Publications

Working Papers

Stakeholder responses to CSR information: Evidence from employees

solo-authored

Abstract: While there is ample evidence that investors use CSR disclosure, evidence for non-investor stakeholders is rare. Focusing on employees as a specific stakeholder group, I use a sample of Fortune’s “100 best companies to work for” list firms between 2005 and 2017 to provide evidence on employees’ long and short-term responses to positive, employee-specific CSR disclosure. Measuring the short-term response using abnormal Google search volume, I find a significant increase in searches following the list publication. However, this increased employee does not lead to a long-term response, as indicated by the insignificant increase of applications to the list firms. In contrast, firms seem to increase their CSR activities in employee-related matters, as they pay fewer non-financial misconduct fines after being featured on the list. Overall, I find that employees pay attention to tailored CSR information but fail to act upon it, whereas firms change their CSR activities when anticipating increased stakeholder attention.

The analysis of material contracts: Use of SEC contractual data in accounting research

with Victor Sehn and Matthias Uckert 

Abstract: Material contracts offer direct insights into firms' decision-making. Despite their extensive information content, prior literature makes notably less use of material contracts compared to other firm disclosures. This paper seeks to address this gap by promoting the use of material contracts as a valuable data source in accounting research. To that end, we conduct a full-scale analysis of the material contracts filed as exhibits with the SEC between 2001 and 2024. The paper provides empirical evidence on the strategic contract filing behavior, the filers' characteristics and the contracts' information content. We highlight challenges and limitations of material contracts as a data source and outline potential future research questions. Our sample and the corresponding code are provided in an open-source database, easing the access and processability of contracts for accounting researchers. 

Walking the Climate Talk? The Use of Environmental Clauses in Corporate Contracts

with Victor Sehn

Abstract: In recent years, the number of firms announcing net-zero emission pledges has significantly increased. As these pledges constitute long-term forecasts of corporate environmental performance, stakeholders face the challenge of assessing their credibility and distinguishing between credible commitments and cheap talk. This paper analyzes firms’ use of environmental contract clauses and assesses whether these clauses are indicative of firms’ “walking their talk”. Analyzing material contracts between 2013 and 2023, we find a steady rise in environmental clauses, with a sharp increase in incentive clauses towards the end of the sample, which the firms also mention in their contract-related communication. Environmental contract clauses, if made in combination with climate pledges, are associated with a decrease in future emissions, suggesting that these clauses can be a useful indicator to identify credible climate commitments.

Real Effects Arguments in Financial Reporting Standard Setting: Evidence from Lease Accounting

with Thorsten Sellhorn and Katharina Weiß

Abstract: This paper studies real effects arguments – claims that accounting standards causally affect preparers’ actions in the real economy – in the context of IFRS standard setting. To identify such real effects arguments, we apply semi-automated content analysis to the 426 due process documents and the 1,727 comment letters related to the IASB’s lease accounting project. Specifically, we document the real effects arguments that emerge during this process, and study when and where they originate, as well as how they diffuse through the IASB’s standard-setting process. We find that both comment letter and due process documents focus on financing real effects arguments. Yet, comment letters also feature concerns about market-wide implications. We further show that real effects arguments tend to arise via constituents’ comment letters rather than at the Board and staff’s initiative. They are brought into Board discussions only selectively via staff papers, and feature less prominently in Board deliberations, consistent with staff acting as a ‘filter’. Our study provides important insights for the upcoming Post-implementation Review, highlighting which effects analyses can fruitfully be conducted to address concerns raised by constituents.

Ann-Kristin Großkopf

a.n.grosskopf@uva.nl