The Influence of Unrelated and Related Diversification on Fraudulent Reporting

2014 ◽  
Vol 131 (4) ◽  
pp. 815-832 ◽  
Author(s):  
Subrata Chakrabarty
Keyword(s):  
Related Diversification ◽  
Fraudulent Reporting

scholarly journals Enhanced Magnetic Properties of BiFeO3 Thin Films by Doping: Analysis of Structure and Morphology

Nanomaterials ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yilin Zhang ◽  
Yuhan Wang ◽  
Ji Qi ◽  
Yu Tian ◽  
Mingjie Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Thin Films ◽  
Magnetic Properties ◽  
Sol Gel ◽  
Exchange Interactions ◽  
Ferromagnetic Behavior ◽  
Ferromagnetic Properties ◽  
Structure And Morphology ◽  
Related Diversification ◽  
Lattice Distortions ◽  
Mn Doped

The improvement of ferromagnetic properties is critical for the practical application of multiferroic materials, to be exact, BiFeO3 (BFO). Herein, we have investigated the evolution in the structure and morphology of Ho or/and Mn-doped thin films and the related diversification in ferromagnetic behavior. BFO, Bi0.95Ho0.05FeO3 (BHFO), BiFe0.95Mn0.05O3 (BFMO) and Bi0.95Ho0.05Fe0.95Mn0.05O3 (BHFMO) thin films are synthesized via the conventional sol-gel method. Density, size and phase structure are crucial to optimize the ferromagnetic properties. Specifically, under the applied magnetic field of 10 kOe, BHFO and BFMO thin films can produce obvious magnetic properties during magnetization and, additionally, doping with Ho and Mn (BHFMO) can achieve better magnetic properties. This enhancement is attributed to the lattice distortions caused by the ionic sizes difference between the doping agent and the host, the generation of the new exchange interactions and the inhibition of the antiferromagnetic spiral modulated spin structure. This study provides key insights of understanding the tunable ferromagnetic properties of co-doped BFO.

scholarly journals Pengaruh Risiko Bisnis, Life Cycle Dan Diversifikasi Terhadap Struktur Modal Serta Hubungannya Dengan Nilai Perusahaan Manufaktur Di Indonesia

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Septi Diana Sari
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Capital Structure ◽  
Firm Value ◽  
Order Theory ◽  
Diversification Strategy ◽  
Single Segment ◽  
Unrelated Diversification ◽  
Related Diversification ◽  
Positive Effect ◽  
The Capital Structure

This study aims to examine the factors that affect the capital structure. The task of the financial manager is to determine the amount of capital structure to enhance shareholder value. Since the capital structure associated with firm value , this study also aimed to examine the effect of capital structure on firm value by considering the company's diversification strategy and corporate life cycle stages . By using the data obtained from the OSIRIS period 2009-2012, researchers used multiple regression test and path analysis to test the hypothesis. From the test results stated that only companies which are in the start-up phase which has a significant positive effect on the capital structure , as well as the diversification strategy has an influence on the capital structure of the company's capital structure with a sequence of related diversification > unrelated diversification > single segment. But when regressed diversification strategy with corporate values, only a single segment strategy and related diversification which significantly affect the value of the company, as well as the positive effect of capital structure on firm value. Most of the results of this study can be explained by the signaling effect and the pecking order theory. 

Information Technology and Diversification

2011 ◽  
pp. 2460-2474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Namchul Shin
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Business Performance ◽  
Relative Impact ◽  
Scope Economies ◽  
Business Units ◽  
Strategic Emphasis ◽  
Related Diversification ◽  
The Relationship

While the importance of IT coupled with organizational changes for business performance has been widely discussed in the information systems (IS) literature, there has been little empirical research on the issue. This research examines empirically the relationship between IT and diversification by employing multiple diversification measures. It also examines empirically the relative impact on performance of IT and diversification. Results show that diversification coupled with increased IT spending improves firm performance when its strategic emphasis is on related diversification. The results also show that firms place strategic focus on related diversification when they increase IT spending, and that they require more IT when their strategic emphasis is tilted toward related diversification. The findings imply that by providing a better means of coordination, IT enables scope economies, efficient utilization of business resources and collaboration across individual business units, eventually leveraging the benefits of diversification.

scholarly journals Product diversification and large construction firm productivity: the effect of institutional environments in Malaysia

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohd Azrai Azman ◽  
Carol K.H. Hon ◽  
Bo Xia ◽  
Boon L. Lee ◽  
Martin Skitmore
Keyword(s):  
Firm Performance ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Product Diversification ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Construction Firms ◽  
Unrelated Diversification ◽  
Construction Firm ◽  
Related Diversification ◽  
Generalised Method Of Moments ◽  
The Impact

PurposeMany large construction firms (LCFs) adopt product diversification (PD) to counter downturns and spread risks. However, no detailed information is available concerning the type of PD that improves their performance. In addition, it is still uncertain how much changes in institutional dimensions influence the effectiveness of PD. Therefore, the aim is to resolve this issue by establishing a model that shows the extent of this influence.Design/methodology/approachThe generalised method of moments (GMM) estimator is used to model the PD strategies of 86 LCFs in Malaysia over 14 years (2003–2016) and its impact on productivity and profitability performance.FindingsUnrelated diversification (UD) decreased firm performance in 2003–2016, while related diversification (RD) had a positive impact during the more liberal 2010–2016 phase. The models show that the impact of PD is highly dependent on changes in institutional dimensions.Practical implicationsFirstly, managers may adjust the type of PD and its level of diversification to improve firm performance. Secondly, they may devise PD strategies based on changes in institutional dimensions to maximise their effectiveness.Originality/valueThe study contributes to the literature by determining the optimal amount of PD (including RD and UD) and its impact on performance. Secondly, the study is the first to investigate the moderating relationship of the institutional dimensions of economic and regulatory institutions on PD-firm performance. Thirdly, the study is the first to explore the components of technical-scale-scope economies (movement towards and around the production frontier), this being crucial to the strategy that was only conjectured in previous studies.

On the Determinants of Enterprise Risk Management Implementation

2011 ◽  
pp. 87-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt Desender
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Enterprise Risk Management ◽  
Important Influence ◽  
Board Composition ◽  
Board Independence ◽  
Enterprise Risk ◽  
Fraudulent Reporting

Corporate governance failures and new legislation have emphasized the importance of enterprise risk management (ERM) in preventing fraudulent reporting. Despite the increased attention to ERM, little research has been done to explain why some organizations embrace ERM while others do not. The objective of this paper is to explore how the board composition is related to the degree of enterprise risk management implementation. Our main results reveal that the position of the CEO in the board has an important influence on the level of ERM. Furthermore, we find that board independence by itself is not sufficient to induce higher levels of ERM. Board independence is only significantly related to ERM when there is a separation of CEO and chairman. Firms with an independent board and a separation of CEO and chairman show the highest level of ERM. One possible explanation for our results is that CEOs do not favour ERM implementation and are able to withstand pressure from the board when they are occupying the seat of chairman.

Related diversification, core competences and corporate performance

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (S2) ◽  
pp. 149-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constantinos C. Markides ◽  
Peter J. Williamson
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Performance ◽  
Core Competences ◽  
Related Diversification

Corporate or Product Diversification

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margarethe F. Wiersema ◽  
Joseph B. Beck
Keyword(s):  
Distribution Channels ◽  
Shareholder Wealth ◽  
Product Diversification ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Business Trend ◽  
Corporate Diversification ◽  
Diversification Strategy ◽  
Unrelated Diversification ◽  
Strategic Assets ◽  
Related Diversification

Corporate or product diversification represents a strategic decision. Specifically, it addresses the strategic question regarding in which businesses the firm will compete. A single-business company that expands its strategic scope by adding new businesses becomes a diversified, multibusiness company. The means by which a company expands its strategic scope is by acquiring businesses, investing in the development of new businesses, or both. Similarly, an already diversified firm can reduce its strategic scope by divesting from or closing businesses. There are two fundamentally different types of corporate diversification strategy, depending on the interrelatedness of the businesses in the company’s portfolio: related diversification and unrelated diversification. Related diversification occurs when the businesses in the company’s portfolio share strategic assets or resources, such as technology, a brand name, or distribution channels. Unrelated diversification occurs when a company’s businesses do not share strategic assets or resources and do not have interrelationships of strategic importance. Companies can pursue both types of diversification simultaneously, and thus have a portfolio of businesses both related and unrelated. In addition to variations in the type of diversification, companies can vary in the extent of their diversification, ranging from business portfolios with very limited diversification to highly diversified portfolios. Decisions regarding the diversification strategy of a firm represent major strategic scope decisions since they impact the markets and industries in which the company will compete. Companies can increase or reduce their level of diversification for a variety of reasons. Economic motives, for example, include the pursuit of economies of multiproduct scale and scope, whereby per-unit costs may be lowered through the increase in sales volume or other fixed-cost reducing benefits associated with growth through diversification. In addition, companies may diversify for strategic reasons, such as enhancement of capabilities or superior competitive positioning through entry into new product markets. Similarly, economic and strategic reasons can motivate the firm to refocus and reduce its level of diversification when the strategic and economic rationales for being in a particular business are no longer justified. The performance consequences of corporate diversification can vary, depending on both the extent of the firm’s diversification and the type of diversification. In general, research indicates that high levels of diversification are value-destroying due to the integrative and complexity-associated costs that administering an extremely diversified portfolio imposes on management. Nevertheless, related diversification, where the company shares underlying resources across its business portfolio (e.g., brand, technology, and distribution channels), can lead to higher levels of performance than can unrelated diversification, due to the potential for enhanced profitability from leveraging shared resources. Corporate diversification was a major U.S. business trend in the 1960s. During the 1980s, however, pressure from the capital market for shareholder wealth maximization led to the adoption of strategies whereby many companies refocused their business portfolios and thus reduced their levels of corporate diversification by divesting unrelated businesses in order to concentrate on their predominant or core business.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document