Search results

This paper aims to verify whether the integration of sustainability in executive compensation positively affects firms’ non-financial performance and whether corporate governance characteristics enhance the relationship between sustainability compensation and firms’ non-financial performance and to expand the domain of the impact of sustainability on non-financial performance.

This analysis is based on a sample of companies listed on the Milan Italian Stock Exchange from the Financial Times Milan Stock Exchange Index over the 2016–2020 period. Regression analysis was used by using data retrieved from the Refinitiv Eikon database and the sample firms’ remuneration reports.

The findings of this paper show that embedding sustainability in executive compensation positively affects firms’ non-financial performance. The results of this paper also reveal that specific corporate governance features can improve the impact of sustainability on non-financial performance.

This analysis is limited to Italian firms included in the Financial Times Milan Stock Exchange Index; however, the findings are highly significant.

The findings provide regulators with useful insights for considering the integration of sustainability goals into executive remuneration. Another implication is that policymakers should require – at least – listed firms to fulfil specific corporate governance structural requirements. Finally, the findings can provide investors and financial analysts with a greater awareness of the role played by executive remuneration in the long-term value-creation process.

This paper contributes to addressing the relationship among sustainability, remuneration and non-financial disclosure, drawing on the stakeholder–agency theoretical framework and focusing on Italian firms. This issue has received limited attention with controversial results in the literature.

This paper aims to examine the impact of the recent financial crisis on audit quality by analysing discretionary accruals.

This study considers a sample of German, French, Italian and Spanish non-financial firms from 2005 to 2013 to investigate the auditor’s independence. It uses a cross-sectional and time-series ordinary least squares regression model to control for other predictors of the auditor’s independence when the financial crisis produces a decrease in audit quality.

The proportion of the non-financial firms having lower audit quality was higher during the financial crisis. In addition, during the crisis auditors were less likely to provide a higher audit quality for these non-financial firms. The level of audit quality returned to normal levels during the post-crisis years when the crisis had ceased.

These findings contribute to the literature on the impact of economic and financial changes on audit quality. In addition, this research finds that the Big Four accounting firms provide a higher audit quality in different circumstances from non-Big Four accounting firms, and that audit quality decreased during the crisis and returned to normal in the post-crisis period.

The main purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between credit risk and financial performance in non-financial firms.

In order to test the relationship between Altman Z-score model as a credit risk proxy and the Return on Asset and Equity as indicator for financial performance with control variables leverage, liquidity and firm size. Least Square Dummy Variable regression analysis is opted. This research's sample included 69 non-financial companies from the Pakistan Stock Exchange KSE-100 Index between 2012 and 2017.

This study establishes the findings that Altman Z-score, leverage and firm size significantly impact the financial performance of the KSE-100 non-financial firms. However, liquidity is found to be insignificant in this study. Altman Z-score and firm size have shown a positive relationship to the financial performance, whereas leverage is inversely related.

This study brings in a new and useful insight into the literature on the relationship between credit risk and financial performance. The results of this study provide investors, businesses and managers related to non-financial firms in the KSE-100 index with significant insight about credit risk's impact on performance.

The evidence of the credit risk and financial performance on samples of non-financial firms has not been studied; mainly it has been limited to the banking sector. This study helps in the evaluation of Altman Z-score's performance in the non-financial firms in KSE-100 index as well.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of the comply-or-explain principle in the Italian context. In particular, the analysis will evaluate, which factor impact on firms' voluntary adoption of this tool to adequate their non-financial reports to the legal requirements of Directive 95/2014/EU.

The methodology consists of two different levels of analysis. The first part is statistical descriptive, and it consists of a rhetorical analysis on the justifications provided by the firms about their omissions to comply with Directive 95/2014/EU. The second part is inferential and its aim is to evaluate, which factors impact on comply-or-explains adoption.

The findings reveal how the comply-or-explain application in Italy has been characterized by several criticisms. The result highlight how the justifications adopted by the firms is influenced by their sector of activity and omission's type. Moreover, the analysis suggests how the sector of activity and the level of adherence to global reporting initiative influenced the average number of omissions.

The limitations of the research are represented by the focuses on a single country and by the short period of analysis. In this sense, future research could be addressed to the analysis of countries different from Italy. Moreover, accounting scholars could provide further contributions to the political debate through the evolution of the “comply-or-explain” principle’s strategies over the years.

The practical implications connected to the present research are twofold. The first one is represented by the possibility for policymakers to increase the degree of attention about the use of comply-or-explain as legitimization's tool. The second one is represented by the possibility for practitioners to identify a new reporting framework.

The social implications are represented by the possibility for stakeholders to evaluate the reliability's degree of the disclosure produced by Italian public interest entities after the implementation of Directive 95/2014/EU.

Despite the growing attention paid by academics regard Directive 95/2014/EU, this is the first attempt to analyze the comply-or-explain from a rhetorical perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between board attributes and firm value to identify board attributes that are “pleasant” to have from what is required to have in financial and non-financial firms.

The paper uses five measures of firm value to estimate the relationship between internal governance mechanism for financial and non-financial firms using system generalized methods of moments.

The paper finds that board independence and board size is a “must” have and value-enhancing board attributes for financial firms. On the contrary, board independence may be considered as a “pleasant” board attribute for non-financial firms. Further, the paper finds that duality is not value-enhancing board attribute for both financial and non-financial firms.

The findings imply that differences in requirements for strategic or resource and monitoring functions in financial and non-financial firms are responsible for the differences in board attributes that are value-relevant for these firms.

The findings suggest that the value relevance of board attributes differs in financial and non-financial firms.

This study aims to examine whether chief executive officer (CEO) pay-performance sensitivity to shareholder wealth is related to the use of non-financial performance measures in incentive contracts.

Using hand-collected performance measure data in a sample of S&P 500 firms across the period 1994–2010, this study investigates the sensitivity of CEO bonus and cash pay to shareholder wealth of firms that use non-financial performance (NFPM) measures of varying types and contractual weights in their bonus contracts along with financial measures (NFPM firms) in comparison to that of firms using financial measures only (FPM firms).

This study finds evidence that the pay-performance sensitivity is stronger in NFPM firms than in FPM firms. These results are driven by the use of CEO individual goals and operational efficiency. Furthermore, when using environmental, social and governance factors, the pay-performance sensitivity is stronger in terms of accounting performance only. This study also finds that using NFPM enhances pay-performance sensitivity more as their contractual weights increase and as financial risk increases.

These findings are important to stakeholders, and especially regulators in understanding incentive effects of alternative performance measures. This study also sheds light on what types of non-financial measures are better in helping firms align CEOs’ incentives to shareholders’ interests.

This study contributes to prior research on benefits of non-financial information within the context of executive compensation. This study presents original results about the effects of contractual weights of non-financial measures and financial risk on CEO pay-performance sensitivity. This study also presents new insights regarding how different types of non-financial measures affect CEO pay-performance sensitivity.

Research has called for increased relevance of business reporting. A step towards that goal is an increased disclosure of non‐financial information. At the present time, non‐financial information is mostly provided on a voluntary basis.

Valuation relevance of non‐financial information is studied by examining the information content of 200 analyst reports written on a respective number of firms listed in the S&P 500 index, while simultaneously performing a disclosure study of non‐financial information by the same 200 firms in their annual reports.

We found the valuation relevance of non‐financial information to be related to the size of the target firm. Further, analysts’ use of non‐financial information is related to the level of non‐financial information in the 10‐k report of the target firm. Finally, analysts tend to rely more heavily on forward‐looking non‐financial information than on historical non‐financial information.

The findings in this paper have implications for policy makers, preparers of business reporting, and others having to make judgments on information usefulness.

This study looks at the valuation relevance of non‐financial information, as opposed to earlier studies that have judged the usefulness of non‐financial information by measuring its value relevance. Information is regarded to have valuation relevance if it is used by analysts in the valuation process. Hence, valuation relevance offers an alternative way of measuring information usefulness.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the sensitivity of firm value to exchange rate (ER) movements, and the determinants of such exposure for 100 European blue chip companies over 2001-2012.

The authors adopt a disaggregated framework that distinguishes between Eurozone and non-Eurozone firms, and between financial and non-financial firms across the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods of the recent financial crisis.

The authors find no significant difference between Eurozone and non-Eurozone, and financial and non-financial firms. Exposure is found to be higher during the financial crisis, across all sub-samples of firms. In the majority of cases the exposure coefficient is significantly positive, indicating that European firms’ stock returns are positively (negatively) affected by depreciation (appreciation) of ERs (indirect quotation).

It is recommended that firms’ financial plans budget for higher liquidity levels in order to build up, during “good times”, a natural hedge for the higher exposure likely to be faced during periods characterized by greater financial distress.

The main novelty lies in the adoption of a disaggregated framework that discriminates between pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods in order to ascertain the extent to which the recent financial crisis affected the relationship in question.

This study aims to compare the impact of board characteristics on the performance of listed non-financial firms to the impact of board characteristics on the performance of listed financial firms (commercial banks) in Ghana.

The fixed and random effects models with generalized least square specifications are used in estimating regressions to correct for heteroscedasticity and serial correlation. Additionally, this study uses lagged models of the board variables to address the possibility of the presence of endogeneity and to generate robust estimates.

The empirical results show some similarities and differences on the impact of board characteristics on the performance of listed non-financial firms and banks. On similarities, for both non-financial firms and banks, board size is seen to have a significant non-linear impact on Tobin’s q. Also, the proportion of foreign board members shows a positively significant relationship with firm performance for both listed non-financial firms and banks. The effect of the proportion of board members with higher educational qualifications on firm performance appears to be negative and statistically significant for both sample of firms. On the other hand, the impact of board composition and board gender diversity on firm performance differs from listed banks and non-financial firms.

The panel regressions for the listed banks were run on 63 observations because of the small sample size for the listed banks. Though enough for estimation purposes, inferences from results should be made with caution.

This paper, unlike most corporate governance – firm performance studies, focuses not only on listed non-financial firms but also on listed banks. From a multi-theoretical perspective, this paper provides a comparative analysis on the impact of board characteristics on financial performance of listed non-financial firms and banks.

This study attempts to identify fundamental determinants of bond ratings for non-financial and financial firms. Further the study aims to develop a parsimonious bond rating model and compare its efficacy across statistical and range of machine learning methods in the Indian context. The study is motivated by the insufficiency of prior work in the Indian context.

The authors identify the critical determinants of non-financial and financial firms using multinomial logistic regression. Various machine learning and statistical methods are employed to identify the optimal bond rating prediction model. The data cover 8,346 bond issues from 2009 to 2019.

The authors find that industry concentration, sales, operating leverage, operating efficiency, profitability, solvency, strategic ownership, age, firm size and firm value play an important role in rating non-financial firms. Operating efficiency, profitability, strategic ownership and size are also relevant for financial firms besides additional determinants related to the capital adequacy, asset quality, management efficiency, earnings quality and liquidity (CAMEL) approach. The authors find that random forest outperforms logit and other machine learning methods with an accuracy rate of 92 and 91% for non-financial and financial firms.

The study identifies important determinants of bond ratings for both non-financial and financial firms. The study interalia finds that the random forest technique is the most appropriate method for bond ratings predictions in India.

Better bond ratings may mitigate corporate defaults.

Unlike prior literature, the study identifies determinants of bond ratings for both non-financial and financial firms. The study also experiments with modern machine learning techniques besides the traditional statistical approach for model building in case of relatively under researched market.