Search

The negative relationship between corporate risk and corporate returns, also known as the "Bowman paradox," has been an important puzzle in strategy research that has motivated dozens of empirical studies. Theoretically, the paradox was explained with an appeal to contingent managerial preferences for risk or to heterogeneous managerial capabilities. A popular alternative view has been that the paradox is merely an empirical artifact and, thus, does not need to be explained with management theories. Furthermore, the view that the negative risk–return relationship does not need to be explained theoretically was reinforced to become a bottom line for nearly five decades of research on diversified firms—that the paradox cannot be explained theoretically based on the context of corporate diversification. This study counters that pessimistic view and develops a formal model to explain theoretically how the negative risk–return relationship exists in diversified firms due to the interplay of two types of economies of scope. Thus, the Bowman paradox is explained in this study parsimoniously, with the fundamental features of the context of corporate diversification that exist regardless of the variation in managerial preferences for risk or in managerial capabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a unifying model of disclosure in the presence of competitors and supply market reliance to examine the role of multisegment operations on disclosure choice. A firm's private information can have varying demand implications for its own portfolio of segments and for its competitors' portfolios of segments. In multisegment firms, cross-firm spillovers of information discourage disclosure whereas cross-segment spillovers encourage disclosure. This suggests multisegment firms with more informationally diverse segments will have more incentives for transparency. Further, in multisegment firms, reliance on an imperfect supply market has less detrimental effects on transparency compared to single-segment firms. Supply market reliance is less detrimental for multisegment firms with a more diverse portfolio of segments. The results suggest that multisegment firms have more incentives for transparency relative to single-segment firms. JEL Classifications: L11; L13; M41. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I use an accounting reform to assess the agency cost of debt in diversified firms. Those firms that switch from single to multiple segments following the reform suffer a 12% increase in their bond spread when compared with their stand-alone peers. Consistent with lenders anticipating underinvestment and asset-substitution incentives, diversified firms with high cash-flow volatility across divisions suffer the highest increase in borrowing costs. I employ a novel approach that allows abstracting from unobservable characteristics that would otherwise influence the pricing of diversified firms' debt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The authors study the valuation effect of corporate diversification in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 in Europe. Design/methodology/approach: Applying a cross-sectional regression model to a sample of public companies headquartered in the European Union, the authors investigate the existence of and the change in a diversification discount between 2018 and 2020. By applying the Excess Q methodology, the authors make an industry adjustment of diversified companies to measure the value effect of corporate diversification. Findings: The authors find an economically and statistically significant diversification discount that increases from an average Excess Q of −0.05 in 2019 to −0.10 in 2020. The diversified companies' inferior fundamental financial performance in 2020 accompanies the discount. The results deviate from those of previous research, which mostly show a decrease in the diversification discount in economic crises, and thereby, shed doubt on whether diversification provides insurance against pandemic-induced adverse value effects. Originality/value: The study distinguishes the role of corporate diversification during recessionary periods by establishing that the valuation effect of diversification depends on the nature of the crisis. The analysis incorporates criticism of previous studies concerning a biased methodology and uniform data source by applying the Excess Q methodology and using FactSet industry segment data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective - This study examines the relationship between diversification strategy and company economic performance in the Moroccan real estate sector. The research focuses on measuring the impact of diversification on technical and Scale efficiency using the Data Envelopment Analysis (D.E.A.) method. The objective is to provide empirical evidence regarding the performance differences between diversified and undiversified companies in the Moroccan real estate industry context. Methodology -Data was collected on sales, inventory, and personnel expenses to construct the input-output ratio from a sample of 60 companies in the Moroccan real estate sector. Diversified and undiversified firms were identified based on their business activities. The Data Envelopment Analysis (D.E.A.) method was then applied to measure these companies' technical and Scale efficiency. Findings - The results reveal that diversified companies in the Moroccan real estate sector exhibit significantly higher economic efficiency, around 40% compared to 31% for undiversified firms. Moreover, diversified firms demonstrate superior pure technical efficiency with a score of 47%, while undiversified firms lag at 36%. However, the two groups have no significant difference in scale efficiency. These findings highlight the positive impact of diversification on overall efficiency and suggest the potential benefits of adopting diversified strategies in the real estate industry. Novelty - This study contributes to the existing literature by exploring the relationship between diversification and performance in the particular context of the real estate industry in Morocco. The findings of this study have practical implications. Managers and policymakers can utilize the results to understand the potential benefits of diversification and consider incorporating this strategy into their business models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research Summary: Whether diversified firms have advantages over their single‐business counterparts is the focus of much research in strategic management. Indeed, there is sparse evidence that corporate advantage exists, on average. We explore one potential driver of corporate advantage—that multi‐business firms have more flexibility than single‐business firms to cope with uncertainty, because they can internally redeploy resources across businesses. Using Compustat data, we show that uncertainty increases the relative advantage of multi‐business firms, a finding robust to controls for endogeneity. Consequently, the paper provides important insight and evidence around when corporate advantage might obtain. Moreover, we find that growth option value is accentuated in the presence of switching flexibility. Finally, multi‐business firms with redeployment experience and businesses with more inversely correlated returns benefit more from uncertainty. Managerial Summary: Multi‐business firms have a flexibility advantage over single‐business firms as they can reallocate firm resources from one business unit to another depending on inducements. What is the impact of this flexibility on firm value? In this paper, we test whether such a flexibility advantage translates into greater economic returns in more volatile markets. We expect that resource redeployment creates value if it amplifies business‐specific positive shocks while alleviating business‐specific downturns. Consistent with this argument, we find empirical evidence that with increasing stock market volatility, multi‐business firms benefit significantly more in terms of firm value than their single‐business counterparts. In particular, in highly volatile stock markets, monthly adjusted returns are 2.3 times higher for multi‐business firms than for single‐business firms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We document a strong decline in corporate-diversification activity since the late 1970s, and we develop a dynamic model that explains this pattern, both qualitatively and quantitatively. The key feature of the model is that synergies endogenously decline with technological specialization, leading to fewer diversified firms in equilibrium. The model further predicts that segments inside a conglomerate should become more related over time, which is consistent with the data. Finally, the calibrated model also matches other empirical magnitudes well: output growth rate, market-to-book ratios, diversification discount, frequency and returns of diversifying mergers, and frequency of refocusing activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rapid growth, acquisitions, and diversification are examples of major changes that often result in the need to redefine the distinctive characteristics of the organization in question thereafter. However, a sudden identity presentation that significantly differs from the past lacks credibility among both the organizational members and the organization's external constituents. We contribute to previous research by showing the previously neglected potential that lies in the flexible selection, valuation, and spatio-temporal positioning of referents, and how this enables the construction of an identity that is simultaneously sufficiently congruent with the organization's present activities and continuous with its previous identity. Moreover, we also reveal how this use of referents changes across the phases of organizational evolution. Empirically, our findings are grounded on an intensive case study of an organization over a 20-year time frame that evolved from a minor spin-off to a prominent and eventually to a major diversified company. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigate why CEOs of multibusiness corporations decide to engage in a corporate split that spawns multiple independent, smaller, but more adaptive, entities. Through an in-depth examination of the dynamic forces that led CEO Meg Whitman to split HP, we propose that the company's evolving business ecosystem led to the divergence of the consumer-oriented and enterprise-oriented business models in the corporate portfolio. We document the interplay between inter–business model complementarity and intra–business model complexity and how this vicious cycle, in combination with increasing capital market pressure, led to the CEO decision to split and her public justification for this momentous move. Our combined longitudinal interpretative and realist process-tracing approach generates one of the first conceptual frameworks to integrate insights from the ecosystem and corporate divestiture literatures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study analyzed the effect of industrial and international diversification on the profitability and operational risk of Brazilian companies. The sample comprised 210 publicly traded Brazilian companies, who trade shares on the B3 stock exchange. The results of the study showed that industrially diversified companies both reduce operational risk and increase profitability in terms of return on assets, while companies that are internationally diversified reduce their profitability. As well, the companies that diversify both industrially and internationally, see increasedoperational risk. This study is relevant to the investigation of the relationship of industrial and international diversification in companies' operating results, as it indicates that, in the context of Brazil, industrial diversification tends to improve operating results, with an increase in profitability and a reduction in operating risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]