Search results

Responsible investors have been the precursor in using ESG information in investment decisions. The growing attention to ESG issues across the more traditional investment community is considered as the mainstreaming of RI. However, it is important to note that the integration of ESG information by mainstream investment companies is a fundamentally different approach than RI. While RI derives from moral and ethical concerns, the new trend of integration of ESG information by mainstream investors is business driven.

Financial analysts' forecasts serve as a proxy for market earnings expectations, and research provides mixed evidence of the relation between financial analysts' expertise and forecast accuracy. The judgment and decision-making (J/DM) literature suggests that those with more expertise will not perform better when tasks exhibit either extremely high or extremely low complexity. Expertise is expected to contribute to superior performance for tasks between these two extremes. Using archival data, this research examines the effect of analysts' expertise on forecasting performance by taking into consideration the forecasting task's complexity. Results indicate that expertise is not an explanatory factor for forecast accuracy when the forecasting task's complexity is extremely high or low. However, when task complexity falls between these two extremes, expertise is a significant explanatory variable of forecast accuracy. Both results are consistent with our expectations.

Using data from securities analysts, who are awarded status by the third-party organization Institutional Investor magazine, we examine the emergence of competition and articulate a model of competitive response among actors aware of the importance of status and some of the dimensions on which it may be gained. We predict analysts’ initiating or ceasing coverage of stocks in response to other analysts initiating coverage on stocks they cover. We find that competition can emerge because of status seeking rather than as a response to own capabilities or market needs, with compelling, and potentially negative, market implications for overt status seeking.

This study examines whether the source from which nonprofessional investors obtain corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure influences their investment-related judgments and decisions and whether that influence depends on the company's financial performance. In an experiment, we find an asymmetrical effect of information source that varies with financial performance. In particular, information source affects investors' management credibility judgments when the firm announces unfavorable earnings result but not when the announced result is favorable. The mediation analysis reveals that investors' management credibility judgments mediate the joint effect of information source and financial performance on investors' investment decisions. Our findings highlight that the effectiveness of CSR communication can be complicated and that investors are sensitive to other factors that exist in the communication setting, such as the context in which CSR is disclosed (contextual factor) and information source of CSR disclosures (attributional factor).

We evaluate the performance of financial analysts versus naïve models in making long-term earnings forecasts. Long-term earnings forecasts are generally defined as third-, fourth-, and fifth-year earnings forecasts. We find that for the fourth and fifth years, analysts' forecasts are no more accurate than naïve random walk (RW) forecasts or naïve RW with economic growth forecasts. Furthermore, naïve model forecasts contain a large amount of incremental information over analysts' long-term forecasts in explaining future actual earnings. Tests based on subsamples show that the performance of analysts' long-term forecasts declines relative to naïve model forecasts for firms with high past earnings growth and low analyst coverage. Furthermore, a model that combines a naïve benchmark (last year's earnings) with the analyst long-term earnings growth forecast does not perform better than analysts' forecasts or naïve model forecasts. Our findings suggest that analysts' long-term earnings forecasts should be used with caution by researchers and practitioners. Also, when analysts' earnings forecasts are unavailable, naïve model earnings forecasts may be sufficient for measuring long-term earnings expectations.

This chapter provides an approach for teaching the income statement within an earnings quality framework in an intermediate accounting course. Not only is the approach rich in content, but it also is an engaging pedagogical device. The article provides a broad outline and then fills in the details with discussion, information, and examples.

In the growing debate about designing new management control systems (MCS) to include stakeholder values, there has been little discussion about information overload. Stakeholder advocates call for including more environmental and related social disclosures but do not consider how information overload might impair the use and interpretation of corporate performance measures. As we know, shareholders and boards of directors are most concerned with market data such as earnings per share, dividend rates, and market value growth. In this chapter, we assert that management control system designers must consider information overload before expanding the MCS to include social and nonfinancial disclosures.

The paradox in expanding MCS is that demand for sustainability performance measures will likely result in overload for both information preparers and information users. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and similar sustainability disclosures are likely to overload MCS and overwhelm the readers and users by performance reports that include multiple dimensions.

CSR affects the design of companies' annual reports because stakeholders are increasingly concerned with how organizations address their social responsibilities and how they disclose their societal responses. Management accountants are accustomed to providing performance measures within an organization and MCS usually have an internal focus. CFOs are often not accustomed to balancing the needs of stakeholders with those of managers and owners. We suggest that companies and CFOs will face an information overload dilemma in making these determinations, and that users will be overloaded in sifting through the multiple dimensions of information that are increasingly being provided. We suggest that the bias toward financial performance measures will distort both the provision of relevant information and the use of sustainability performance measures. We modified the Epstein and Roy sustainability model (2001) to illustrate some of these potential impacts.

We note that the balanced scorecard (BSC) was developed as one such tool to reflect and communicate multiple measures. We summarize a previous study showing how managers ignored multiple performance measures in a performance scorecard study. We then relate our results to some of the information overload literature to support our suggestion that stakeholders will face many of the same information overload issues and constraints when using and processing social disclosures.

Our summary of the information overload literature results in a call for more interdisciplinary information overload research involving real-world contexts and tasks. We note that most of the extant information overload literature is restricted to discipline-based silo-oriented studies and to simplistic evaluations, brand identification, or forecasting tasks. Our study went into some depth to describe the business, its strategies and objectives, and a comparison of actual results to specific goals. As management control systems evolve or are designed to report sustainability data, the issues surrounding increasing complexity and information overload will become exponentially problematic. We suggest that future research also include consideration of information overload conditions facing preparers and disclosers of sustainability measures.