Search results

The aim of this paper is to systematically review the literature published in recognized journals focused on recognition-based heuristics and their effect on investment management activities and to ascertain some substantial gaps related to them.

For doing research synthesis, systematic literature review approach was applied considering research studies published within the time period, i.e. 1980–2020. This study attempted to accomplish a critical review of 59 studies out of 118 studies identified, which were published in reputable journals to synthesize the existing literature in the behavioural finance domain-related explicitly to recognition-based heuristics and their effect on investment management activities.

The survey and analysis suggest investors consistently rely on the recognition-based heuristic-driven biases when trading stocks, resulting in irrational decisions, and an investment strategy constructed by implementing the recognition-based heuristics, would not result in better returns to investors on a consistent basis. Institutional investors are less likely to be affected by these name-based behavioural biases in comparison to individual investors. However, under the context of ecological rationality, recognition-based heuristics work better and sometimes dominate the classical methods. The research scholars from the behavioural finance community have highlighted that recognition-based heuristics and their impact on investment management activities are high profile areas, needed to be explored further in the field of behavioural finance. The study of recognition-based heuristic-driven biases has been found to be insufficient in the context of emerging economies like Pakistan.

The skilful understanding and knowledge of the recognition-based heuristic-driven biases will help the investors, financial institutions and policy-makers to overcome the adverse effect of these behavioural biases in the stock market. This article provides a detailed explanation of recognition-based heuristic-driven biases and their influence on investment management activities which could be very useful for finance practitioners’ such as investor who plays at the stock exchange, a portfolio manager, a financial strategist/advisor in an investment firm, a financial planner, an investment banker, a trader/ broker at the stock exchange or a financial analyst. But most importantly, the term also includes all those persons who manage corporate entities and are responsible for making its financial management strategies.

Currently, no recent study exists, which reviews and evaluates the empirical research on recognition-based heuristic-driven biases displayed by investors. The current study is original in discussing the role of recognition-based heuristic-driven biases in investment management activities by means of research synthesis. This paper is useful to researchers, academicians, and those working in the area of behavioural finance in understanding the role that recognition-based heuristics plays in investment management activities.

The modern corporation is evaluated by many measures that go beyond profit, which was the emphasis for years previously. Today’s corporation is weighed against expectations of many stakeholders, including not just customers but employees, investors, the government and even the public at large with no discernible financial or other tie to a company. As such, corporate boards necessarily must be concerned with more than financial performance, including corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the increasing emphasis on environmental, social and governance (ESG) metrics. Given that public relations scholars and practitioners have long been concerned with stakeholder relationships, social responsibility and other non-financial indicators, it would make sense that public relations has a more obvious presence on corporate boards.

This study examined the 25 companies in the Fortune Modern Board 25 to determine how many board members had a background or expertise in public relations that would contribute to the leadership necessary for the concerns of the modern corporation, and whether the boards had a committee designated to public relations or related functions.

Results show that there are few corporate boards that have public relations represented prominently in either their members or committees. The same is true for executive leadership teams. Public relations or communications executives do appear to play some role in ESG, CSR and DEI reporting, but often there are staff members with those specific titles and roles.

The study was limited to 25 corporations on a Forbes list that ranked them as best in communicating ESG, CSR and DEI. The method examined publicly available literature which was revealing to the research questions, but more could be learned by interview or survey with CCOs.

The study shows the current presence of public relations capacity in terms of members of corporate boards, corporate committees and among the C-suite is not significant. Also, rather than PR as a function owning modern concerns of DEI, ESG and CSR, there are professionals with specific expertise in those areas who are responsible for those corporate issues.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR), ESG (environmental, social, governance) and DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) have recently been stressed as important for corporations to measure and report. The role of the public relations profession in managing and/or communicating in these areas is important to consider in terms of public expectations and satisfaction of communication on these subjects.

This paper is unique in integrating public relations theory and practice with board theory and the current management concerns with ESG, CSR and DEI. Little if any previous research has considered which professions are in charge of communicating on these concerns.