GCGC

Video

Presentation

A board gender quota reduces firm value if it forces the appointment of under-qualified female directors. We test this hypothesis using Norway’s 2005 board gender-quota law, which increased the average fraction of female directors from 5% in 2001 to 40% by 2008. Statistically robust analyses of quota- induced shareholder announcement returns, and of long-run stock and accounting performance, fail to reject the hypothesis of a zero valuation effect of this economy-wide shock to board composition and director independence.

March 28 2024

Most listed firms are freestanding in the U.S, while listed firms in other countries often belong to business groups: lasting structures in which listed firms control other listed firms.

March 28 2024

This panel discussion focused on corporate governance indices. This topic, being something that finance professors, economists and law professors feel very passionate about, is also something important to practitioners outside of academia.

March 28 2024

This paper clarifies why corporate governance arrangements in public firms generally do not make use of judicial evaluations of boards’ and managers’ business decisions. In principle, information generated in litigation, particularly discovery, could usefully supplement public information (particulary stock prices) in the provision of performance incentives. In particular, the optimally adjusted combination of standard performance pay and litigation could impose less risk on boards and managers than standard performance pay alone.

March 28 2024

Hedge fund activism has recently spiked, almost hyperbolically. No one disputes this, but divergent explanations exist for it. Some see activist hedge funds as the natural champions of dispersed shareholders, who are not economically capable of collective action in their own interest. So viewed, hedge fund activism can bridge the separation of ownership and control. That, however, may assume what is to be proved. Others believe that hedge funds have interests that differ materially from those of other shareholders.

March 28 2024

‘Disruptive’ innovations are powerful forces for reshaping activities and generating growth. Yet by definition, the properties (what they can do) and consequences (whether they disrupt) of innovations are not widely understood when they are first explored. This aggravates agency problems in financing innovative projects, increasing the cost of capital. Policymakers, keen to stimulate innovation, are exploring a number of ways of facilitating capital-raising by innovative firms.

March 28 2024

Pages