Search results

This paper aims to investigate how sell-side analysts form expectations on, analyse, and communicate the effects of corporate acquisitions.

The paper reports on case studies of three listed firms who are frequent acquirers. The case data comprise semi-structured interviews and content analysis of analyst reports and corporate reports.

The paper reports three sets of findings. First, the analysts viewed acquisitions as heterogeneous events and, therefore, also treated acquisitions differently depending on factors such as size and acquisition strategy and the perceived “authenticity” of the acquisition (i.e. whether parts of the acquisition would be more accurately described as organic growth and regular capital expenditure (CAPEX) investments). Second, the authors find that analysts struggle with analysing the effects of acquisitions at the announcement date because of a mismatch between the analysts’ need of and the analysts’ access to relevant information. Although clients demand evaluations of announced acquisitions, relevant accounting information is not published until much later and the information at hand only allows for cursory analyses. Finally, the authors find that the analysts’ valuation models were too inflexible to fully incorporate the effects of the acquisition. In sum, the analysts, therefore, developed acquisition-driven investment cases without supporting accounting information and without converting expected acquisitions into forecasts.

By adopting a qualitative case study research design, the paper contributes to the ongoing efforts to open the “black-box” of sell-side analyst behaviour. In particular, the unique research design focusses on effects related to specific corporate events (acquisitions) rather than analysts’ everyday work.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the sociology of financial analysis by exploring how sell-side analysts enact their professional roles during public earnings presentations. It addresses the following research question: How do analysts perform their professional roles in interactions with managers, fund managers and other analysts?

The research adopts a dramaturgical analysis of analysts’ interactions with managers and fund managers. The empirical material includes 50 hours of direct observations of earnings presentations and 21 interviews with analysts, managers and other relevant actors.

The findings show that analysts struggle with role conflicts because they need to satisfy the contrasting demands of managers, fund managers and colleagues. Performing the role of an expert critic mainly depends on the approval of managers; yet, analysts also find themselves in situations where they must confront the managers. To counter role conflicts and sustain their role performance, analysts also produce displays of role distance and carefully prepare to meet their audiences’ expectations. To maintain the role of the expert critic, analysts depend on both those taking their advice (fund managers) and those being reviewed (managers).

This study is one of few empirically rich investigations of analysts’ activities, interactions with managers and meetings with multiple audiences. It also contributes to previous interview studies using dramaturgical analysis by offering in-depth observations of a single, distinct situated activity system.

The aim of this paper is to explore how managers are mobilising IC items when approaching their investors and analysts. To this date, there is a lack of knowledge surrounding the translation processes of IC, from corporate disclosures to the capital market. Little is known of how managers mobilise their IC in order for analysts and investors to embrace it and consider it to be a relevant part of corporate disclosures.

The study applies a performative approach to IC, in which framing theory is mobilized to understand the duality of financial indicators. The empirical material was collected through a case study approach, focusing on the interim reporting practices of a Swedish online gaming company. The study investigated a total of 16 earnings announcements and their accompanying conference calls in the period of 2008‐2011. In addition, five interviews with top managers and financial analysts were performed.

The findings suggest that IC is highly dependent on financial indicators and can therefore not be treated as the opposite of financial capital. Instead of complementing financial capital, IC is the symptomatic quality of financial indicators, i.e. a way to make sense, contextualise and reconnect a disentangled representation with empirical phenomena.

This paper introduces a new way of viewing IC disclosures, expanding the knowledge and methodology in IC research. The paper also highlights the study of an important disclosure, expanding research on IC disclosures beyond annual reports. Finally, it offers practitioners additional insights in the communication of non‐financials to the capital market.

This paper aims to analyze the process of producing a reported profit number to understand how different actors overcome the tensions arising from the often conflicting value frames that apply in different situations during this process and how the actors can benefit from the ensuing friction.

The tensions found in the profit production process are theorized in terms of dissonance (Stark, 2009), emphasizing how multiple voices, drawing on different value frames, contribute to the search for a profit number. The authors study this by means of a case study of a large listed company in the construction industry, where, because of how judgment pervades the profit production process, the search for profit is particularly exposed.

The authors find three important value frames – caution, control and compliance – which managers, accountants and auditors draw on in the profit production process, depending on the situation they find themselves in. With this finding, the authors contribute to the previous research on financial reporting and management work and the production of profits by demonstrating how the relationships between the involved actors – primarily the auditor–client relationship – can be characterized by principled and constructive rivalry in which competing value frames can coexist alongside each other and how the dissonance created in these situations can produce generative and productive friction.

Previous research has mostly focused on profit measurement, taking the existence of a “true” profit number for granted. The auditor–client negotiation literature typically suggests that actors endeavor to solve situations in a zero-sum game where different value frames are present. This paper, drawing on an incipient theoretical approach to accounting research which emphasizes multivocality and perspective, contributes to the nascent research on financial accounting and management work in general and the profit production process in particular. With empirical illustrations of the dissonance found in this process, this paper suggests that tensions resulting from dissonance (Stark, 2009) may be a resource in situations like the profit production process.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of inscriptions on social media in enabling action at a distance. The purpose is addressed by investigating how and by what mechanisms inscriptions on social media can shape action at a distance.

We conduct a qualitative analysis of the Facebook page of a crowdfunded grassroots initiative, where the founders and their stakeholders interact.

We identify two mechanisms by which inscriptions on social media can shape action at a distance: a flow of micro-level inscriptions and a joint stabilisation of inscriptions. By signalling achievement, creating a sense of closeness and highlighting powerful explanations, these mechanisms guide what action at a distance is taken and by whom. Action thereby becomes a mutual exercise between centres of calculation and distant peripheries, highly intertwined with the stability of inscriptions. The two mechanisms indicate the importance of the boundaryless nature of the inscriptions in shaping action at a distance.

Our findings indicate new forms of inscriptions and, consequently, of novel conditions for action at a distance. These insights add to the literature on Web 2.0 and accounting, which has mainly revolved around the relationship between centres of calculation and distant peripheries that act upon each other rather than around the inscriptions that enable such action.

By mobilizing the empirical setting of a megaproject, this study problematizes public budgeting as participatory practice. The authors suggest that megaprojects are prone to democratic legitimacy challenges due to a long history of cost overruns, which provides stakeholders with a chance to dramatize a budgetary controversy.

Through article and document data, the authors reconstructed a controversy that emerged around the budget of Stockholm/Åre’s candidature for the Olympic Winter Games 2026. The authors used Boltanski and Thévenot's (2006) orders of worth to systematically analyze the justification work of key stakeholder groups involved in the controversy.

This study illustrates that a budgetary controversy was actively maintained by stakeholder groups, which resulted in a lack of public support and the eventual demise of the Olympic candidature. As such, the authors provide a more nuanced understanding of public budgeting as a controversy-based process vis-à-vis a wider public with regard to the broken institution of megaprojects.

This study suggests more attention to the disruptive power of public scrutiny and the dramatization of budgeting in megaprojects. In this empirical case, the authors show how stakeholders tend to take their technical concerns too far in order to challenge a budget, even though megaprojects generally provide an ill-suited setting for accurate forecasts.

While studies around the financial legacies of megaprojects have somewhat matured, very few have looked at pitching them. However, the authors argue that megaprojects are increasingly faced with financial skepticism upon their approval upfront.

Using the global financial crisis as a critical event and based on institutional theory and stakeholder theory, this paper aims to explore the relationship between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR). The question is how stakeholders can influence corporate responses to societal change by using their position in the governance structure.

The analysis is based on a historical analysis of data collected mainly between 2002 and 2004. The historical perspective enables an understanding of the response of the company to environmental changes.

The approach enables researchers to relate the normative component of CSR to specific governance mechanisms. These governance mechanisms are specified in direct and indirect influence pathways. Historical data shed light on how, in the upbeat of the crisis, stakeholders have influenced the principles and policies of the ING Group, a Dutch financial company.

The paper suggests that stakeholders influence principles – normative assumptions that guide corporate decisions – mainly in dialogue-based meetings (direct influence pathways). Companies are made accountable in indirect influence pathways such as regulations. The author also demonstrates that a historical approach enables an understanding of long-term historical developments and the linking of corporate policies to the normative assumptions of stakeholders.

If stakeholders wish to assess the social responsibility of a company, then they should assess the governance structure in relation to the principles and policies. The power structure within a company and that within the institutional framework in which the company operates (the governance system) strongly influences how a company executes its social responsibilities.

The paper demonstrates how stakeholders can use the governance structure to influence a bank. If society – or a specific group in society – wants banks to play a different role, this paper points to what could be the levers of change in the governance system and the governance structure.

Insights into the complex relationship between corporate governance and the processes in which the social responsibilities of a company are developed.

This chapter examines SDG 13 which deals with efforts to combat climate change. The chapter begins by outlining the targets related to this goal, the trend towards increased heating of the planet and failures to curtail carbon emissions. This is framed using criminological concepts such as state-corporate crime and carbon criminality. The major concern of the rest of the chapter is to outline a climate action plan. As part of this, it discusses a range of initiatives currently underway intended to pressure governments to take more concerted action around climate change. These include activist interventions and climate litigation. The chapter concludes by exploring the possibilities and obligations of global community action to address the most important issue of our era.

Rafis Abazov is an adjunct lecturer at the Harriman Institute at Columbia University, New York. He is the author of The Formation of Post-Soviet International Politics in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan (1999), the Freedom House Report on Kyrgyzstan (2002 and 2003), the Historical Dictionary of Kyrgyzstan (2004), and Historical Dictionary of Turkmenistan, as well as numerous articles on economic and political development in Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan. He has contributed articles to the Encyclopedia of Modern Asia, and the Encyclopedia of National Economies.