Search results

The study aims to investigate market reactions associated with the JUST 100 rankings published by JUST Capital, a non-profit organization, as well as differences in financial reporting quality and performance between selected firms and their industry peers.

This study uses a sample of 431 firms selected as the 100 America’s Most Just Companies between 2016 and 2020 by JUST Capital. This study performs both an event study to determine whether the rankings are useful to investors and cross-sectional regression analyses on the characteristics of selected firms compared to their peers.

This study finds that investors react positively to selected firms around the time of the release of the JUST 100 rankings, suggesting that the rankings are decision-useful. This study also finds that selected firms exhibit higher accounting quality and financial performance than their peers.

Rankings may not be free from bias because of JUST Capital’s ownership of an exchange-traded fund.

The findings validate the rankings as well as the methodology used by JUST Capital, as they show market participants value firms that engage in socially responsible actions through their commitment to positively impact five key stakeholder groups: employees, customers, communities, environment and shareholders.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that shows the importance of the JUST 100 rankings for investment decisions. Considering the growing push for companies to disclose environmental, social and governance (ESG) activities, this study provides evidence to support ESG disclosure regulations.

The extant literature on work–life balance (WLB) has generally overlooked the interrelationship between leadership and WLB. Does leadership have any impact on employees' use of WLB policies and practices? To answer this question, this article considers the social exchange theory as well as transformational and transactional leadership in an investigation of the impact of leadership on WLB.

The study employs qualitative data from 32 semi-structured interviews to achieve the study’s objectives.

The research reveals that leadership does matter in WLB. The study findings reveal that both the transactional and transformational leadership styles result in the establishment of strong reciprocal relationships between leaders and employees in terms of using WLB policies and practices. Managers only sanction the use of WLB policies and practices only as a reward for excellent performance or when they are completely sure the outcome will favour the organisation. The study concludes that the desire to achieve WLB has often led many employees to go the extra mile in carrying out their work duties, which is rewarded with an approval to use WLB policies and practices. These non-contractual exchanges emphasise reciprocity and are based on trust.

The extent to which the findings of this research can be generalised is constrained by the size and nature of the research sample.

Many managers are transactional leaders, and they purposefully allow their employees to use WLB policies and practices only as a reward for meeting targets and for excellent performance. This means that employees who fall short of the required targets and expected performance are not permitted to use WLB policies and practices. This finding implies that such employees experience incessant work–family conflict, which may have negative implications for their work engagement, overall well-being and work performance.

This study demonstrates that leadership is relevant to WLB. It shows that transformational leadership is supportive of WLB, as it considers employees' work performance and non-work outcomes. The results and practical implications of this study aids the understanding of the non-contractual exchanges involved in manager–employee relationships, which is crucial for ensuring employees' achievement of WLB and for organisations to achieve their goals.

We investigated the association of COVID-19 indicators and economic uncertainty indices on payment-based system cryptocurrency (i.e. Bitcoin, Ripple and Dogecoin) returns.

We used an autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) model for panel data and performed robustness checks by utilizing a random effect model (REM) and generalized method of moments (GMM). There are 25 most adopted cryptocurrency’s countries and the data spans from 22 March 2021 to 6 May 2022.

This research discovered four findings: (1) the index of COVID-19 vaccine confidence (VCI) recovers the economic and Bitcoin has become more attractive, causing investors to shift their investment from Dogecoin to Bitcoin. However, the VCI was revealed to be insignificant to Ripple; (2) during uncertain times, Bitcoin could perform as a diversifier, while Ripple could behave as a diversifier, safe haven or hedge. Meanwhile, the movement of Dogecoin prices tended to be influenced by public figures’ actions; (3) public opinion on Twitter and government policy changes regarding COVID-19 and economy had a crucial role in investment decision making; and (4) the COVID-19 variants revealed insignificant results to payment-based system cryptocurrency returns.

This study contributed to verifying the vaccine confidence index effect on payment-based system cryptocurrency returns. Also, we further investigated the uncertainty indicators impacting on cryptocurrency returns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lastly, we utilized the COVID-19 variants as a cryptocurrency returns’ new determinant.