Search results

Common institutional ownership is a phenomenon that has extended throughout the capital markets in recent years and has a significant impact on business strategy decisions. The study intends to investigate the effect of common institutional ownership on corporate over-financialization and potential functioning mechanisms.

Using panel data from Chinese-listed companies over the period of 2003–2021, the authors conduct regression models which controlled year-, industry- and regional fixed effects to explore the impact of common institutional ownership on corporate over-financialization.

This study concludes that corporate over-financialization may be prevented via common institutional ownership. The mechanism test suggests that common institutional ownership inhibits corporate over-financialization by improving internal control quality and enhancing financial flexibility. Besides, heterogeneity analysis shows that the inhibiting effect of common institutional ownership on corporate over-financialization is more pronounced in stability-oriented institutional investors and high financing constraints firms.

This paper makes a valuable contribution to the current studies on effective strategies to prevent enterprises from becoming overly financialized by recognizing common institutional ownership. Furthermore, this paper adds to the research on common institutional ownership’s economic consequences. Finally, this study provides management implications for how to optimize corporate governance structures, curb the financialization of entities in practice and promote the development of the real economy.

Institutional investors are major shareholders in publicly traded firms and play crucial roles in the financial and governance aspects of these firms. Despite their importance, little is known about their role in internal auditing. This study aims to fill this gap by investigating the relationship between institutional investors’ ownership and investment in the internal audit function (IAF).

The study uses ordinary least squares regressions with two-way cluster-robust standard errors (firm and year) to estimate the relationship between institutional investors’ ownership and investment in IAF for Malaysian listed firms between 2009 and 2020.

The findings show that companies with higher levels of institutional ownership invest more in IAF, suggesting that institutional investors can effectively monitor managers due to their large holdings. Moreover, both transient and dedicated institutional investors are more likely to invest in IAF.

The results highlight the importance of institutional investors as a significant determinant of investment in IAF, which can aid regulators and managers in understanding the institutional investors’ role in governing and optimizing the efficient use of a firm’s resources. The findings also provide insight into institutional investors’ behavior regarding monitoring systems, which may inspire regulators and policymakers to consider increasing institutional investors’ participation to enhance governance structures.

This study focuses on listed and over-the-counter (OTC) companies in the Taiwan Stock Exchange. It found that an increase in the ownership proportion of institutional investors (INs), including foreign investors, investment trusts, and dealers can enhance the informativeness of stock prices. The relationship between these factors follows an inverted U-shaped pattern, indicating that excessively high ownership ratios can actually lead to a decrease in the informativeness of stock prices. Additionally, increasing the ownership proportions of foreign investors and investment trusts can reduce the risk of stock price collapse, while dealers show no significant relationship in this regard. This study also reveals that the technical variable of the price deviation rate is an important explanatory factor for post-collapse returns. It is positively correlated with the magnitude of the price decline after a collapse, meaning that stocks with weaker pre-collapse performance experience larger post-collapse declines. When the data during the 2020 pandemic period are excluded, changes in foreign ownership ratios show a significant positive correlation with postcrash returns in both the long and short term. The significant correlation in the short term may be due to a high proportion of foreign ownership. Any reduction in this could put pressure on stock prices, and retail investors may follow suit and sell-off, using foreign investors as a reference. The significant correlation in the long term might be due to foreign investors themselves possibly also trying to avoid the pressure that their own short-term sell-offs could exert on stock prices. The changes in the ownership ratios of investment trusts and dealers indicate that medium and long-term changes have a significant impact on postcrash returns, while the changes in the major players' ownership show no significant correlation. When data from 2020 are included in the analysis, the significance of all INs decreases.

This study aims to investigate the impact of equity ownership structure (i.e. CEO ownership, board chair ownership and institutional ownership) on internationalization of firms. The moderating role of international experience of board chairs is also examined.

This study uses Compustat-Capital IQ data from Standard &Poor’s. The sample of this study includes 309 US multinational corporations representing different sectors. The parameters were estimated by using the ordinary least squares regression with the SPSS statistical package.

The finding of this study suggests that CEO ownership and board chair ownership have a significant, positive impact on the degree of internationalization of firms, whereas institutional ownership has a negative impact. The predicted moderating role of international experience of board chairs has found mixed results.

This study contributes to the literature by taking a holistic approach to examine the impact of equity ownership types (i.e. CEO ownership, board chair ownership and institutional ownership) on firms’ degree of internationalization. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is also the first to investigate the impact of independent board chairs’ equity ownership and international experience on internationalization.

There is consensus among scholars on how political institutional imprinting interprets the unique management and practice phenomenon of Chinese enterprises. However, little scholarly attention has been given to the different political institutional imprints that shape firms’ internationalization. Therefore, this study aims to investigate how communist and market logic political institutional imprintings influence firms’ initial ownership strategies in outward foreign direct investment.

Based on the propensity score matching difference in difference method and a sample of 464 foreign investments from 2009 to 2020 for 310 Chinese private firms.

The results show that private firms with market logic political institutional imprintings tend to adopt higher ownership and vice versa. As institutional differences increase, private firms with market logic imprintings are more risk-taking and adopt higher ownership, whereas private firms with communist imprintings are more conservative and choose lower ownership. When diplomatic relations are friendlier, private firms with market logic imprintings prefer higher ownership to grasp business opportunities and vice versa.

This study not only identifies the net effect of political institutional imprinting on private firms’ initial ownership strategy but also investigates the different moderating effects of current institutional forces to respond to the call for research on bringing history back into international business research and the fit between imprinting and the environment.

In this research, we explore the adverse impact of foreign ownership on operational security, a critical operational implication of the liability of foreignness (LOF).

The empirical analysis is based on a multi-country dataset from the World Bank Enterprises Survey, which contains detailed firm-level information from over 8,902 firms in 82 emerging market countries. We perform a series of robustness checks to further confirm our findings.

We find that a high ratio of foreign ownership is associated with an increased likelihood of security breaches and higher security costs. Our results also indicate that high levels of host countries’ institutional quality and firms’ local embeddedness can mitigate such vulnerability in operational security.

This study is one of the first to uncover the critical operational implication of the LOF, indicating that a high ratio of foreign ownership exposes firms to operational security challenges.

This study examines the impact of chief executive officer (CEO) power, institutional investors and their interaction on green financing provided by Bangladeshi financial institutions and the moderating effect of government policy and CEO political connections on these relations.

We employ ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions and interaction terms among variables of interest for the empirical analysis.

Green financing decreases with CEO power, implying that CEOs of this country’s financial institutions are averse to green loans, whereas institutional investors increase green financing extended by these institutions. The government policy, which includes financial incentives for complying financial institutions, strengthens institutional investors' positive impact on green financing, but it does not change CEOs' aversion to green loans. Institutional investors have a positive moderating effect on the relationship between green finance (GF) and CEO power, but this positive moderating effect is negated in banks where the government owns a stake, possibly because CEOs of state-owned financial institutions are politically connected, which reduces institutional investors’ influence over them.

This study is unique in that it is the first to examine how the interaction among different stakeholders affects green financing in a unique setting. As the literature is almost silent on this topic, the findings of this paper are expected to raise policymakers’ awareness of the obstacles that hamper the efforts of developing countries to go green.

The dissemination of misleading and false information through media can jeopardize a company’s reputation, thus posing a threat to its stock and performance. Institutional investors are known to influence capital markets. Therefore, this paper investigates whether institutional investors engage in shaping the media sentiment stock nexus, stabilize company stocks and enhance performance.

We first investigate the effect of media sentiment on market reactions by using panel regression models. To examine the role of institutional investors, we design a quasi-experiment by exploiting the Financial Crisis of 2008 and go further by examining the heterogeneity across levels of institutional ownership. Due to risk-averse, investors may respond asymmetrically to pessimistic and positive sentiment. Accordingly, we split the sample into two sub-types, good news and bad news, based on keywords representing positive or negative content.

We find supportive evidence that institutional investors have impacts on how the markets react to media news, and the impacts are heterogeneous in the face of bad and good news. We conjecture that institutional investors act as a stabilizer of stock prices through media sentiment management.

This paper confirms the distinctive effects of institutional investors on capital markets, and uncovers the behind-the-scenes intervention and possible causal link running from institutional investors to media sentiment management. It contributes to the broad field of institutional investors' behavior, media news involvement in capital markets and market efficiency.

The aim of this study is to measure the risk disclosure level and to determine the relationship between ownership structure dimensions (institutional ownership, foreign ownership and family ownership) and corporate risk disclosure in Jordan.

This study used a sample of 94 Jordanian listed firms from the Amman Stock Exchange for the period from 2014 to 2017. This study measured risk disclosure using the number of risk-related sentences in the annual report, while random effects regression was used for hypotheses testing.

The results revealed that family ownership has a negative effect on risk disclosure practices, but institutional ownership, foreign ownership, firm size and leverage have no significant effect on the risk disclosure level.

The finding of this study is more likely be useful for many concerned parties, researchers, authorities, investors and financial analysts alike in understanding the current practices of the risk disclosure in Jordan, thus helping them in reconsidering and reviewing the accounting standards and improving the credibility and transparency of the financial reports in the Jordanian capital market.

This study offers novel evidence detailing the impact of ownership structure toward corporate risk disclosure, its implementation in emerging markets following the minimal amount of scholarly efforts on the topic. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first examination of the impact of ownership structure on corporate risk disclosure. Thus, this study has important implications for the decisions of executives, policymakers, shareholders and lenders, as it enables them to better understand the linkage between ownership structure on corporate risk disclosure.

This paper aims to review empirical research on the relationship between institutional ownership (IO) and board governance (85 studies).

Based on agency and upper echelons theory, the heterogeneous monitoring function of specific types and the nature of institutional investors on board composition, compensation and chief executive officer (CEO) characteristics will be focused.

The author found that most studies have referred to archival studies, analyzed the impact of board governance on IO, focused on CEO characteristics, neglected IO heterogeneity and advanced regression models to address endogeneity concerns. In line with the theoretical framework, the relationship between total IO and board governance is heterogeneous. However, specific types such as foreign, dedicated and pressure-resistant institutions represent active monitoring tools and push for increased board governance.

The author provided useful recommendations for future research from a content and methodological perspective, e.g. the need for analyzing the impact of IO on sustainable board governance and other characteristics of top management team members, e.g. the chief financial officer.

As many regulatory bodies implemented regulations to promote shareholder rights and board governance, this literature review highlights the connections of both corporate governance mechanisms. Managers should conduct a careful and timely investor analysis and change the composition and compensation of the board of directors in line with institutional investors’ preferences.

This analysis makes useful contributions to prior research by focusing on IO and board governance, whereas the author structured the heterogeneous variables and results within the structured literature review. The authors guides researchers, regulatory bodies and business practice in this corporate governance topic.