Top management team incentive similarity and underinvestment

CEO duality and diversity synergy in maximizing the performance of Chinese firms

CEO overconfidence and ESG misconduct: the moderating role of corporate governance in emerging markets

This study aims to investigate whether chief executive officer overconfidence (CEOO) leads to environmental, social, and governance misconduct (ESGMIS) and examines whether corporate governance (CG) mechanisms mitigate this relationship. The study uses a panel dataset of non-financial firms listed in Indonesia from 2017 to 2022. This analysis employs a fixed-effects panel regression model with year fixed effects and firm-clustered standard errors. Robustness tests are conducted using alternative variable specifications to validate the findings. The results indicate that CEOO does not exert a direct effect on ESGMIS; rather, its impact is conditional and becomes significant only when CG is considered. Specifically, CG weakens the positive relationship between CEOO and ESGMIS, suggesting that the influence of managerial traits depends on the governance structure. This study advances the literature on CEO behavior by exploring its implications for ESGMIS, a relatively underexplored area. It provides empirical evidence from an emerging market context, where governance mechanisms are still evolving, and managerial discretion is comparatively high. Methodologically, the study contributes by employing a composite index to measure CEOO, offering a more comprehensive proxy than traditional single-measure approaches.

ESG Disclosure and Firm Value: The Moderating Role of Competitive Advantage

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure has been increasingly recognized as a significant determinant of firm value; however, its effectiveness is believed to be influenced by the firm's internal conditions, particularly its competitive advantage. This study aims to examine the effect of ESG disclosure on firm value and to investigate the moderating role of competitive advantage in this relationship. The research sample comprises companies listed on the ESG Quality 45 KEHATI Index of the Indonesia Stock Exchange over the period 2021–2024. Moderated regression analysis was employed using EViews software. The results indicate that ESG disclosure positively affects firm value, suggesting that sustainability transparency enhances stakeholder trust and drives higher market valuations. Furthermore, competitive advantage is found to significantly strengthen the positive effect of environmental, ESG disclosure on firm value, indicating that firms with stronger competitive positions are better able to leverage their sustainability disclosure in creating value for stakeholders. These findings enrich the application of stakeholder theory by establishing that competitive advantage serves as a critical boundary condition that determines the effectiveness of environmental, social, and governance disclosure in enhancing firm value.

Disclosure performance and firm value: The mediating role of financial reporting quality

This study examines the relationship between environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure and firm value, emphasizing the mediating role of financial reporting quality (FRQ), a transmission mechanism that remains underexplored in emerging markets. Using 3,978 firm-year observations of listed firms in Vietnam from 2016 to 2024, the baseline findings reveal that ESG disclosure exerts a positive and statistically significant impact on firm value. Among the individual ESG dimensions, the social pillar demonstrates the strongest influence. Structural equation modeling (SEM) further confirms that FRQ partially mediates this relationship; specifically, effective ESG disclosure enhances information transparency and mitigates earnings management, which in turn leads to higher investor confidence and superior valuation (Velte, 2017; Almahuzi, 2025). Additionally, propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to address endogeneity and reverse causality concerns, confirming the robust positive effect of ESG on stock prices. This research contributes to agency and signaling theories by providing empirical evidence that integrating high-quality ESG disclosure with financial transparency is crucial to strengthen market confidence and promote sustainable growth in developing economies (Grewal et al., 2021).

How Important Is Internal Information Asymmetry for Firm-Level Productivity?

Theoretical research suggests internal information asymmetry (IIA) between top managers and divisional managers can reduce productivity by distorting internal resource allocation. The net effect, however, is unclear because IIA also reflects valuable private information within divisions, and empirical evidence is limited because of the unobservability of managers’ private information sets. Using a measure of IIA that exploits differences in returns to insider trading by top and divisional managers, we find that higher IIA is associated with lower total factor productivity. A one standard deviation increase in IIA corresponds to a 2.6% decrease in productivity relative to industry peers. This effect is comparable in magnitude to other important internal informational frictions, such as internal control weaknesses, and is distinct from internal information quality. Cross-sectional analyses indicate that the negative association is stronger when curative measures are limited and when agency conflicts between top managers and shareholders are greater. Mechanism tests indicate that IIA reduces internal capital market efficiency and increases underinvestment. Finally, using brokerage mergers and closures as a plausibly exogenous shock, we find that increases in IIA lead to declines in productivity. Overall, we provide empirical evidence that IIA is an economically important determinant of firm-level productivity. This paper was accepted by Jan Bouwens, accounting. Supplemental Material: The code and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.08526 .

Professionalization as a Factor of Heterogeneity in Family and Nonfamily Firms: Effects on Performance

This study examines the relationship between firm ownership and organizational performance with a focus on heterogeneity in the professionalization of management. Using a comprehensive panel dataset of Spanish manufacturing firms, the study identifies significant ownership‐ and management model‐related differences in productive efficiency. The results reveal that while family firms are marginally less productive than nonfamily firms, professionalized management substantially enhances their performance, putting it above that of professionally managed nonfamily firms. The results indicate that external management effectively addresses agency problems and mitigates asymmetrical altruism issues in family firms while simultaneously leveraging their inherent strengths, such as concentrated ownership and alignment of interests. As such, the best outcomes are achieved by combining family ownership and professionalized management. This conclusion underscores the importance of accounting for both ownership structure and heterogeneity in management models in the study of firm efficiency. Additionally, these insights have practical economic implications, suggesting that the strategic separation of ownership and management could unlock new avenues to improve organizational performance.