how heuristics are formed for millennials. Financial planners can use these insights while providing financial advice to this generation and marketers can use them to create more relevant outreach.

Financial investments are an important conduit for financial security. By understanding the cognitive processes that influence financial investment decision-making, it is possible for educators to create content appropriately and for financial planners to advise clients accordingly to enable optimal financial decisions that will be wealth-creating.

Existing literature primarily treats heuristics, herding and prospect theory as being independent of each other. The authors take a novel approach to model the antecedents to heuristics to be herding and prospect theory. The model is tested on millennials for two financial products: equity and mutual funds.

This paper brings in relevant entrepreneurial behavior theory to understand the ownership decisions founders make during the nascent stage of new venture creation, and how such decisions impact the viability of the firm.

The authors examine the behavior and decision making of 137 lead founders during the nascent stage of new venture creation. Psychological ownership and environmental uncertainty are measured of lead founders when dividing up firm ownership among the founding team. Using a longitudinal approach, these nascent-stage decisions are then analyzed to understand the impact on the new venture one year later.

Counter to prior research suggesting teams are better off with identical wages and ownership, the authors find such harmony (i.e. “kumbaya”) pursuit to be a detriment to new venture emergence. Specifically, this study finds that nascent ventures are better off with an unequal ownership split among the founding team members. These findings suggest that nascent firms with an unequal split are more likely to move beyond the nascent stage and launch a functional business.

Although the results of this study offer a valuable contribution to lead founders and new businesses, the study looked at each startup independent of another and is therefore not able to draw any conclusions related to competitiveness.

Lead founders and founding teams frequently divide ownership evenly among the founders. This paper shows that, while convenient, the decision to divide ownership equally can hamper a nascent firm as it moves toward the launch phase of the startup process. These results should motivate founders to think deeply regarding the ownership structure decision and, at the very least, consider the possible negative costs associated with the pursuit of founding team unity.

While scholars have brought attention to the nascent stage, few have identified and analyzed the decisions that take place during this critical time of the new venture development process. Furthermore, even is less is known of the impact nascent decisions have on startup launch. This study sheds light on these areas.

Using a sample of 6,198 US firms that went public from 1975 to 2004, the purpose of this paper is to examine when these firms come back to the equity market and investigate the determinants of the timing decision.

By properly modeling the time between two consecutive equity offerings using the duration analysis, the author tests different hypotheses in a unified framework and investigates their relative importance in explaining the timing decision of seasoned equity issuance.

The paper documents that firms often return for a new round of equity issuance shortly after the preceding one. First seasoned equity offerings (SEOs) after the IPO are more likely to be conducted at a faster speed than subsequent (follow-on) SEOs. The duration analysis shows that first SEOs are more likely to ride the aggregate stock market wave and take advantage of the idiosyncratic mispricing of the stock than follow-on SEOs. On the contrary, both macroeconomic and firm-specific growth opportunities are more important for follow-on SEOs than for first SEOs.

The paper employs a novel econometric method to depict a dynamic picture of SEO decisions. The results provide a possible explanation to reconcile the discrepancies in the findings of prior studies. Namely, those studies examining mostly first SEOs could bias toward the timing hypothesis, while those studies focussing on follow-on SEOs is more likely to find evidence that supports the need for growth.