Search results

This study delineates overall financial characteristics of the Turkish non‐financial firms listed in the Istanbul Stock Exchange across a variety of ownership variables. It essentially compares the performance of affiliates of diversified Turkish business groups with that of unaffiliated firms. The article notes that firms affiliated with diversified Turkish business groups do not differ significantly from unaffiliated firms in terms of accounting and stock market measures of performance. The findings also indicate that the performance measures of family‐owned firms are not significantly different from those of non‐family‐owned firms. Results also suggest that foreign‐owned firms perform significantly better in terms of return on assets than domestic firms, but not in terms of other performance measures.

This paper deals with the preferences of creditors and investors in Jordan regarding the credibility and use of financial statements audited by accounting firms with international affiliations compared to local accounting firms. Audit firms in Jordan are divided into two groups. Group 1 consists of audit firms with affiliation with an international firm. Group 2 consists of audit firms with no international affiliation. A questionnaire elicited preferences of creditors and investors for Group 1 and Group 2 audit firms. This questionnaire was administered to a sample of investors and creditors. The results suggest that a preference by both creditors and investors for financial statements audited by accounting firms with international affiliation. The factors leading to such a preference are also indicated. The results suggest that affiliation with international audit firms, application of international standards, personal contacts and the long experience of auditors are the most important factors that make both investors and creditors prefer Group 1 over Group 2 audit firms.

The resource-based view of the firm and strategic groups research are two of the most investigated frameworks in strategic management. Historically, assumptions behind these two views have seemingly put them at odds. The resource-based view of the firm argues that sustained competitive advantage is best attained when firms have unique resources, while strategic groups research argues that a number of firms within the same industry can achieve sustained profitability with strategies that are similar to one another, but distinct from other industry members. The two views focus on different levels of analysis and each largely ignores the other’s focal level. Yet neither offers any propositions that are incompatible with the tenets of the other. Thus, conceptual integration that crosses levels of analysis is possible and potentially fruitful. Indeed, some strategic groups research has begun to bridge the gap between these two theories by suggesting that firm differences exist both within and between strategic groups. This article adopts a multi-level view by developing propositions concerning contingencies when firm differences, group processes, or both may lead to sustained competitive advantage. Implications for practitioners as well as suggestions for future theory building and empirical tests are also discussed.

Research on strategic industry groups provides numerous examples of the tensions between theory and methodology in strategic management research. After an initial explosion of largely non-theoretical, methods-driven studies led to mounting criticisms, researchers recognized the need for more theoretical guidance concerning the nature of groups and their potential influences on firm performance. This refocusing on theory has produced different research streams, each with its own methodological concerns. This chapter reviews these developments with the objective of understanding how researchers balance theory and methods in current research.

Business group affiliation seems to make a firm more opaque. The benefits of group affiliation (internal market transactions) and the negative aspects of group affiliation (agency problems of group control) both may make group firms more opaque than non-group firms. Using the opacity index developed by Anderson, Duru, and Reeb (2009), this paper reports that Korean group firms are more transparent than non-group firms after the Asian financial crisis (1997–1998) and this leads to better performance of group firms. The improved transparency results from disappeared internal market benefits and diminished agency problems. These results are robust after controlling for the size of internal markets of groups, industry diversification, the existence of group inside financial institutions, and endogeneity.

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of financial distress (FD) on investment-cash flow sensitivity (ICFS) of Indian firms.

The study uses the system generalized method of moments (GMM) technique to investigate the effect of FD on ICFS of Indian firms during the period from 2001 to 2019.

Using FD measures like Ohlson's bankruptcy method, Altman's Z-score model and financial-distress ratio, the researchers find that FD increases ICFS and negatively affects corporate investment. The researchers’ findings explain that FD increases restrictions on external financing, which makes cash flow more important for corporate investment. Additionally, the researchers find that the effects of FD on ICFS are weak (strong) for bigger and group affiliated (smaller and standalone) firms. The study’s findings are robust to several measures of FD, group affiliation and firm size.

First, the researchers find that FD affects the ICFS, therefore, financially distressed firms should have sufficient internal funds or external funds for investment. Second, lending agencies should also consider the firms' FD condition before providing funds to secure their money. Third, investors should be very careful while investing in a financially distressed firm as we find that financially distressed firms face a decline in their investment which might reduce firm profitability.

This study contributes to the existing literature by providing empirical evidence by analyzing the impact of FD on ICFS in the context of India. As per the authors’ knowledge, this is the first-ever attempt to examine the effect of FD on ICFS.

The purpose of this study is to examine efficiency differences among petroleum firms based on their ownership status, with the aim of helping these firms understand how specific levels of state-ownership affects efficiency and to bring new perspective to the ownership-performance literature.

The study uses ten-year data (2001-2010) of 32 global petroleum firms categorized into four groups based on ownership types. The metafrontier analysis is used with the dynamic slack-based measure to estimate dynamic efficiency differences among the groups while respectively, accounting for carryover variables such as oil and gas reserves.

Fully state-owned firms outperformed private, majority and minority state-owned firms, indicating that not all types of state-owned petroleum firms are outperformed by private firms. Additionally, firms with shared ownership between state and private are seen to have a lesser comparative advantage in the industry than those with full private or state ownership.

Jointly owned petroleum firms should consider converting ownership to either full private or full state control. Conflict management measures should be used to handle possible conflicts between different shareholding groups.

This is among the first studies to sub-group state ownership into various levels to comprehensively examine specific levels of state ownership that is detrimental to the performance of petroleum firms. It is also the premier oil efficiency study to use the metafrontier framework to cater for group heterogeneity. The study treats oil and gas reserves as interconnecting variables that are not consumed only in the period for which they are discovered to ensure fair assessment.

This study aims to investigate the moderating role of audit quality on the association between business group affiliation of firms and earnings management in the South Asian emerging economy of Bangladesh.

A usable sample of 917 firm-year observations was drawn from companies listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange from 2005 to 2013. Data were collected from the annual reports of sample companies. Earnings management was measured using the absolute value of discretionary accruals, and two proxies were used to measure audit quality: auditor size and industry specialisation.

Results showed that the level of discretionary accruals is positively associated with business group affiliation status, and higher audit quality reduces this association. This suggests that in environments without strong investor protection, complex ownership structures create opportunities for controlling shareholders to expropriate minority shareholders. The controlling shareholders could then mask this practice through earnings management. The findings also show that in environments lacking strong investor protection, audit quality can help improve earnings quality for group-affiliated firms.

The results suggest that financial statement users need to consider audit quality for a reasonable evaluation of the earnings quality of business groups. The study also informs regulators by illuminating audit quality as a key area of focus in any effort directed at enhancing stock market efficiency through improved earnings quality in environments where business group affiliation is prevalent.

This study documents empirical evidence on the moderating effect of audit quality on the positive association between business group affiliation and earnings management.

The purpose of this paper is to observe listed firms in China during the 2008 financial crisis and investigates how group affiliation affects firm value when the economy turns down. The paper focusses the study on answering the following questions: during the crisis, do affiliated firms have higher or lower stock returns than independent firms? Does corporate governance relate to the value of group firms? How does group affiliation influence firm value? Does performance of affiliated entrepreneurial firms differ from affiliated state-owned enterprises (SOEs)?

The paper uses non-parametric tests and regression analysis on a sample of 1,469 Chinese listed companies to investigate the research questions.

Affiliated firms have lower stock returns than independent firms by 1.91 percent during September to December of 2008. This poor performance is even worse for firms seriously shocked by the crisis. Good corporate governance can mitigate the negative effects of group affiliation on firm value. The lower valuation of affiliated firms lies in the fact that controlling shareholders undertake more related party transactions at the expense of minority shareholders. Finally, although business groups can provide internal financing for entrepreneurial firms in China, affiliated entrepreneurial firms experience a larger value decrease than affiliated SOEs due to the conflict interest between controlling and minority shareholders.

This research provides unique evidence about the performance of group-affiliated firms during the 2008 financial crisis and documents the mechanisms through which group affiliation influences firm value.

Energy efficiency is critical for global sustainability (International Energy Agency, 2019). The purpose of this paper is to examine how agency conflicts arising from pyramidal ownership structures impact the energy intensity (EI) of group-affiliated Indian firms. Group-affiliated firms face unique governance challenges. For instance, parent owners (promoters) may transfer profits from one group-affiliated firm to another firm in which they have greater ownership. The authors hypothesize that such governance issues will lead to underinvestment in energy-saving projects among group firms in which promoters have a low ownership stake, resulting in their greater EI.

The authors measure EI as the ratio of total energy expense to total sales revenue (EI) and as the industry-adjusted version of this ratio. Group-affiliated Indian firms are divided into high- and low-stake firms based on the sample’s median promoter ownership.

Results support the authors’ prediction: group firms in which promoters have low ownership are more energy intensive, consistent with these firms being exposed to greater governance challenges and agency conflicts that result in operating inefficiencies and/or underinvestment in energy-saving projects.

Given energy efficiency will be key in addressing climate change, this study could raise awareness among activists, motivate regulators to consider agency problems among group-affiliated firms in emerging markets and may underscore the importance of environmental-related corporate disclosures.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to identify the significant impact that firm ownership structure and associated governance challenges have on corporate EI.