Unethical Employee Behavior Against Coworkers Following Unkind Management Treatment: An Experimental Analysis
Sabrina Jeworrek, Joschka Waibel
Managerial and Decision Economics,
Nr. 5,
2021
Abstract
We study unethical behavior toward unrelated coworkers as a response to managerial unkindness with two experiments. In our lab experiment, we do not find that subjects who experienced unkindness are more likely to cheat in a subsequent competition against another coworker who simultaneously experienced mistreatment. A subsequent survey experiment suggests that behavior in the lab can be explained by individuals' preferences for norm adherence, because unkind management behavior does not alter the perceived moral appropriateness of cheating. However, having no shared experience of managerial unkindness opens up some moral wiggle room for employees to misbehave at the costs of others.
Artikel Lesen
Managerial Effect or Firm Effect: Evidence from the Private Debt Market
Bill Francis, Iftekhar Hasan, Yun Zhu
Financial Review,
Nr. 1,
2020
Abstract
This paper provides evidence that the managerial effect is a key determinant of firms’ cost of capital, in the context of private debt contracting. Applying the novel empirical method developed by an earlier study to a large sample that tracks the job movement of top managers, we find that the managerial effect is a critical and significant factor that explains a large part of the variation in loan contract terms more accurately than firm fixed effects. Additional evidence shows that banks “follow” managers when they change jobs and offer loan contracts with preferential terms to their new firms.
Artikel Lesen
Managerial Biases and Debt Contract Design: The Case of Syndicated Loans
Tim R. Adam, Valentin Burg, Tobias Scheinert, Daniel Streitz
Management Science,
Nr. 1,
2020
Abstract
We examine whether managerial overconfidence impacts the use of performance-pricing provisions in loan contracts (performance-sensitive debt [PSD]). Managers with biased views may issue PSD because they consider this form of debt to be mispriced. Our evidence shows that overconfident managers are more likely to issue rate-increasing PSD than regular debt. They choose PSD with steeper performance-pricing schedules than those chosen by rational managers. We reject the possibility that overconfident managers have (persistent) positive private information and use PSD for signaling. Finally, firms seem to benefit less from using PSD ex post if they are managed by overconfident rather than rational managers.
Artikel Lesen
