Pandej Chintrakarn

Exploiting a takeover-threat measure that is less directly subject to managerial choice than firm-chosen governance provisions and a large sample spanning more than half a century, this study examines the association between hostile takeover threats and corporate debt maturity structure. Drawing on the hostile takeover index of Cain, McKeon, and Solomon (2017) and a sample covering the period from 1964 to 2020, we investigate whether variation in takeover threats is associated with differences in firms' debt maturity choices. We find that firms facing greater hostile takeover threats tend to rely more heavily on short-maturity debt, a pattern consistent with, although not demonstrating, the view that takeover threats and short-term debt may serve as complementary governance mechanisms that enhance outside monitoring and constrain managerial discretion. These associations remain robust across firm fixed-effects regressions, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, and instrumental-variable specifications. We also find that the association between takeover threats and shorter debt maturity is stronger among highly levered firms but weaker among firms with greater profitability, larger cash reserves, and higher capital expenditures. Because our design mitigates but does not eliminate endogeneity and alternative explanations, we interpret the evidence as a robust conditional association between hostile takeover threats and firms' debt maturity policies rather than as causal evidence.

Our study examines the influence of corporate integrity on capital structure decisions using a novel text-based measure derived from sophisticated textual analysis of earnings conference calls. Using a large sample of U.S. firms spanning 2001–2018, we document a robust negative association between corporate integrity and leverage. Our results are consistent with the interpretation that firms with stronger corporate integrity tend to adopt more conservative financial policies, viewing debt default as a serious ethical violation. We further analyze interaction effects and find that this negative association is significantly weaker for firms with substantial cash holdings and stronger liquidity positions, suggesting that financial flexibility mitigates the costs of leverage even for high-integrity firms. A comprehensive set of robustness checks, including propensity score matching, entropy balancing, and instrumental-variable analyses, supports the stability of our findings. Finally, we show that leverage attributable to corporate integrity is positively related to firm value, as measured by Tobin's Q. Overall, our study highlights the economically meaningful role of corporate culture, particularly integrity, in shaping capital structure choices and firm value.

This review examines how classified (staggered) boards affect non-financial corporate outcomes and how these outcomes inform the long-standing debate over the value of takeover defenses. We develop a framework based on four competing perspectives: the entrenchment view, the bonding hypothesis, the myopic-markets hypothesis, and the optimal-governance view. These perspectives generate distinct predictions for outcomes that are often obscured by aggregate financial measures such as Tobin's Q and stock returns. We review evidence on innovation, environmental performance, labor investment, corporate social responsibility, corporate culture, inclusion-related policies, and voting premiums, which we treat as direct evidence on managerial entrenchment rather than as a conventional non-financial outcome. The evidence suggests that staggered boards can promote innovation and labor-related outcomes by supporting long-term investment and stakeholder commitment, while also imposing costs in areas such as corporate culture, social capital and corporate social responsibility, inclusion, and private-benefit extraction. Environmental findings remain mixed. Our primary contribution is a mechanism-based synthesis that clarifies when, why, and for which stakeholders staggered boards are likely to create benefits or costs.

We examine how organizational maturity shapes firms' strategic responses to biodiversity challenges. We find that older firms exhibit significantly lower biodiversity risk, consistent with the view that organizational maturity facilitates capability development rather than constraining adaptation through inertia. We show that mature firms are systematically less exposed to biodiversity-related challenges. This effect is particularly pronounced for profitable firms with substantial capital investments, suggesting that accumulated resources enable mature firms to more effectively develop and deploy capabilities for managing biodiversity-related pressures. Our findings advance corporate life cycle theory by revealing how organizational maturity shapes environmental risk management and highlight how experience, resource accumulation, and stakeholder integration shape firms' strategic adaptation to emerging ecological constraints. Our study also validates the effectiveness of machine learning-based textual analysis in measuring complex corporate risks.

We analyze the evolution of climate change sentiment in firms over time and the role of independent directors using sentiment metrics developed by Sautner et al. (2023). These metrics, derived from advanced textual analysis of earnings calls, capture overall sentiment, positive sentiment, negative sentiment, and specific metrics for physical risk, regulatory risk, and new business opportunities. Our findings reveal a positive trend in sentiment, driven by increased optimism and reduced negativity. Regulatory risk sentiment shows rising optimism, while physical risk sentiment remains stable. Independent directors initially dampen optimism, but this diminishes over time, highlighting sustainability's strategic value. These findings suggest that climate-related corporate communication is increasingly driven by long-term strategic and economic considerations rather than symbolic statements. The results demonstrate the role of governance in shaping how firms respond to sustainability challenges, with implications for corporate strategy, investor assessment of climate disclosures, and regulatory policy design.

Purpose: This study examines the evolution of corporate innovation culture, focusing on how board independence and gender diversity impact this trend. It seeks to determine whether innovation culture has strengthened over time and to identify the role of board composition in fostering innovation. Design/Approach: Using a text-based metric from Li et al. (2021), this study analyzes over 50,000 firm-year observations. Temporal trend analysis and regression modeling assess shifts in innovation culture, with a focus on the moderating effects of independent and gender-diverse boards. Findings: The findings reveal a positive trend in corporate innovation culture, supporting the “innovation surge hypothesis.” Independent directors are shown to enhance long-term strategic thinking, while gender-diverse boards contribute varied perspectives, strengthening the culture of innovation. Originality: This study employs the machine learning-based approach developed by Li et al. (2021) to measure corporate innovation culture, providing fresh insights into how board diversity and independence sustain innovation. By leveraging this novel method, we contribute to the understanding of corporate governance’s role in fostering long-term innovative growth.

Purpose This study examines how firm maturity shapes corporate cybersecurity risk. Drawing on corporate life cycle theory, it assesses whether older firms are more or less vulnerable to cyber threats and how financial and governance characteristics influence this relationship. MethodologyCybersecurity risk is measured using a novel text-based metric developed by Florackis et al. (2023), which applies machine learning to annual report disclosures. Using a large panel of U.S. firms, the analysis employs OLS regression with industry and year fixed effects. To enhance robustness, propensity score matching and entropy balancing are used. Interaction analyses further examine profitability, leverage, cash reserves, dividends, and managerial ownership. FindingsOlder firms exhibit significantly lower cybersecurity risk, reflecting accumulated experience, stronger internal systems, and more developed governance. This risk-reducing effect strengthens with profitability, cash reserves, and dividend payouts but weakens with high leverage. Higher managerial ownership further enhances older firms’ ability to mitigate cyber risk by better aligning managerial and shareholder incentives. Reductions in cybersecurity risk attributable to firm age are also associated with higher firm value and stronger operating performance. OriginalityThis study shifts focus from the consequences of cybersecurity risk to its determinants by integrating corporate life cycle theory into cybersecurity research. Using an advanced text-based risk measure, it highlights how maturity, financial structure, and governance jointly shape firms’ cybersecurity resilience.

We examine the critical impact of oil price uncertainty on corporate innovation culture. We employ a unique measure of corporate innovation derived from textual analysis of earnings call transcripts, offering a more comprehensive perspective on innovation than traditional metrics like R&D expenditures and patents. The findings reveal a significant negative effect of oil price uncertainty on corporate innovation, indicating that firms tend to scale back innovation activities in response to heightened uncertainty. Since we account for overall economic uncertainty, the observed effect of oil price uncertainty on innovation is distinct and goes beyond the influence of general economic conditions. Importantly, firms where innovation is more critical to profitability experience a smaller decline in innovation when faced with oil price uncertainty. This research contributes to the understanding of how external economic factors, particularly oil price volatility, influence corporate innovation strategies and highlights the differential impact across firms based on the strategic importance of innovation.

We examine how firm age affects the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) within the workforce. Drawing on a novel dataset developed by Babina et al. (2024) combining resume and job posting data for U.S. firms, we find that older firms often encounter difficulties integrating AI talent, possibly due to entrenched practices, outdated systems, and resistance to change. Specifically, a rise in firm age by one standard deviation reduces the share of AI workers by 5.2%. However, investments in R&D and infrastructure can mitigate these challenges, enabling modernization and attracting skilled AI professionals. Importantly, our analysis reveals that board composition, particularly the presence of female and minority directors, impacts AI adoption. In older firms, risk-averse decision-making and slower consensus-building among diverse boards may hinder the integration of AI talent. Firms that successfully integrate AI talent achieve significant improvements in market valuation and operational efficiency. Our study provides practical insights for managers and policymakers aiming to guide mature organizations through the challenges of technological transformation. Our findings relate to internal AI capability development and may not fully capture firms' reliance on external AI solutions.