Search results

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the relative profitability and growth matrix and to demonstrate its use as a competitive analysis tool.

Two well‐known drivers of value are profitability and growth. After a study of 2 × 2 matrices we applied these drivers on a relative or industry comparative basis to a 2 × 2 matrix, and then we applied that matrix to competitive analyses of two industries to assess its strategic utility.

Our findings suggest that the relative profitability and growth matrix could be a useful competitive analysis screening and communications tool.

The relative profitability and growth matrix assesses a firm's profitability and growth relative to its industry and by so doing helps to identify and classify performance in a succinct format that facilitates further analysis. After such analysis has been completed the matrix can also serve as a convenient tool to communicate the analytical findings.

The relative profitability and growth matrix is a value‐driver based 2 × 2 matrix, the strategic utility of which is demonstrated and explained in two examples.

We investigate the relative roles of key components of earnings change in explaining the value relevance of earnings across different life‐cycle stages of the firm. We hypothesize that firms in different life‐cycle stages take different strategic actions: change in sales is emphasized in the growth and mature stages, while in later stages, profitability is emphasized. Because payoffs to such strategies vary across the life‐cycle, the stock market reaction to the success firms have in employing these strategic actions is likely to vary across the life‐cycle. To test our hypotheses, we disaggregate changes in earnings into three key components: earnings change from change in sales, earnings change from change in profitability, and an interaction term comprising both sales change and profitability change. Our findings are consistent with our hypotheses: when firms are in the growth stage, the value‐relevance of change in sales is relatively greater than that of change in profitability. In the mature stage, the value relevance of change in profitability increases, relative to that of change in sales. When firms are in stagnant stage, the value‐relevance of changes in profitability are relatively greater than that of change in sales. Collectively, the results demonstrate a shift in the value relevance of earnings components from a growth emphasis early in the life‐cycle to a profitability emphasis later in the life‐cycle.

The purpose of this research is to understand US Upper Midwest dairy farm profitability performance over time and across herd size. Profitability is broken down into asset efficiency and operating profit margin. The primary objective is to determine how much information is required to accurately benchmark farm performance.

Financial ratios to measure profitability (rate of return on assets), profit margin (operating profit margin ratio), and asset efficiency (asset turnover) were collected from Michigan State University and the University of Wisconsin business analysis programs for dairy farms from 2000 through 2016. Financial ratio patterns were examined both across time and herd size. Annual distributions were divided into quartiles and the use of one to five-year averages were used to determine accuracy of quartile rank compared to true long-run farm profitability performance.

Financial performance across large herds was more uniform than across smaller herds. Small and large herd profitability performance converged in poor years but diverged in good years. Using three or more years performance greatly improved accuracy of benchmarking profitability.

The data utilized are very rich in the sense of the amount of variation across years and herd size. The results have important implications for farm financial management and benchmarking farm financial performance. Farm firms should benchmark multiple years of profitability before making major management changes to alleviate deficiencies.

This paper studies the impact of ownership structure on performance in European banking both prior and during the recent crisis. We use a panel of European banks during the period 1996–2011 and utilize random effects estimations in order to identify differences in bank performance (profitability, loan quality, and cost efficiency) due to differences in ownership structure. Both stakeholder and shareholder banks have distinct advantages, shareholder banks showing better profitability before the crisis but stakeholder banks having higher loan quality before and during the crisis. Differences in profitability and loan quality between stakeholder and shareholder banks before the crisis are especially pronounced in countries that experienced a banking crisis after 2007. There is strong a heterogeneity in performance between different stakeholder ownership groups. With the exception of private savings banks, profitability and loan quality of stakeholder banks has improved relative to that of general shareholder banks during the crisis years. The paper contributes to the previous literature by comparing pre-crisis and crisis performance and includes more refined ownership classifications. The results indicate that the survival of the stakeholder model is due to its competitive advantages. Our findings provide support for those arguing that the diversity of organizational structures is worth preserving. Ownership pluralism should become a policy objective in the banking industry.

Using data on 739 banks from 22 countries with a dual banking system from 2012 to 2019, this paper aims to examine whether capital inflows affect banks’ profitability in recipient countries.

The authors check the conjecture about the effect of capital inflows on the profitability of the host country’s banks by estimating the following regression:

Pict=α0+α1·CFct+α2·Islamici+α3·CFct×Islamici+δ·Xict+θ·Yct+εict (1)

where the dependent variable (P_ict) refers to bank profitability, measured by either ROA or ROE for bank i, country c and year t. ROA is defined as the ratio of net profit to average total assets expressed as a percentage, which determines how efficiently a bank uses its assets to generate a profit. ROE is defined as the ratio of net profit to average total equity expressed as a percentage, which is a measure of increases in shareholders’ wealth.

The authors find that capital inflows are generally positively associated with bank profitability. However, cross-border capital inflows reduce the rate of return in Islamic banks relative to their conventional counterparts. When decomposing inflows by instrument, the authors find that the enhancing role of capital inflows on bank profitability comes mainly from debt inflows and borrowers; the authors observe that the documented results emanate mostly from the inflows to the financial sector. These results remain unchanged if holding a bank’s risk constant. Overall, foreign funds in the form of debt inflows targeting the financial sector can disproportionately improve the performance of commercial banks in recipient countries.

The paper is an original research project. The analysis contributes to the existing literature in several ways: the authors study whether the impact of capital inflows on bank profitability varies with the bank business model by looking at both the Islamic and conventional bank systems. The profitability of the banking system is an important catalyst for growth and stability. The authors also decompose capital inflows to recipient countries into their equity and debt components and study the differential impact of those components on the profitability of Islamic and conventional banks.

The purpose of this paper is to further the knowledge of how industries perform, and sheds light on how the relative positions of industry change over time.

Using rank-order listings, histograms, and linear regressions, the comparisons of firms in the Fortune 1000 yield four results, two that are confirmatory, and two that are new.

As expected, industries differ widely in performance, regardless of the financial metric used, and there is a dramatic difference between within-industry variance (high) and between-industry variance (low). In fact, high-performing firms in less profitable industries often outperform low-performing firms in more profitable industries. Contrary to previous research, the paper shows that industries shift relative position over time: the industries with the highest return on equity in one year often are not the highest in subsequent years; and, contrary to IO theory, the paper finds that concentration is not a reliable predictor of profitability. Although certain industries may show increased profitability after undergoing concentration, there is no consistent relationship between an industry's concentration ratio and that industry's average profitability.

While the research is limited to its use of visual (such as histogram) and qualitative (such as rank-order) observations of only large (Fortune 1000) US-based, public firms, the results suggest that researchers should decompose the elements of industry structure and firm strategies to understand what, specifically, contributes to variation in firm performance.

For executives, the research confirms that the quality of their business strategies is more important than the initial choice of industries within which they choose to compete. Simply competing in an industry with high average profitability does not guarantee success.

This research shows how industries vary significantly in relative profit rankings over time, a finding that differs from prior research where time coefficients are found to be small. In addition, the research challenges the traditional IO notion that industry concentration leads to superior performance.

Bounded rationality theory argues that classical and neoclassical economic theories are unrealistic in assuming that managements have perfect knowledge regarding decision‐making alternatives. Instead, that information tends to be very limited both as to a firm's alternatives and the costs and benefits of each. At best, therefore, managements can make rational decisions only within the bounds of whatever information they possess; this results in many managerial decisions being sub‐optimal with respect to the total reality. Logically, the imperfect knowledge problem applies to all aspects of business, especially to international marketing since such information tends to be very limited.

The enactment of Riegle‐Neal IBBEA in 1994 encouraged bank mergers and acquisitions. Empirical evidence indicates that large banks benefited from IBBEA enactment. However, there is little, if any, evidence of the impact of the act on small banks’ profitability relative to large banks. This study examines the impact of IBBEA on the performance of small banks in the period preceding and following IBBEA implementation. Evidence is presented that indicates the return on assets of small banks was significantly less than that of larger banks in the post‐IBBEA period. This is contrary to the results of the pre‐IBBEA period when small banks’ profitability was competitive with and in some cases even better than large banks’ profitability. It is concluded that the enactment of IBBEA has placed small banks at a competitive disadvantage which could eventually lead to their demise.

This empirical study investigates the relationship between the choice of an export market expansion strategy and the subsequent performance of exporting firms. Multiple measures of export performance were compared across three groups of firms following different export market expansion strategies: export market concentration, concentric diversification, and diversification strategies. A sample of 52 small and medium‐sized US high technology manufacturers showed significant differences among three strategic groups in export level and growth measures, but no significant differences in export profitability measures were found.

The main objective of this paper is to assess how the degree of regulation that a company has to comply with affects its profitability. There is great variation within the internet value chain in the profitability of different players. The paper aims to analyse a large sample of companies that are leaders in different internet‐based businesses (network operators, search engines and other ASP, software, electronic retailing, content delivery networks, device manufacturers …). The paper's hypothesis is that regulation plays an important role in the profitability of a company and therefore also in how the market values them.

The methodology used to check the authors' hypothesis includes the following steps: identify leaders in the internet space; identify their core asset and group them according to it; calculate their profitability across a series of dimensions, with focus on return on fixed assets (ROFA); assess the degree of regulation of each group; and assess the statistical relationship between regulation and profitability and look for significant results.

The paper analyses the degree of regulation of the core asset of these companies and finds that is statistically related to their profitability. Companies with core assets free from regulation yield much higher profits on their investments than those with core assets curtailed by regulation.

This finding can cast light on some policy proposals under debate (net neutrality, access regulation, privacy …), especially how they can increase or decrease the current imbalance in the relative profitability of companies and the internet balance of payments and power between the European Union and the USA.