Does institutional ownership discourage investment in corporate R&D?

被引:20
作者
Mishra, Chandra S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Florida Atlantic Univ, Coll Business, Boca Raton, FL 33431 USA
关键词
Corporate innovation; Managerial myopia; Institutional ownership; FIRM PERFORMANCE; GOVERNANCE; INVESTORS; US; FINANCIALISATION; INCENTIVES; INNOVATION; AGENCY; MARKET;
D O I
10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121837
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
We examine the influence of institutional investor ownership in a firm on their investment in R&D. We find partial support for managerial myopia in that at a higher level of institutional ownership, we find managers cut back R&D investment. We find a positive relation between institutional holdings in a firm and their investment in R&D till the institutional holdings in the firm reaches a threshold. Our results are consistent with the notion that managerial myopia sets in as the managers yield to institutional pressure when the institutional ownership level exceeds a threshold. Our results suggest that managers become sensitive to the pressure from institutional investors when the institutional ownership crosses a threshold. We find the greater the stock undervaluation, the lower the investment in R&D. We find stronger negative relation between institutional ownership and R&D when the firm's stock is more undervalued, consistent with the notion that managerial myopia worsens when the firm is more likely to be a takeover target as their stock becomes undervalued. We find banks, insurance companies, and public pension funds have a positive influence on the firm's R&D, but mutual funds and hedge funds have a negative influence on R&D. We find positive influence of dedicated institutional investors but negative influence of transient investors and quasi-indexers on corporate R&D.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 70 条
[31]   MANAGERIAL INCENTIVES AND CAPITAL MANAGEMENT [J].
HOLMSTROM, B ;
COSTA, JRI .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1986, 101 (04) :835-860
[32]  
Hsu H., 2011, INT C EC FIN RES, V4, P362
[33]   THEORY OF FIRM - MANAGERIAL BEHAVIOR, AGENCY COSTS AND OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE [J].
JENSEN, MC ;
MECKLING, WH .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 1976, 3 (04) :305-360
[34]   FIRM PERFORMANCE, CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, AND TOP EXECUTIVE TURNOVER IN JAPAN [J].
KANG, JK ;
SHIVDASANI, A .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 1995, 38 (01) :29-58
[35]   TOP EXECUTIVE REWARDS AND FIRM PERFORMANCE - A COMPARISON OF JAPAN AND THE UNITED-STATES [J].
KAPLAN, SN .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1994, 102 (03) :510-546
[36]  
Kline B., 2010, Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (Methodology in the Social Sciences), V3rd
[37]  
Knott AM, 2012, HARVARD BUS REV, V90, P76
[38]  
Kochhar R, 1996, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V17, P73, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199601)17:1<73::AID-SMJ795>3.0.CO
[39]  
2-N
[40]   The US stock market and the governance of innovative enterprise [J].
Lazonick, William .
INDUSTRIAL AND CORPORATE CHANGE, 2007, 16 (06) :983-1035