A growing body of research suggests that having more women in the boardroom leads to better corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance. However, much of this work views the CSR-enhancing effect of women directors as largely driven by their moral orientations and rarely considers other underlying mechanisms. Moreover, less explored are the firm-specific conditions under which such CSR-promoting roles of female directors might be performed more (or less) effectively. In this paper, we seek to bridge this gap in the literature by (1) proposing an additional account for the positive influence of female independent directors on the firm’s CSR and (2) illuminating the organizational context in which female directorship is likely to translate into good CSR performance. We argue that women independent directors might take CSR issues more seriously than their male counterparts not only because of their stronger moral orientations, but also because they have reputational reasons to do so. Further, we suggest that female directors’ concerns about CSR-relevant matters are more (less) likely to gain support from other members of the organization when their company is doing more (less) business in the product markets where reputation for CSR is more (less) vital for success. Using a sample of Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 1500 index firms (2000–2009) and the data on their board composition and CSR ratings, we find strong support for our argument. We find that the number (or proportion) of women independent directors is positively associated with a firm’s CSR ratings and that the strength of this relationship depends on the level of the firm’s consumer market orientation.

In this paper, we investigate the effect of an epidemic outbreak on consumer expenditures. In light of scanner panel data on consumers’ debit and credit card transactions, we present empirical evidence that outbreaks cause considerable disruption in total consumer expenditures with significant heterogeneity across categories. Our findings strongly imply that customers alter their behaviors to reduce the risk of infection. The estimated effect of an epidemic outbreak is qualitatively different from that of other macroeconomic factors. The implications of this research provide important guidance for policy interventions and marketing decisions aimed at sustaining economic growth.

In this paper, we carefully investigate previous literature to extract 10 relevant factors to explain the hospital profitability and build an econometrically well-specified model of explaining hospital profitability that does not suffer from omitted variable bias. Then we provide empirical evidence to a common belief that the objective function of a hospital varies with the type of hospital. We identified distinct objective functions for three types of hospitals: for-profit hospitals are driven by the overarching agreed-upon goal of profit maximization for shareholders; government hospitals, which are often the insurers of last resort, are obliged to put the public interest over profit objectives; nonprofit hospitals, which are legally prohibited from distributing profits, occupy the middle ground between for-profit and government hospitals. The results of this paper suggest that the ownership type should determine the factors on which hospitals focus and hence are useful to hospital management and academic researchers.

Discretionary accruals reflect the management’s accounting choices made within the flexibility of accounting standards. Discretionary accruals can be used by the management to better reflect the economic value of the firm and to signal their private information about a firm’s future prospects to the market, but they can also be used opportunistically by managers. However, the prior literature documents mixed evidence related to the information content in discretionary accruals. Thus, we examine the association between discretionary accruals and analysts’ forecast dispersion to provide further evidence on the information content in discretionary accruals. Moreover, as greater external monitoring and rigorous ESG management allow less room for manager’s manipulation of discretionary accruals, we investigate whether greater external monitoring by institutional owners and higher ESG scores moderate the relationship between discretionary accruals and analysts’ disagreements on long-term EPS growth forecasts. We find a positive association between discretionary accruals and analysts’ forecast dispersion, which suggests there is low information content in discretionary accruals. Furthermore, we find that a greater concentration in institutional ownership, greater blockholders’ institutional ownership, and a positive ESG score mitigate the positive relationship between discretionary accruals and analysts’ forecast dispersion. Thus, better external monitoring and higher quality ESG enhance the information credibility of a firm’s disclosure.

The electronic sharing of health information holds the potential to enhance communication and coordination among hospitals and providers, ultimately leading to improved hospital performance. However, despite the benefits, hospitals often encounter significant challenges when it comes to sharing information with external parties. Our study aimed to identify the circumstances under which sharing information with external parties can result in changes in overall hospital costs, with a particular emphasis on various obstacles that hospitals may encounter, including lack of incentives or capabilities essential to facilitate effective information exchange. To achieve this goal, we obtain data from multiple sources, including the American Hospital Association (AHA) annual and IT surveys, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) hospital compare dataset, and the Census Bureau’s small-area income and poverty estimates. Consistent with previous research, we observed a significant reduction in hospital costs when information was shared internally but not externally. However, our findings also revealed that the sharing of health information can lead to cost savings for hospitals when they encounter challenges such as the absence of incentives and capabilities regardless of whether the information is shared internally or externally. The implication of our study is simple but strong: perseverance and effort yield positive outcomes. Only when hospitals push through challenges related to sharing information can they achieve the anticipated advantages of information sharing. Based on our results, we suggest that policymakers should strategically target hospitals and providers that face challenges in sharing health information rather than focusing on those without obstacles. This targeted approach can significantly increase policy efficiency, and we emphasize the need for policymakers to address the specific areas where hospitals and providers encounter difficulties. By doing so, they can effectively “scratch where it itches” and address the core issues hindering the successful exchange of health information.

This study explores factors associated with the breadth (extent) and depth (level of detail) of digital information exchange among stakeholders in health information technology (IT) systems. Annual and IT surveys of the American Hospital Association and the U.S. Census Bureau’s small-area income and poverty estimates from 2014–2016 were analyzed for associations between key factors and breadth and depth of information exchange. OLS Regression was used with a sample consisting of 10,040 year-hospital observations. We found that hospital-level variables such as size, ownership type, system affiliation, physician-hospital arrangement, and revenue model affect information exchange. We further found that market-level variables such as concentration ratio, urbanness, and median household income, although they directly affect information exchange, do not moderate the relationship between hospital-level variables and information exchange. Our study fills a gap in the previous literature arising from the lack of research on the determinants of health information exchange.