Search results

Considering the existing evidence on the impact of female board members on the default risks of an organization, the purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of board gender diversity, alongside institutional characteristics and macroeconomic factors, on the financing costs of microfinance institutions (MFIs).

This study collected unbalanced panel data of 1,190 unique MFIs between 2010 and 2018 from the World Bank. The collected data, which covers a total of 95 developing and emerging countries, was thereafter analyzed using the pooled ordinary least squares and random effects model. To overcome endogeneity and omitted variable bias (e.g. time-invariant variables), the authors have also used the generalized method of moments and fixed effects model, respectively. Different proxies of board gender diversity and sub-sample analysis by regions were further undertaken to examine the robustness of the obtained results.

The findings of this study revealed that board gender diversity has a statistically significant negative effect on the financing costs of MFIs. This suggests that a gender-diverse board can generate cheaper funding for MFIs by minimizing their default risks through effective monitoring and strategic management. Furthermore, the negative impact of board gender diversity on financing costs appears to be more pronounced when there is a minimum of two female board members in the boardroom of MFIs. The results of this study remain consistent and valid regardless of alternate model specifications (e.g. sub-sample analysis, use of alternative proxies of board gender diversity and application of different estimators) and endogeneity issues. Ultimately, the findings in this study reiterate the importance of promoting and implementing gender diversity in the boardroom to minimize the financing costs of MFIs.

This study investigated the relationship between board gender diversity and financing costs of MFIs by using relatively recent and global data. The minimum number of female board members required to significantly reduce the financing costs of MFIs was also identified.

Sees the objective of teaching financial management to be to help managers and potential managers to make sensible investment and financing decisions. Acknowledges that financial theory teaches that investment and financing decisions should be based on cash flow and risk. Provides information on payback period; return on capital employed, earnings per share effect, working capital, profit planning, standard costing, financial statement planning and ratio analysis. Seeks to combine the practical rules of thumb of the traditionalists with the ideas of the financial theorists to form a balanced approach to practical financial management for MBA students, financial managers and undergraduates.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of financial factors on firms’ financial and tax reporting decisions. Firms often face the difficulties of accomplishing both financial and reporting goals. The extent to which reporting they put more value depends on the differential weighting of firms’ financial reporting and tax costs. The authors incorporate various financial factors as a source of cross-sectional differences in the weighing of both financial reporting and tax costs.

To examine firms’ decisions when fulfilling both the purposes of financial and tax reporting is difficult, the authors use a large set of firms in Korea, where book-tax conformity is high and aggressive tax shelters are restricted. The authors develop a new measure that can specify firms’ decision making between financial and tax reporting by considering both earnings management and tax avoidance.

The findings show that debt ratio affects firms’ financial and tax reporting decisions non-monotonically depending on the level of the debt ratio. The authors also find that firms with more long-term debt financing are more likely to be aggressive in financial reporting, while firms with higher financing deficit or better access to the capital market are more likely to be aggressive in tax reporting.

Thus, the findings provide more compelling evidence of firms’ decision making between two conflicting strategies, particularly when fulfilling both the purposes of financial and tax reporting is difficult. The authors expect that the results provide practical implications to standard setters, auditors and financial statement users who are interested in the ongoing debate over book-tax tradeoffs.

This paper fulfills an identified need to study how firms’ decision making between two conflicting reporting strategies are affected by the various financial factors, which are closely linked to a firm’s financial reporting and tax costs.

This study aims to focus on the optimal green R&D of a capital-constrained supply chain under different channel power structures as well as the impact of capital constraint, financing cost, channel power structure and cost-reducing efficiency on green R&D and supply chain profitability.

A two-echelon supply chain is considered. The upstream firm engages in green R&D but has capital constraints that can be overcome by external financing. Green R&D is beneficial to reduce production costs and increase consumer demand. Based on whether or not the upstream firm is capital constrained and dominates the supply chain, four models are developed.

Capital constraints significantly lower green R&D and supply chain profitability. Transferring leadership from the upstream to the downstream firms leads to higher green R&D levels and downstream firm profitability, whereas the upstream firm's profitability is increased (decreased) if green R&D investment efficiency is high (low) enough. Greater financing costs reduce green R&D and downstream firm profitability; however, the upstream firm's profitability under the model in which it functions as the follower increases if the initial capital is sufficient. More importantly, empirical analysis based on practice data is used to verify the theoretical results reported above.

This study reveals how upstream firms in supply chains decide green R&D decisions in situations with capital constraints, providing managers and governments with an understanding of the impact of capital constraint, channel power structure, financing cost and cost-reducing efficiency on supply chain green R&D and profitability.

The major contributions are the exploration of supply chain green R&D by taking into consideration channel power structures and cost-reducing efficiency and the validation of theoretical results using practice data.

Although supply chain finance (SCF) aims to optimize capital flows in the supply chain process, its effectiveness in improving cost performance remains controversial. From the perspective of efficiency motives, this study aims to explore how the combinations of SCF solutions and traditional financing instruments lead to supply chain cost reduction.

A mixed-method approach is used in this study. First, using the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), the authors analyze 405 survey data across four industries in China and identify the configurations of financing instruments for supply chain cost reduction. Second, to better understand the reasons behind each configuration, the authors conduct the content analysis on the interview data composed of 24 Chinese companies.

The authors find that the effectiveness of SCF solutions for supply chain cost reduction is related to the focal company's use of traditional financing instruments. Moreover, compared with guaranteed financing, companies that use credit financing are more likely to adopt SCF solutions to achieve supply chain cost reduction. Finally, the effectiveness of SCF solutions in reducing supply chain costs varies greatly across industries.

The study’s findings provide insights for policymakers and SCF practitioners in the aspects of simplifying the SCF application.

This study contributes to the current literature by addressing the theory–practice gap related to SCF. The study also provides new understandings of factors related to supply chain cost reduction, as well as factors that influence SCF adoption.

This study aims to examine the relation between long-term debt and internationalization in the presence of the agency costs of debt and business risk.

Sample firms consist of 517 non-financial listed firms in Malaysia, with 4,197 firm-year observations from the year 2000 to 2014. This study uses panel data regressions and a series of robustness tests to examine the hypotheses.

The results show that multinational corporations (MNCs) are more likely to sustain less long-term debt than domestic corporations (DCs) to mitigate the costs related to agency problem and firm risk. Meanwhile, foreign-based MNCs maintain less long-term debt than local-based firms, and the finding is more significant at a higher degree of internationalization. Robustness tests confirm the negative relations.

The findings indicate that the ongoing debate on the debt financing puzzle can be explained by internationalization. Moreover, the findings suggest that in addition to the systematic differences between MNCs and DCs, studies on the debt financing and internationalization should also account for the systematic differences among MNCs such as the local-based MNCs, foreign-based MNCs and DCs that later expand their business operations abroad.

MNCs have to be responsive to the diverse institutional environments as they diversify their business operations geographically. When the adverse effects of internationalization outweigh the benefits, MNCs could use the long-term debt financing decision to mitigate the costs of doing business abroad. This is because debt financing is also a primary concern in the corporate financial decisions for the maximization of shareholders’ wealth.

This study contributes to the debt financing literature from the international perspective by providing evidence from an emerging market. In addition, this study highlights the importance of recognizing firms by their firm-specific characteristics, such as internationalization, given the systematic differences among firms.

This paper aims to analyze how banks transmit shocks that hit the debt market to their borrowers. Recent financial crisis demonstrated that the banking system can be a pathway for shock transmission.

Bank-level panel regressions.

This paper shows that when banks experience a shock to the cost of their bond financing, they pass a portion of their extra costs or savings to their corporate borrowers. While banks do not offer special protection from bond market shocks to their relationship borrowers, they also do not treat all of them equally. Relationship borrowers that are not bank-dependent are the least exposed to bond market shocks via their bank loans. In contrast, banks pass the highest portion of the increase in their cost of bond financing to their relationship borrowers that rely exclusively on banks for external funding.

These findings show that banks put more weight on the informational advantage they have over their relationship borrowers than on the prospects of future business with these borrowers. They also show a potential side effect of the recent proposals to require banks to use CoCos or other long-term funding.

The findings are timely, given the ongoing debates on the proposals to introduce bail-in programs and proposals to require banks to use CoCos or other long-term funding.