Search results

In this paper, the authors tested if promoting the workforce's happiness (through high performance work policies or HPWP) and well-being in European Public companies relates to their profitability (return on equity, ROE), market risk (beta) and stock price return. Also, the authors tested if investors have a performance benefit if they buy a portfolio screened with companies with HPWP.

The authors proxied the quality of the HPWP efforts in the first method with the Refinitiv workforce score. They used this data in an unbalanced panel of eastern, western, northern and southern Europe companies from 2011 to 2022. The panel data also included the ROE, the market risk (beta) and the stock price return of these companies. The authors estimated the corresponding regressions with the panel data and tested the relationship between the workforce score and these three variables. In a second method, they simulated the weekly performance of a portfolio that invested only in European companies with high standards in their HPWP and compared its performance against a conventional market portfolio (with no HPWP screening).

In the first method, the authors found no significant relationship between the workforce score and the ROE, beta, or stock price return in the panel regression, controlling for random effects. In the second one, they found no over or underperformance in the HPWP portfolio against the European market one in the second method.

The results suggest that there is no risk or cost for European Public companies and investors alike if they promote, with better HPWP, the happiness and well-being of their workforce. The findings suggest that if European companies promote HPWP, there will be no adverse impact on their profits, market risk, or stock price performance. Also, investors will not lose performance (against a conventional market portfolio) if they screen their portfolios with this type of workforce-friendly companies.

Increase the scarce literature on the test of the workforce score with company profitability (ROE), stock market price variation and stock market risk level.

Grounded in contingency theory and strategic fit theory, the goal for this research was to determine if managers differentiate in terms of the degree of partnership when allocating resources for planning, joint operating controls, communication and other management components to relationships and if this differentiation is based on the Partnership Model (Lambert et al., 1996).

In total, 381 managers representing 31 relationships participated in one-and-a-half-day partnership meetings, and the authors analyzed how the management components were implemented in each relationship compared to the recommendations in the Partnership Model.

Managers did not differentiate types of partnerships which led to over-resourcing relationships with low potential and under-resourcing those with the highest potential for creating value. The principles of contingency theory and strategic fit were not used for managing relationships.

Contingency theory combined with the relationship view suggests that management components should not be implemented at the same level for all relationships, but in the 31 relationships studied different partnership types were not managed based on their potential.

The research reinforces the need for a formal structure like the Partnership Model to establish joint goals for a relationship and guide management in implementation.

Effective supply chain management depends on the ability of managers to differentiate among partnership types and fit relational mechanisms that are appropriate. However, researchers tend to generalize their findings to all partnerships regardless of potential. The authors found support for the Partnership Model published in IJLM in 1996 as a method to resource different types of partnerships following the contingency perspective and strategic fit theory.

Institutional investors are major shareholders in publicly traded firms and play crucial roles in the financial and governance aspects of these firms. Despite their importance, little is known about their role in internal auditing. This study aims to fill this gap by investigating the relationship between institutional investors’ ownership and investment in the internal audit function (IAF).

The study uses ordinary least squares regressions with two-way cluster-robust standard errors (firm and year) to estimate the relationship between institutional investors’ ownership and investment in IAF for Malaysian listed firms between 2009 and 2020.

The findings show that companies with higher levels of institutional ownership invest more in IAF, suggesting that institutional investors can effectively monitor managers due to their large holdings. Moreover, both transient and dedicated institutional investors are more likely to invest in IAF.

The results highlight the importance of institutional investors as a significant determinant of investment in IAF, which can aid regulators and managers in understanding the institutional investors’ role in governing and optimizing the efficient use of a firm’s resources. The findings also provide insight into institutional investors’ behavior regarding monitoring systems, which may inspire regulators and policymakers to consider increasing institutional investors’ participation to enhance governance structures.

Referring to “behavioural finance” and “normative model” theories, this study explores the relative significance of behavioural heuristic biases in the investment decisions of real estate investment trusts (REITs) when compared with the conventional normative decision factors, with an ultimate aim to identify the significant behavioural factors that should be avoided to ensure rational asset acquisitions and market efficiency.

A triangulation approach was adopted. Qualitative multiple case studies were conducted, with four cases selected from Australian and New Zealand REITs across the industry, to identify what normative and behavioural finance factors are involved in investment decisions. This formed the basis for the subsequent expert review survey to explore how significant the behavioural factors were manifested in the judgement when compared with the normative factors.

Three out of four theoretical behavioural factors manifested themselves in the investment decisions: investor sentiment, anchoring factors and overconfidence. The overall impact of these three behavioural factors was that they were as significant as normative factors in investment decisions. The heuristic availability of information was found to have no significant effect on experienced REIT fund managers.

The findings were based on four multiple cases and an expert review survey of six frontline fund managers, which form a baseline upon which further research can be conducted to widen the scope of research to cover all REITs in Australasia so that the results can become more robust to benefit the entire market in the region.

As behavioural factors are significant in the decision-making process, REIT fund managers should raise awareness to avoid the significant behavioural factors identified, in particular investor sentiment, which was found to be the most significant one.

This study confirms the relative significance of behavioural factors in property investment decisions within the context of Australasian REITs and alerts fund managers to the ways they should follow to ensure rational investments and market efficiency. It also extends the scale of existing studies to cover not only Australia but also New Zealand for the benefit of the entire Australasian market.

This paper investigates the relationship between the sustainable finance disclosure regulation (SFDR) and the performance of unlisted real estate funds.

While existing literature has primarily focused on the impact of voluntary sustainability disclosure, such as certifications or reporting standards, this study addresses a significant research gap by constructing and analyzing the financial J-Curve of 40 funds under the SFDR. The authors employ a panel regression analysis to examine the effects of different SFDR categories on fund performance.

The findings reveal that funds categorized under Article 8 of the SFDR do not exhibit significantly poorer performance compared to funds categorized under Article 6 during the initial phase after launch. On average, Article 8 funds even demonstrate positive returns earlier than their peers. However, the panel regression analysis suggests that Article 8 funds slightly underperform when compared to Article 6 funds over time.

While investors may not anticipate lower initial returns when opting for higher SFDR categories, they should nevertheless be aware of the limitations inherent in the existing SFDR labeling system within the unlisted real estate sector.

To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first quantitative examination of unlisted real estate fund performance under the SFDR. By providing unique insights into the J-Curves of funds, our research contributes to the existing body of knowledge on the impact of sustainability regulations in the financial sector.

Using overlapped portfolio data on public equity funds in Korea, the authors construct several types of fund-stock weighted bipartite networks and measure fund network centrality. The authors also examine the relationship between network centrality and fund investment performance. The authors' results are three-fold. First, the authors find that the fund centrality of the network in which funds and stocks are connected based on the most active investing behavior positively affects the fund performance. Second, the funds with a high centrality level based on the same network generate higher returns by holding stocks with high value uncertainty. Third, the authors find that fund centrality is not associated with herd behavior. Based on these results, the authors argue that fund centrality is a proxy of information advantage and skill of fund managers. The authors' paper shows that network analysis could be a new way to identify funds with better performance and measure the skill and information advantage to construct an optimal portfolio.

The purpose of this research is to analyze the influence of heuristics on Brazilian investors' behavior in the decision-making process.

The authors apply the partial least squares structural equation modeling methodology. This sample is composed of 220 investors.

The heuristics of overconfidence and anchoring positively influence investors' decision-making, while loss aversion negatively influences it. The herd effect exhibits no influence. The results also support the idea that decision-making positively influences investors' performance. Investors feel secure in their attitudes regarding financial decision-making, even if their decisions are not always rational as they are affected by biases.

This article explains the influence of heuristics on investors' decision-making and performance in the Brazilian context during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper aims to investigate not only the performance of Portuguese mutual funds investing in domestic and international equities but also which fund characteristics, such as age, size, family size, expense ratios and flows, influence future performance.

Fund performance is evaluated over the 2005–2022 period by a robust six-factor model, while the impact of fund characteristics on performance is assessed by a set of fixed-effects panel data regressions with two-way cluster-robust standard errors.

The results show that, while funds investing in domestic equities predominantly exhibit neutral performance, most international equity funds have significantly negative alphas. The authors document a negative and statistically significant relationship between fund age and performance for all fund categories. Total expense ratios have an inverse relationship with domestic equity fund performance but do not impact the performance of international equity funds significantly. Though fund flows have a neutral effect on performance across the overall period, they are important determinants of both domestic and international funds’ performance in more recent years.

The authors contribute to the literature by carrying out a comprehensive analysis, based on recent and robust methodologies, of the impact of mutual fund characteristics on the future performance of Portuguese equity funds. The research findings serve as a premise for advising investors on how to choose the top-performing funds.

This paper aims to examine the relationship between environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance and systemic risk sensitivity of Chinese listed companies. From the consumer loyalty and investor structure perspectives, the relationship between ESG performance and systemic risk sensitivity is analyzed.

Since Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) ESG officially began to analyze and track China A-shares from 2018, 275 listed companies in the SynTao Green ESG testing list for 2015–2021 are selected as the initial model. To measure the systematic risk sensitivity, this study uses the beta coefficient, from capital asset pricing model (CPAM), employing statistics and data (STATA) software.

The study reveals that high ESG rating companies have high corresponding consumer loyalty and healthy trading structure of institutional investors, thereby the systemic risk sensitivity is lower. This paper reveals that companies with high ESG rating are significantly less sensitive to systemic risk than those with low ESG rating. At the same time, ESG has a weaker impact on the systemic risk of high-cap companies than low-cap companies.

The study helps the companies understand the influence of market value on the relationship between ESG performance and systemic risk sensitivity. Moreover, this paper explains explicitly why ESG performance insulates a firm’s stock from market downturns with the lens of consumer loyalty theory and investor structure theory.

The paper provides new insights on the company’s ESG performance that significantly affects the company’s systemic risk sensitivity.

Over the past two decades, the topics of Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) have attracted an increasing amount of interest, reflecting a growing sensitivity of investors and corporations towards environmental, social and governance issues.

This survey offers an overview of the academic literature on ESG/CSR through the lens of investors, institutions and firms. We first discuss the definitions of ESG and CSR and their relationship to each other.

We next describe how ESG is measured and note problems with the measurement of and quality of ESG data and discrepancies between different measures of ESG. We then turn our attention to investors, examining what types of investors invest in ESG and the role of institutional investors in ESG. From the firm's perspective, we discuss why firms themselves conduct ESG. We also summarize the literature on the impact of ESG on firms: how ESG affects firms' financing, disclosure and reporting activities and firm performance. Finally, we describe other consequences of the focus of ESG and CSR on firms and investors.

This survey offers an overview of the academic literature on ESG/CSR through the lens of investors, institutions and firms.