MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310810863 · doi:10.33423/jaf.v22i5.5634

Do Managerial Entrenchment and High Free Cash Flow Always Have a Negative Impact?

2022· article· en· W4310810863 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Accounting and Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFree cash flowExtant taxonCash flowBusinessAgency (philosophy)Monetary economicsCashEconomicsAccountingFinanceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Presence of free cash flow and anti-takeover provisions are often symptomatic of agency problem in a firm. We argue that this relationship is likely to be mediated by motivations of the management. Extant family firm research suggests that the management in family firms are more likely to focus on long-term performance and are more likely to be motivated by the desire to build legacy and attain longevity. This study finds that whereas on average for a non-family firm, both free cash flow and anti-takeover provisions are negatively related to firm performance, the relationship flips in the case of family firms. We find that increased anti-takeover defenses and high free cash flow are related to superior performance in the case of family firms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Accounting and FinanceSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207