Earnings behaviour of financially distressed firms:The role of institutional ownership

Using a sample of 859 U.S. bankruptcy-filing firms over the period 1986-2004, we examine the earnings behaviour of managers during the distressed period by looking at sources of abnormal accruals prior to the bankruptcy-filing year. Results show that managers of highly distressed firms shift earnings downwards prior to the bankruptcy filing. We test and provide evidence in support of two potential contributing factors. First, top-level management turnover among distressed firms leads new managers to earnings bath choices during the distressed period. Second, qualified audit opinions exert pressure on managers to follow more conservative earnings behaviour during the distressed period. Evidence is also provided that the management of distressed firms with lower (higher) institutional ownership has greater (lesser) tendency to manage earnings downwards. Results also show that higher institutional ownership mitigates the negative abnormal returns of firms with top management turnover. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study that attempts to examine whether institutional ownership relates to market reaction in conjunction with a top management turnover or a qualified audit opinion during the distressed period. Prior studies focused on the investigation of earnings management or institutional ownership (separately) during the distressed period, but did not examine if the effect of institutional ownership on earnings behaviour also influences subsequent returns. Thus, the results of this study should be of interest to analysts, standard setters and regulatory bodies since our results show that management turnover, qualified audit opinions and firm governance mechanisms affect the quality of earnings and the level of abnormal returns. © 2007 Accounting Foundation, The University of Sydney.

Crisis and institutional change in urban governance

Recent studies of new institutional spaces typically underplay the uneven and contested process of institutional change by undervaluing the role of inherited institutions and discourses. This is a critical issue as neoliberal networked forms of governance interact with inherited institutional arrangements, characterised by important path dependencies that guide actors. Contradiction and tensions can emerge, culminating in crisis tendencies, and producing both discursive and material contestation between actors. It is with an understanding of path dependencies, ideas (structured into discourses), and (perceived and actual) crisis tendencies that this paper examines contested institutional change through a case-study analysis of one city, and a critical engagement with neoinstitutionalism. The purpose is to examine, firstly, the significance of inherited path-dependent arrangements in fostering conflict and crisis tendencies during interaction with emergent state action; secondly, the extent to which crisis is evident in processes of institutional change and the form that this takes; and, thirdly, the importance of ideas in producing institutional transformation. It is found that institutional conflict is evident between inherited institutions and emergent state action, and stems both from the way agents are organised by the state and from certain path dependencies, but that this does not lead to an actual material crisis. Rather, the nation-state, in partnership with senior city government actors, use ideational/discursive ‘crisis talk’ as a means by which to induce institutional change. The role of ideas has been in critical in this process as the nation-state frames problems and solutions in line with its existing policy paradigm and institutional arrangements, and with discourses further reinforcing existing material power relations.