Search results

This survey explores the application of real options theory to the field of health economics. The integration of options theory offers a valuable framework to address these challenges, providing insights into healthcare investments, policy analysis and patient care pathways.

This research employs the real options theory, a financial concept, to delve into health economics challenges. Through a systematic approach, three distinct models rooted in this theory are crafted and analyzed. Firstly, the study examines the value of investing in emerging health technology, factoring in future advantages, associated costs and unpredictability. The second model is patient-centric, evaluating the choice between immediate treatment switch and waiting for more clarity, while also weighing the associated risks. Lastly, the research assesses pandemic-related government policies, emphasizing the importance of delaying decisions in the face of uncertainties, thereby promoting data-driven policymaking.

Three different real options models are presented in this study to illustrate their applicability and value in aiding decision-makers. (1) The first evaluates investments in new technology, analyzing future benefits, discount rates and benefit volatility to determine investment value. (2) In the second model, a patient has the option of switching treatments now or waiting for more information before optimally switching treatments. However, waiting has its risks, such as disease progression. By modeling the potential benefits and risks of both options, and factoring in the time value, this model aids doctors and patients in making informed decisions based on a quantified assessment of potential outcomes. (3) The third model concerns pandemic policy: governments can end or prolong lockdowns. While awaiting more data on the virus might lead to economic and societal strain, the model emphasizes the economic value of deferring decisions under uncertainty.

This research provides a quantified perspective on various decisions in healthcare, from investments in new technology to treatment choices for patients to government decisions regarding pandemics. By applying real options theory, stakeholders can make more evidence-driven decisions.

Decisions about patient care pathways and pandemic policies have direct societal implications. For instance, choices regarding the prolongation or ending of lockdowns can lead to economic and societal strain.

The originality of this study lies in its application of real options theory, a concept from finance, to the realm of health economics, offering novel insights and analytical tools for decision-makers in the healthcare sector.

This study aims to validate the link between production manipulation and a firm’s performance variability (fundamentals and stock returns). It explores whether executives' risk-taking incentives encourage production deviations around the normal level during uncertainty.

Utilizing panel data of manufacturing firms from Compustat over three decades, the study investigates production management practices during economic uncertainty. The Economic Policy Uncertainty Index (EPU) is employed as a key metric. The empirical strategy involves documenting the effect of economic uncertainty on overproduction and underproduction, examining the role of executive compensation and assessing the impact on risk.

The research finds that risk-taking incentives increase over/underproduction, particularly amplifying the extent of underproduction during uncertainty. Production deviation rises, indicating that firms take greater risk by engaging in abnormal business operations. The study’s results are robust against various econometric methods, emphasizing the influence of risk-taking incentives on corporate production decisions.

While providing valuable insights, the study acknowledges inherent limitations, including factors influencing production decisions beyond risk-taking incentives. Further research could explore additional determinants for a comprehensive understanding.

The findings highlight the potential dark side of executive compensation that motivates suboptimal risk-taking decisions, impacting risk, cost of capital and firm performance. Policymakers and compensation committees can use these insights to design efficient systems that mitigate moral hazard problems associated with productivity changes.

The study emphasizes the broader social implications of production manipulation under uncertainty. It prompts discussions on the ethical considerations of managerial opportunism, its potential consequences for stakeholders and market dynamics.

This study contributes to the literature by examining the role of economic uncertainty on production manipulation and the influence of risk-taking incentives. It extends the earnings management literature by considering real activity manipulation and emphasizing the importance of decomposing production deviation into positive and negative values.

The authors seek to analyze the impact of weak corporate governance by top executives of a firm on the firm's earnings reports. This research is meant to further emphasize the impact of co-opted executives on a firm, primarily through their impact on earnings management.

Using financial data from 11,473 firm-year observations, the authors utilize ordinary least squares (OLS), 2-stage IV regressions, propensity score matching (PSM) and entropy balancing to analyze the impact of a co-opted top management team on discretionary accruals and restatements.

The authors find empirical evidence that firms with weak corporate governance from top executives are more likely to manipulate reported earnings and have lower financial reporting quality. The authors also find that the effect of co-opted executives on earnings management is weaker when a chief executive officer's (CEO’s) incentives are not aligned with those of top executives, suggesting that executives prevent earnings management due to reputational concerns. Co-opted chief financial officers (CFOs) increase the magnitude of earnings management in a firm but are not solely responsible for the authors' results.

The authors' results suggest that the top executive team provides an important first defense in the prevention of earnings management and corporate wrongdoing. Co-option of the top executive team may be an important consideration when doing research into corporate governance.

This study aims to examine the role of economic political uncertainty (EPU) on various corporate policies, namely, cash reserves, investment, capital structure and operating activities of Indian listed firms.

To assess the influence of policy-related uncertainties, the author uses the India-specific EPU news-based index constructed by Baker et al. (2016) as a proxy for policy uncertainties. This study uses data from listed Indian firms spanning the period 2003 to 2019. The author uses panel regression models with firm-fixed effects to analyze the impact of EPU on corporate policies, including cash reserves, leverage and CAPEX, while considering key control variables.

In response to heightened EPU, firms tend to increase their cash reserves, curtail their investment activities and favour secured financing options. Notably, this study aligns with the “real options” framework, demonstrating that firms with substantial investment irreversibility significantly reduce their capital expenditures during periods of elevated EPU. Additionally, the results reveal that rising EPU corresponds to heightened borrowing costs and increased operating expenses for firms.

In contrast to prior research that predominantly investigated the impact of EPU on the decisions of listed firms in developed markets, this study delves into the role of EPU on corporate policies among listed firms in India. This focus is particularly relevant, given the significant policy changes that have transpired in the Indian business landscape in recent years.

Surprisingly little is known of the various methods of security analysis used by financial analysts with industry-specific knowledge. Financial analysts’ industry knowledge is a favored and appreciated attribute by fund managers and institutional investors. Understanding analysts’ use of industry-specific valuation models, which are the main value drivers within different industries, will enhance our understanding of important aspects of value creation in these industries. This paper contributes to the broader understanding of how financial analysts in various industries approach valuation, offering insights that can be beneficial to a wide range of stakeholders in the financial market.

This paper systematically reviews existing research to consolidate the current understanding of analysts’ use of valuation models and factors. It aims to demystify what can often be seen as a “black box”, shedding light on the valuation tools employed by financial analysts across diverse industries.

The use of industry-specific valuation models and factors by analysts is a subject of considerable interest to both academics and investors. The predominant model in several industries is P/E, with some exceptions. Notably, EV/EBITDA is favored in the telecom, energy and materials sectors, while the capital goods industry primarily relies on P/CF. In the REITs sector, P/AFFO is the most commonly employed model. In specific sectors like pharmaceuticals, energy and telecom, DCF is utilized. However, theoretical models like RIM and AEG find limited use among analysts.

This is the first paper systematically reviewing the research on analyst’s use of industry-specific stock valuation methods. It serves as a foundation for future research in this field and is likely to be of interest to academics, analysts, fund managers and investors.

The objective of this paper is to examine the determinants of the Greek house market during the period 2006–2022 using not only economic variables but also behavioral variables, taking advantage of available information on the volume of Google searches. In order to quantify the behavioral variables, we implement a Python code using the Pytrends 4.9.2 library.

In our study, we assert that models relying solely on economic variables, such as GDP growth, mortgage interest rates and inflation, may lack precision compared to those that integrate behavioral indicators. Recognizing the importance of behavioral insights, we incorporate Google Trends data as a key behavioral indicator, aiming to enhance our understanding of market dynamics by capturing online interest in Greek real estate through searches related to house prices, sales and related topics. To quantify our behavioral indicators, we utilize a Python code leveraging Pytrends, enabling us to extract relevant queries for global and local searches. We employ the EGARCH(1,1) model on the Greek house price index, testing several macroeconomic variables alongside our Google Trends indexes to explain housing returns.

Our findings show that in some cases the relationship between economic variables, such as inflation and mortgage rates, and house prices is not always consistent with the theory because we should highlight the special conditions of the examined country. The country of our sample, Greece, presents the special case of a country with severe sovereign debt issues, which at the same time has the privilege to have a strong currency and the support and the obligations of being an EU/EMU member.

The results suggest that Google Trends can be a valuable tool for academics and practitioners in order to understand what drives house prices. However, further research should be carried out on this topic, for example, causality relationships, to gain deeper insight into the possibilities and limitations of using such tools in analyzing housing market trends.

This is the first paper, to the best of our knowledge, that examines the benefits of Google Trends in studying the Greek house market.

Managers must make numerous strategic decisions in order to initiate and implement a business model innovation (BMI). This paper examines how managers perceive the management team interacts when making BMI decisions. The paper also investigates how group biases and board members’ risk willingness affect this process.

Empirical data were collected through 26 in-depth interviews with German managing directors from 13 companies in four industries (mobility, manufacturing, healthcare and energy) to explore three research questions: (1) What group effects are prevalent in BMI group decision-making? (2) What are the key characteristics of BMI group decisions? And (3) what are the potential relationships between BMI group decision-making and managers' risk willingness? A thematic analysis based on Gioia's guidelines was conducted to identify themes in the comprehensive dataset.

First, the results show four typical group biases in BMI group decisions: Groupthink, social influence, hidden profile and group polarization. Findings show that the hidden profile paradigm and groupthink theory are essential in the context of BMI decisions. Second, we developed a BMI decision matrix, including the following key characteristics of BMI group decision-making managerial cohesion, conflict readiness and information- and emotion-based decision behavior. Third, in contrast to previous literature, we found that individual risk aversion can improve the quality of BMI decisions.

This paper provides managers with an opportunity to become aware of group biases that may impede their strategic BMI decisions. Specifically, it points out that managers should consider the key cognitive constraints due to their interactions when making BMI decisions. This work also highlights the importance of risk-averse decision-makers on boards.

This qualitative study contributes to the literature on decision-making by revealing key cognitive group biases in strategic decision-making. This study also enriches the behavioral science research stream of the BMI literature by attributing a critical influence on the quality of BMI decisions to managers' group interactions. In addition, this article provides new perspectives on managers' risk aversion in strategic decision-making.

Exploring how racism continues to persist throughout public and nonprofit organizations is central to undoing persistent society-wide injustices in the United States and around the globe. The authors provide two cases for identifying and understanding the ways in which philanthropy’s whiteness does harm to K–12 students and communities of color.

In this article, the authors draw on critical race theory and critical whiteness studies, specifically Cheryl Harris' work to expose the whiteness of philanthropy, not as a racial identity, but in the way that philanthropy is performed. The authors characterize one of the property functions of whiteness, the right to exclude, as working through two mechanisms: neoliberal exclusion and overt exclusion. Drawing on this construction of the right to exclude, the authors present two cases: the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the City Fund.

Whether intentional or not, the Gates Foundation and the City Fund each exclude communities of color in several ways: from changes to schools and districts, parents' experiences navigating school enrollment due to these changes, to academic assessments and political lobbying.

These cases provide a way for researchers and practitioners to see how organizations in real time reify the extant racial hierarchy so as to disrupt such organizational processes and practices for racial justice.