Abstract
This paper explores whether firms that dismiss their CEO following poor corporate performance exhibit better performance post-turnover or whether dismissal merely serves a scapegoating function. We match firms in the same industry, by size, and by Altman Z-score, and compare our turnover sample with the matched group of firms without CEO dismissal. A subset of our results suggests that, after some delay, the market reacts positively to CEO dismissals that occur following bad performance: underperforming firms that fire their CEO exhibit positive and significant abnormal returns whereas their counterparts that retain their CEO exhibit negative abnormal returns. However, the majority of our findings indicate that CEO turnovers do not translate into better operating performance or firm valuation (Tobin's q), thus lending credence to the scapegoating hypothesis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
