Search results

This study aims to squeeze some critical viewpoints from the shifting landscape of business research (she), that conceals her true personality. Today, she is relentlessly struggling to strike a good balance between science and creativity. Therefore, she resolves to pivot the scholarly attention towards “scientific creativity”.

Business research is personified in this viewpoint paper. By adopting the methodology of third-person omniscient, the author pens the introspections of contemporary business research, and how she would express herself in modern times if she were a living person.

Business research introspects that she is suffering from the phenomena of “existential crisis” and “popularity fallacy” in contemporary times. Though she believes that the science of business research is evolving significantly, worries about becoming scientifically monotonous grip her in the dark of the nights. She laments the grim reality of today; studies of a similar nature dominate the research literature while the philosopher in her is fading gradually. Therefore, she calls for more “scientific creativity”. She realises that solving societal problems must remain her foremost priority. However, she believes that her priorities towards society and world peace depend on whether she could revitalise the fading philosopher of personality.

The current viewpoint paper is an attempt to shed some light on the landscape of contemporary business research, which is undergoing unremitting changes. It also highlights the desirable changes in the context of business research.

This current study draws a comparison between the performance indicators of public sector banks (PSBs) and private sector banks (or non-PSBs) in India. The study controls for the impact of COVID-19.

The study uses strongly balanced panel data for seven years of 12 PSBs and 10 non-PSBs from the Nifty PSU Bank Index and Nifty Private Bank Index. The study applies panel data methodology to arrive at the results.

The study demonstrates that the behavior of indicators of performance and returns volatility for PSBs and non-PSBs differs substantially. While factors like capital adequacy ratio (CAR), cost management (COST), liquidity (LIQ), inflation and economic growth exhibit a similar impact on both categories of Indian banks, the effect of credit risk (RISK), market power (POWER) and COVID-19 on performance and returns stability is different for PSBs and non-PSBs.

There is a limited sample size of banks in India.

PSBs and non-PSBs need distinct treatments when calibrating performance indicators.

The performance and stability of banks are essential for society at large, the depositors and the investors.

The study provides vibrant implications for insight for banks to calibrate the variables that determine performance and stability, regulators and policymakers for effective governance of the banking ecosystem and effective utilization of public funds and capital. The findings are relevant for policymaking today, when the government is considering the privatization of a few PSBs.

The microfinancing sector is infamous for being prone to high credit risks due to loan defaults by its poor borrowers. Conversely, the sector is also criticized for creating debt traps for the poor. The dual nature of these peculiar problems in microfinancing causes the market failure phenomenon. Therefore, the current study explores whether public policy intervention is required to address market failure.

The study undertakes a critical review of existing literature, the news, the policy documents and other publicly available information to shape the viewpoints in this study. Constructive criticism is used to build arguments to arrive at a conceptual framework that depicts how public policy should interact with markets to address the peculiar problems of the microfinancing sector.

The findings indicate that market failure in microfinancing is real and pressing. Therefore, public policy is invited, though in its limited form. While the policy intervention may help the formal microfinancing arena by regulating the interest rates, the policy administration in the informal sector is likely to fail. Therefore, the policy should attempt to create an environment of inclusiveness. Policies that rely on coercion are not recommended. In the long run, subsidies via policy intervention are discouraged. Instead, the policy should motivate the microfinancing sector to become self-reliant.

The study is one of its kind to provide perspectives on specific market failures and policy interventions in microfinancing, particularly in economies where formal and informal sectors coexist and are equally crucial.

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues have become the cornerstone of investment decisions in firms today. With that, publicly traded ESG indices (like the BSE ESG 100 index in India) have come into existence. The existing literature signifies that ESG generates financial implications and induces stability. The current study aims to test whether the firms listed on the ESG index (ESG-sensitive firms) face less financial distress than those not listed on such an index.

The study applies panel data difference-in-differences (DID) regression by considering ESG as an unstaggered treatment to 74 non-financial firms listed on India's Bombay Stock Exchanges (BSE) 100 index. In total, 42 firms are ESG treated as they got listed on the BSE ESG 100 index, formed in 2017. The remaining 32 firms form the control group. The confidence intervals and standard errors are estimated using clustered robust errors and the Donald and Lang method.

Listing on the ESG index matters for financial stability; differences in financial distress are significant on financial distress. ESG-sensitive firms face less financial distress than non-ESG firms (or firms not perceived as ESG-sensitive). The results are consistent across two financial distress measures, Altman z-scores for emerged and emerging markets. Thus, the DID in distress status between ESG-sensitive and non-ESG firms matter.

The study creates vibrant implications for practitioners using ESG to reduce financial distress.

The study is one of its kind to test the treatment effects of ESG on firm value and quantify treatment effects on financial distress.

The study intends to determine the environment, social and governance (ESG)'s impact on the firm's value. In addition, how ownership concentration (OC) and transparency and disclosures (TD) influence the impact of firm's ESG on its valuation (firm value).

The relevant panel data with a sample of 78 Indian firms for five years (2016–2020) are gathered. Both linear and nonlinear connections of firm's ESG with its value are tested. In addition, TD and two components of OC (stakes of promoters and institutional investors) are empirically tested as moderators on the connectivity of the firm's ESG with its value.

The linear association of firm's ESG with its value is found insignificant. ESG is found to have a positive and nonlinear (U-shaped) impact on the value of the firms. TD does not moderate the connectivity of firm's ESG with its valuation (firm value). The higher stakes of promoters positively affect the association of firm's ESG with the valuation. However, the high stakes of institutional investors retard the ESG's influence on the firm value.

The study is on Indian firms for five years. A sample of more than one nation and a longer duration (10 years) could have helped better determine the associations among the variables. In turn, these limitations can be the present study's future scope. In addition, the authors find a lack of standardisation of the ESG scales, which is a problem in measuring it. Using standardisation scales of ESG for the analysis can also be future scope on the topic.

The investors would be wary of the level of ESG to influence the firms' value positively. Managers also need to be careful to have sincere efforts for ESG to reap its rich dividends. Policymakers may take cognisance that despite having board seats (in a few cases), institutional investors negatively (instead of positively as expected) influences the ESG's association with the firm's value. They may bring some guidelines or legislative changes to fix responsibility on the part of the institutional investors.

No study reports the linear and nonlinear association of ESG on the firm's value to observe clearer connectivity between the two. Similarly, no study is observed to have promoters and institutional investors as moderators on the association of firm's ESG with the valuation (firm value). Hence, the present study considerably augments the extant literature on the topic and its contribution.