Search results

The purpose of this paper is to determine if there is a link between corporate shareholder value creation and economic growth. The first objective of this paper is to determine which specific shareholder value measurement best explains shareholder value creation for a particular industry. The next objective of the study is to establish, for each of nine different categories of firms examined, a set of value drivers that are unique and significant in expressing shareholder value for that particular category of firms. Lastly, the relationship between shareholder value creation and economic growth is tested.

To quantify and measure value creation, the paper investigates the various value creation measurements that are being applied. The next step is to ascertain whether various industries have different value creation measures that best explain value creation for the respective industries. Then, the value drivers of these specific value creation measures can be determined and their relationship with economic growth tested.

The results of this study indicate that each industry does have a specific shareholder value creation measurement that best explains shareholder value creation for that industry; for example, for five of the nine categories (industries) that were analyzed, market value added was found to be the best shareholder value creation measurement, but for capital-intensive firms and manufacturing firms, the Qratio is the best measure, while for the food and beverage industry, the market to book ratio was found to be a better measure of shareholder value creation than other measures tested. It was further found that an increase in corporate shareholder value creation is to the detriment of economic growth.

The contribution of the present study is its determination of a unique shareholder value creation measurement for particular industries. In addition, a specific set of variables per industry that create shareholder value is identified. Lastly, the important link between shareholder value creation and economic growth is exposed.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the shareholder value creation measure best suited to express shareholder value creation for a particular industry.

The analysis was performed on 192 companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, classified into nine different samples or industries. Five shareholder value creation measures were examined, namely market value added (MVA), a market-adjusted stock return, the market-to-book ratio, Tobin’s Q ratio, and the return on capital employed divided by the cost of equity.

An analysis of the nine categories of firms led to the identification of different measures that are suited to express value creation. Stock returns did not provide an appropriate value measure. Instead, depending on the specific industry, Tobin’s Q ratio, MVA, and the market-to-book ratio should be used to measure and express value creation.

For management, the value drivers identified for each industry present a clear indication of industry-specific variables upon which they can focus in operating activities to most efficiently increase shareholder value.

Unlike previous studies that use only one or two different shareholder value creation measures as dependent variables, this study uses five different value creation measures. Another contribution of this study is the compilation of a unique set of value drivers that explain shareholder value creation separately for each of the nine different categories of firms.

Prior studies on determinants of shareholder value creation have reported conflicting and sometimes confusing results. In this study, to obtain more refined and industry-specific results regarding variables determining shareholder value creation, an analysis was performed focusing on different categories of firms or industries.

Two dependent and 11 independent variables were applied to five different industries to obtain the best set of significant value drivers of shareholder value creation for a particular industry.

Market value added (MVA) is a better indicator of shareholder value created compared to a market adjusted return. Accounting-based variables (EPS, ROA and NOPAT) are superior to economic-based variables (EVA and ROCE) in explaining shareholder value creation, but results differ, depending on the dependent variable chosen as shareholder value creation measure. For each industry, there is a unique set of variables that determine shareholder value creation; the industrial goods industry has seven significant value drivers, namely, EPS, NOPAT, ROCE, the Spread, EVA, EBEI and REVA, whilst for the food and beverages industry, there were only two significant value drivers (EPS and ROA).

These findings imply that management, analysts and shareholders should, depending on the specific industry in which their firm operates, take into account a more specific set of variables when making their financial decisions, including compensation or reward structuring.

To provide a template for creating shareholder value through successful mergers and acquisitions (M&A) practices.

Taking as an example the merger between Ameritrade Holding Corporation and Datek Online Holdings Corp. in 2002, this paper provides a template for clearly and transparently communicating with shareholders and potential shareholders the value creation so the company can get credit for its M&A success in its stock price.

Outlining a template can create consistency, discipline and transparency around the creation of shareholder value during M&As.

Other publications have documented reasons why M&As fail including: companies overpaying, the integration failing to overcome cultural conflicts, poor integration processes being used, resource constraints, etc. This article doesn't cover that. This article walks through a simple template for companies to follow when measuring shareholder value creation from a M&A.

It is more than just the fact that most M&As fail to realize the promised value. To be successful, deal makers must have a simple, transparent and disciplined approach to measuring the shareholder value creation. This paper offers guidelines for this approach.

Suggests that in many companies that have adopted value‐based management, there is a need to shift the focus of management attention from the measurement of value, to the creation of wealth. Argues that shareholder wealth creation is a creative endeavour on the part of the management and employees of a business – and that wealth will only be created for shareholders if management delivers financial performance that exceeds market expectations. This requires the successful implementation of higher value strategies developed from new ideas – not simply the adoption of value‐based measurement and incentive systems.

This paper seeks to compare target shareholders' wealth gains in domestic and cross‐border acquisitions in India. Two existing schools of thought namely, the industrial organizational theory and bid‐specific factors theory have been compared to identify which of these two theories affect the target shareholders' announcement wealth gains in India.

Standard event study methodology has been applied to compute the announcement returns for domestic and cross‐border acquisitions. Cross‐border effect is calculated to compare the value creation in the two sets of acquisitions. Furthermore, cross‐sectional regression analysis is conducted to capture the impact of bid‐related features on target shareholder's value creation.

The results indicate that both domestic and cross‐border acquisitions have created value for the target company shareholders on the announcement. Nonetheless, the analysis of cross‐border effect as well as regression analysis makes it evident that value creation is higher for domestic acquisitions as compared to cross‐border acquisitions due to the influence of various bid‐specific factors. Thus, in India, bid‐related variables are the fundamental drivers of the target's announcement wealth gains irrespective of the nationality of the acquirer.

The paper extends the discussion on the target's wealth creation in domestic and cross‐border acquisitions by segregating the existing literature into two schools of thoughts namely, the industrial organizational school and bid‐specific factors school in an emerging economy like India. Moreover, various reasons specific to Indian mergers and acquisitions have been forwarded to explain the subdued market reaction to cross‐border acquisitions.

The 2008 Crash (the Crash) has been attributed to the dominance of financialized corporate governance, particularly an increased shareholder value rhetoric. Following the Crash, this extreme narrative is understood to have become less financialized through increasingly favouring stakeholders. The purpose of this research is to investigate this often-accepted view using field theory, wherein managers' biases in the value-creating process result from an interconnected, dynamic, multi-actor discourse.

Various domains across the UK’s corporate governance environment, from the perspective of field theory, generate the complex discourse: corporate and regulatory domains, stakeholder organizations such as the press and think tanks. Domain-specific corpora, representative of this multi-actor field, were constructed, with financialization analysed by assessing managers’ altering biases concerning the relative importance of shareholders and stakeholders (amongst other factors like time horizon) to value creation.

Highlights of the multiple findings include the following: corporate narrative about value creation became less financialized following the Crash, yet favouring shareholders, while the multi-actor discourse for the UK economy as a whole became slightly more financialized.

Analysing a multi-actor discourse is complex. And this, to the best of the author’s knowledge, is the first study of its kind, and only made possible with the original methodology of narrative staining. The approach, while having particular relevance to field theory, is applicable to many other narrative-based research scenarios.

The purpose of the research is to analyse the ability of nonfinancial factors to predict value creation in Finnish technology firms. Nonfinancial factors are defined in terms of a large set of variables on organizational characteristics, strategy, competitive stance, consistency of performance measurement, management control systems (MCSs), and quality of MCSs. Financial ratios are used as a benchmark. The hypotheses are that, firstly, nonfinancial factors include important information for prediction and, secondly, that they provide incremental information over financial ratios. The nonfinancial variables are drawn from a postal survey carried out in 1999. Financial variables for 1998–2001 are obtained for 40 private firms of the 110 firms responding to the survey. Shareholder value is estimated on the basis of the four‐year financial data for 2001. This value divided by the shareholder book value (estimated‐to‐book value ratio, EBV) as well as its drivers are predicted by past non‐financial and financial data. Partial Least Squares (PLS) method is used to analyse the importance of information in prediction. The results give support to the hypotheses. Moreover, the results show that nonfinancial factors yield important incremental information over financial ratios when predicting value drivers, that is, growth, profitability, and risk. Especially, financial ratios are weak in predicting growth.

This chapter assembles the key literature on value creation for consideration in relationship to stakeholder theory. The literature review identifies and explains the core topics concerning value creation and related ideas. The purpose is to stimulate research into the theory, practice, and social consequences of value creation in a stakeholder management framework. The construct of “value” lacks theoretical precision and empirical verification. The most fundamental and disputed question addressed is which value approach for the firm best contributes to overall (aggregate) social welfare. The vital issue is whether the managerial stakeholder theory is superior, at long-run value creation for multiple stakeholders including society at large, to the conventional agency theory. Business executives and directors are the ones who choose between agency and stakeholder approaches to management. Their actions influence organizational and social outcomes. Research is limited to a literature review, followed by a discussion of the likely role of value creation theory in future stakeholder research. The chapter first defines value. The basic approach is then to focus on key topics in the relevant literature. The last section addresses the role of value creation theory in future stakeholder research.

This paper aims to analyse the longitudinal performative effects of accounting, focusing on how accounting shapes the stability/instability of economic frames over time.

To explore the performative effects of accounting over time, a longitudinal case study narrates the transformation of a large, listed manufacturing company's financial strategy over 20 years. Using extensive document collection, the authors trace the shift from an “industrial” frame to a “shareholder value” frame in the mid-1990s, followed by the gradual entrenchment of this shareholder value frame until its decline in the wake of the financial crisis in 2008.

Our findings show how accounting has different performative temporalities, capable of precipitating sudden shifts between different economic frames and stabilising an ever-more entrenched and narrowly defined enactment of a specific frame. We conceptualise these different temporalities as performative moments and performative momentum respectively, explaining how accounting produces these performative effects over time. Moreover, in contrast to extant accounting research, the authors provide insight into the performative role of accounting not only in contested but also “cold” situations marked by consensus regarding the overarching economic frame.

Our paper draws attention to the longitudinal performative effects of accounting. In particular, the analysis of how accounting entrenches and refines economic frames over time adds to prior research, which has focused mainly on the contestation and instability of framing processes.