TY - JOUR
T1 - The moderating role of CEO sustainability reporting style in the relationship between sustainability performance, sustainability reporting, and cost of equity
AU - Lopatta, Kerstin
AU - Kaspereit, Thomas
AU - Tideman, Sebastian A.
AU - Rudolf, Anna R.
N1 - Funding Information:
We appreciate feedback and suggestions from Joseph Comprix, Irene M. Gordon, Marie Dutordoir, Patrick D. Kielty, Christian Fieberg, David Harris, Lihong Liang, Peter Koveos, Bharat Patil, Ana Isabel Lopes, Kenth Skogsvik, Ting Dong, Mariya Ivanova, Milda Tylaite, Peter Aleksziev, Jochen Zimmermann, Juergen Bitzer, Erkan Goeren, and Joern Hoppmann as well as from participants of workshops held at Syracuse University (USA), Stockholm School of Economics (Sweden), University of Oldenburg (Germany), University of Bremen (Germany), University of Luxembourg, and conference participants of the 16th CICA International Accounting and Auditing Congress 2017 (Aveiro, Portugal), the 5th Paris Financial Management Conference 2017 (France), the Annual Accounting Conference 2018 (Berlin, Germany), the 80th VHB Annual Meeting 2018 (Magdeburg, Germany), the 41st Annual Congress of the European Accounting Association 2018 (Milan, Italy), the CAAA Annual Conference 2018 (Calgary, Canada) as well as the 2018 AAA Annual Meeting (Washington, DC, USA). We thank Chon-kul Park from Thomson Reuters (Asset4) for answering numerous questions regarding the methodology and data credibility of the sustainability reporting data provided in Asset4. We are also thankful for knowledgeable research support by Annabell Tietz. All errors are our own.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/4
Y1 - 2022/4
N2 - This paper explores the role of individual managers in the relationship between sustainability performance, sustainability reporting, and cost of equity. Based on prior research showing that both sustainability performance and reporting reduce the risk premium, this paper contributes to the literature by acknowledging that the true motives behind a manager’s corporate sustainability engagement are not apparent to investors. Thus, investors need to rely on further information to assess the relationship between sustainability performance and risk. We argue that CEOs’ values and preferences drive their decisions regarding sustainability activities. Thus, their fixed effect on sustainability reporting conveys a signal to investors about the motives behind corporate sustainability engagement and the extent of reporting. In the first step of our empirical analysis, we document that a CEO’s specific reporting style indeed has significant statistical power in explaining a company’s level of sustainability reporting. In the second step, we find that improved sustainability performance is associated with increased cost of equity when the CEO exerts a strong personal influence on sustainability reporting. However, cost of equity declines if the CEO’s influence on the reporting of improved sustainability performance is low. Our results are consistent with the argument that investors interpret CEO’s fixed-effect on sustainability reporting as a signal. That is, for a high CEO fixed-effect, increases in sustainability engagement are conflated with the CEO's self-interested values. In further tests, we show that the signal seems to be particularly important for normative sustainability activities (vs. legal sustainability activities).
AB - This paper explores the role of individual managers in the relationship between sustainability performance, sustainability reporting, and cost of equity. Based on prior research showing that both sustainability performance and reporting reduce the risk premium, this paper contributes to the literature by acknowledging that the true motives behind a manager’s corporate sustainability engagement are not apparent to investors. Thus, investors need to rely on further information to assess the relationship between sustainability performance and risk. We argue that CEOs’ values and preferences drive their decisions regarding sustainability activities. Thus, their fixed effect on sustainability reporting conveys a signal to investors about the motives behind corporate sustainability engagement and the extent of reporting. In the first step of our empirical analysis, we document that a CEO’s specific reporting style indeed has significant statistical power in explaining a company’s level of sustainability reporting. In the second step, we find that improved sustainability performance is associated with increased cost of equity when the CEO exerts a strong personal influence on sustainability reporting. However, cost of equity declines if the CEO’s influence on the reporting of improved sustainability performance is low. Our results are consistent with the argument that investors interpret CEO’s fixed-effect on sustainability reporting as a signal. That is, for a high CEO fixed-effect, increases in sustainability engagement are conflated with the CEO's self-interested values. In further tests, we show that the signal seems to be particularly important for normative sustainability activities (vs. legal sustainability activities).
KW - CEO-firm matched panel analysis
KW - CEO-fixed effects
KW - CEOs’ style
KW - CEOs’ sustainability reporting style
KW - Cost of equity
KW - Sustainability performance
KW - Sustainability reporting
KW - Sustainability Reporting Score
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85127359934&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85127359934&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11573-022-01082-z
DO - 10.1007/s11573-022-01082-z
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85127359934
SN - 0044-2372
VL - 92
SP - 429
EP - 465
JO - Journal of Business Economics
JF - Journal of Business Economics
IS - 3
ER -