When the Boss Comes to Town: The Effects of Headquarters' Visits on Facility-Level Misconduct

Jonas  Heese; Gerardo  Pérez Cavazos

Article | Accounting Review | Forthcoming

When the Boss Comes to Town: The Effects of Headquarters' Visits on Facility-Level Misconduct

by Jonas Heese and Gerardo Pérez Cavazos

Abstract

We study the effects of headquarters’ visits on facility-level misconduct. We use the staggered introduction of airline routes to identify exogenous travel-time reductions between headquarters and facilities and test whether such reductions affect facility-level misconduct. We find that, on average, a travel-time reduction decreases the number of facility-level violations by 2% and associated penalties by 23.4%, indicating that management focuses on reducing costlier violations as opposed to simply reducing the number of violations. The effects are concentrated in firms with weaker control systems, suggesting that strong controls can act as substitutes for visits. Further, the introduction of broadband internet attenuates, but does not eliminate, the effect of visits on misconduct. Lastly, we find that visits result in greater facility-level misconduct when firms are subject to strong performance pressure. Overall, our study provides a nuanced understanding of the effects of on-site visits on facility-level misconduct.

Keywords: corporate misconduct; visits by management; flight routes; control systems; compliance programs; Performance Pressure; Business or Company Management; Management Systems; Governance Controls; Governance Compliance; Performance Expectations;

Format: Print

SSRN

Citation:

Heese, Jonas, and Gerardo Pérez Cavazos. "When the Boss Comes to Town: The Effects of Headquarters' Visits on Facility-Level Misconduct." Accounting Review (forthcoming).

In May 2020, an analyst was assessing eHealth’s performance. eHealth was an online / tele-sales broker of health insurance products. The stock had recently hit all-time highs, closing at a peak of $146 on March 4, 2020. But now, May 4, 2020, eHealth traded at $103. The recent fall had wiped nearly $1.0B from the company’s market capitalization because well-known short seller Carson Block had released a short-report on the company. Carson Block argued that eHealth’s management had undertaken “massive stock promotion.” In the report, Block said that eHealth’s adoption of the new revenue recognition standard – ASC 606 – inflated revenue and masked the fact that eHealth was losing money on each new policy that it sold.
Still, eHealth’s valuation remained elevated at 3.3x FY2021E Revenue, 21x FY2021E adjusted net income, even assuming away accounting uncertainty. In addition, the mean consensus share price target as of May 4, 2020 was $179.
Did the latest news provide a buying opportunity? Or was it best to avoid eHealth, even perhaps consider shorting the company?

In March 2020, as coronavirus reduced demand for air travel, an analyst was forecasting American Airlines’ (American’s) first quarter financial results. To develop a forecast, she needed to familiarize herself with Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842),” passed four years earlier by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. ASU 2016-02 required companies to disclose all leases on their balance sheets, but it made an exception for leases with variable payments, allowing companies to leave such leases off-balance sheet. The Wall Street Journal estimated that more than 50% of American’s leases remained off-balance sheet due to the exclusion of variable leases. Should American and other companies be allowed to leave variable lease payments off-balance sheet? How did the decision to leave these payments off-balance sheet affect companies’ risk profiles and valuations?

Faculty & Research

When the Boss Comes to Town: The Effects of Headquarters' Visits on Facility-Level Misconduct

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors