Search results

The study aims to investigate how the presence and absence of institutional equivalents (interaction of industry peers and local peers) affect the earnings management practices of firms.

The study uses discretionary accruals to operationalize earnings management. A sample of 18,744 Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) listed firm years spanning over 12 financial years (March 2010–March 2021) has been considered and analyzed through panel data regression models.

The author’s results show that the earnings management practices of a firm's institutional equivalents and the firm's own earnings management are positively associated, implying that firms closely follow their institutional equivalents. This association is found to be more pronounced among focal firms when the difference between the earnings management levels of industry peers and local peers is greater. Further, the author find that large firms aggressively imitate their industry peers and local peers, whereas profitability does not influence their imitation behavior.

The author’s findings have implications for understanding peer imitation processes, particularly when firms face increasingly multifaceted institutional environments. It suggests auditors and analysts take into account the earnings management practices of local and industry peers while analyzing the client's financial statements and making forecasts, respectively.

The study is among the pioneering attempts to explore the domain of earnings management from the lens of institutional equivalence and provides compelling evidence that the interaction of industry peers and local peers impacts the earnings management practices of firms.

The study aims at investigating the impact of real earnings management (REM) on the cross-sectional stock return after considering the moderating role of market effect, size effect, value effect and momentum effect.

The study uses weekly and monthly data of 3,085 Bombay Stock Exchange listed stocks spanning over twenty years, from January 2000 to December 2019. REM is measured through metrics developed by Roychowdhury (2006), namely, abnormal levels of operating cash flows, production costs and discretionary expenditure. The study employs univariate and bivariate portfolio-level analysis.

The findings deduced from the empirical results demonstrate that investors perceive downward REM as an element of risk; hence, they discount the stock prices at a higher rate. On the contrary, results show that investors positively perceive upward REM; hence, they hold the stocks even at a lower rate of return. This anomaly is found to be robust for all kinds of considered moderations.

The findings have important managerial implications as investors are found to assign different weights to different forms of REM, depending upon the perception regarding the magnitude of risk involved in different forms. Managers can accommodate this information during their short- and long-term corporate planning.

First, the study is among the earlier attempts to examine the association between REM and stock returns by considering the moderating role of cross-sectional effects. Second, the study considers the direction and endogenous nature of REM while investigating the issue.