Search results

This chapter introduces empirical studies of firm performance and related risk outcomes conducted in the management and finance fields presenting underlying theoretical rationales as they have evolved over time. Early finance studies of market-based returns predominantly found positively skewed return distributions that conform to assumptions about higher returns associated with more risky investments. Subsequent studies found that performance outcomes measured as accounting-based financial returns generally display left-skewed distributions that reflect negative risk-return relationships. This artifact was first observed by Bowman (1980), thus often referred to as the “Bowman paradox” because it contravened the conventional assumptions in finance. The management studies have largely confirmed the inverse risk-return observations but often following rather confined research streams. A contingency perspective inspired by prospect theory and behavioral rationales have investigated the lagged effects of performance on risk outcomes and vice versa. Another stream has focused on the spurious relationships between negatively skewed performance distributions and the inverse risk-return associations. A third approach considered the performance and risk outcomes as deriving from the firms responding in distinct ways to exogenous changes. These studies reach comparable results but underpinned by very different rationales. The finance studies observe deviations from the pure doctrine of positive risk-return associations embedded in the widely adopted capital asset pricing model (CAPM) and note deficiencies with alternative interpretations that even question the validity of CAPM. A more recent strain of studies in behavioral finance observes how many (even professional) investment managers have biases that lead to inverse relationships between perceived risk and return outcomes. While these diverse fields of study have different starting points, they uncover an increasing number of interesting commonalities that can inspire the ongoing search for explanations to observed left-skewed financial returns and negative risk-return correlations across firms.

In this chapter, we perform more detailed analyses and present the distribution characteristics and risk-return relationships of accounting-based financial returns (ROA) across different industry contexts and between periods with different economic conditions. We first display the frequency diagrams of the return measure (ROA) and its two components, net income and total assets, that show entirely different contours in the density graphs that must be reconciled. This is partially accomplished by analyzing the skewness, kurtosis, cross-sectional, and longitudinal risk-return characteristics of each of the three variables. The analyses further considers potential effects of accounting manipulation, and different organizational and executive traits, that identifies significant effects on the accounting-based return measures. We find extremely left-skewed return distributions with high negative correlations between the average return and risk measures, which reproduces the “Bowman paradox” as originally conceived. The same analysis is performed on net income and operating cash flows, the latter being less susceptible to accounting manipulation, which should display similar effects even though these performance distributions show positive skewness. We find negative but insignificant cross-sectional risk-return relations that nevertheless reappear in analyses performed within the specific industry contexts. The study further uncovers effects from prevailing economic conditions where left-skewness and kurtosis as well as negative risk-return correlations are much more significant during periods of high economic growth and business expansion where competition is more pronounced.

This chapter outlines the major analytical efforts performed as part of the overarching research project with the aim to investigate the organizational and environmental circumstances around the extreme negatively skewed performance outcomes regularly observed across firms. It presents the collection and treatment of comprehensive European and North American datasets where subsequent analyses reproduce the contours of performance distributions observed in prior empirical studies. Key theoretical perspectives engaged in prior studies of performance data and the implied risk-return relationships are presented and these point to emerging commonalities between empirical findings in the management and finance fields. The results from extended analyses of more fine-grained data from North American manufacturing firms uncover the subtle effects of leadership and structural features, and computational simulations demonstrate how the implied adaptive processes can lead to the empirically observed performance distributions. Finally, the findings from the analytical project activities are set in context and the implications of the observed results are discussed to reach at a final conclusion.

In view of a disruptive environment, the authors consider theories that explain left-skewed performance outcomes and inverse risk–return relationships where some rationales imply causal dependencies with slightly differing outcomes while others refer to spurious artifacts. These literatures are briefly outlined and dynamic response capabilities introduced as an alternative perspective expressed as strategic responsiveness where commonly observed performance outcomes derive from heterogeneous response capabilities among firms that compete in dynamic environments. Financial performance outcomes are analyzed empirically based on a comprehensive corporate dataset where computational simulations of adaptive strategy making among firms generate comparable outcomes from a simple strategic responsiveness model. The findings demonstrate how diverse adaptive strategy-making processes can generate a substantial part, if not all, of the commonly observed artifacts of firm financial performance. The implications of these results are discussed pointing to propitious approaches of analyzing the impact of dynamic adaptive strategies.

This chapter explores other theoretical explanations to the commonly observed phenomenon of negatively skewed performance outcomes and inverse risk-return relationships in empirical firm data. The analysis conducted in many prior studies have implicated direct causal dependencies between performance and risk, or vice versa, with the possibility of simultaneous two-way relationships that are harder to discern. It is also shown how spurious artifacts deriving from the arithmetic links between mean and variance associate left-skewed distributions with negative mean variance correlations. However, the heterogeneous display of response capabilities among firms that compete in the same industry contexts may provide an alternative explanation for the observed performance characteristics. This is expressed as strategic responsiveness where performance outcomes with high negative skewness and excess kurtosis derive from heterogeneous adaptive processes among firms as they respond to a dynamic environment with different degrees of success. We test these results in different simulated competitive contexts disrupted by major unexpected events and find robust results across different environmental scenarios. The analysis looks at two different response processes, one modeled as conventional adaptive planning following an annual budget cycle, and another modeled as interactive updating where executives have frequent informative budget discussions with operating managers in the firm. The computational simulations show that interactive updating generates outcomes with higher returns and lower performance risk for moderate learning levels and restructuring costs. However, the resulting performance distributions are not as left-skewed as those observed in the empirical data that show higher resemblance to the adaptive planning outcomes.

This chapter tests the market risk and economic policy uncertainty (EPU) of five Asian stock market returns and finds positive and significant intertemporal relations between excess stock returns and conditional volatility/downside risk. The results support positive risk-return relations across five Asian markets after controlling for the lagged dividend yield and the change in EPU ( Δ EPU). The evidence strongly indicates that excess stock returns are negatively correlated with the Δ EPUs. This finding holds true not only for the domestic market but also for external sources. The negative effect of Δ EPU is more profound from the US and global markets as compared with those from the Europe, Japanese, and domestic markets and suggests that a pathway to forming an optimal strategy for portfolio risk management depends on developing an effective hedging strategy against the impact of Δ EPUs from US/global markets.

This paper explores the relationship between size, book-to-market, beta, and expected stock returns in the U.S. Information Technology sector over the July 1990–June 2001 period. Two models, the multivariate model and the three-factor model, are employed to test these relationships. The risk-return tests confirm the relationship between size, book-to-market, beta and stock returns in IT stocks is different from that in other non-financial stocks. However, the sub-period results (the periods before and after the technology crash in April 2000) show that the nature of the relationship between stock returns, size, book-to-market, and market factors, or the magnitude of the size, book-to-market, and market premiums, is on average unchanged for both sub-periods. This result suggests the technology stock crash in April 2000 was not a correction of stock prices.

The author introduces a strategic responsiveness model that reflects an organization’s ability to sense environmental changes and learn from emergent adaptive responses that attempt to realign organizational activities and gain a better fit with the changing conditions. The author shows in computational simulations how superior strategic adaptation is associated with higher average returns and lower performance risk among firms that compete in the same industry contexts and generate negatively skewed outcome distributions consistent with empirical observations. The model is refined to incorporate an interactive strategy-making process, where experiential insights from decentralized initiatives update forward-looking projections in central planning. The ensuing analysis demonstrates how this adaptive strategy-making approach further enhances the favorable risk-return outcomes. The author discusses these findings and the implications for the study of dynamic adaptive strategy-making processes.

In this chapter, we first examine the distribution characteristics of firm performance across different competitive industry contexts and periodic economic conditions of growth, recession, and recovery. There is mounting evidence that the contours of accounting-based economic returns consistently display (extreme) left-skewed leptokurtic distributions with negative risk-return relationships, which implies the existence of many negative performance outliers and some positive outliers. We note how negative skewness, excess kurtosis, and inverse risk-return relationships prevail in industries with more intense competition and in economic growth scenarios where more innovative initiatives compete. As the study of outliers typically is ignored in mainstream management studies, we extract a total of 23 extreme performers using a conventional winsorization technique that identifies 16 negative and 7 positive outliers. We study the performance trajectories of these firms over the full period and find that negative performers typically operate in capital-intensive innovative industries whereas positive performers operate in activities that cater to prevailing demand conditions and expand the business in a balanced manner. The firms that under- and over-perform as measured by the financial return ratio both constitute smaller firms compared to the total sample and show how relative movements in the ratio numerator and denominator affect the recorded return measure. However, the negative outliers generally use their public listing to access capital for investment in more risky development efforts that require a certain scale to succeed and thereby limits their flexibility. The positive outliers appear to expand their business activities in incremental responses to evolving market demands as a way to enhance maneuverability and secure competitive advantage by honing their unique firm-specific capabilities.

Overnight risk is of particular interest for many market participants including traders who provide liquidity to the market, but also to market participants with longer investment horizons who want to determine whether a given risk–return tradeoff can justify possible intermediate portfolio hedging transactions. Overnight risk may in particular play a highly significant role in emerging markets, given that information is incorporated into prices at a slower rate and liquidity may hinder a quick unwinding of portfolio positions.