Publication | Closed Access
The effect of ESOP adoptions on corporate performance: are there really performance changes?
91
Citations
32
References
2000
Year
Firm PerformanceTechnology AdoptionEsop AdoptionsCompetitive AdvantageCorporate InnovationCorporate Risk ManagementManagementEsop FirmsMore EsopsPayout PolicyMergers And AcquisitionsOwnership StructureFinancial ManagementTakeover DefenseCorporate PerformancePerformance ChangesCorporate GovernanceStrategic ManagementCoordinated EffectsFinanceEsg PerformanceAccounting PolicyBusinessBusiness StrategyFinancingFinancial StructureCorporate Finance
Abstract Employee Stock Ownership Programs (ESOPs) have long been promoted as a motivational tool: employees become profit‐minded owners. Latterly, however, more ESOPs are being used as part of a takeover defense: here the ESOPs main purpose is to put more company stock in friendly hands—the employees—who, like existing management, could suffer layoffs, etc. in a hostile takeover. We find that, as a group, only the takeover‐related ESOPs are associated with increased leverage (itself a takeover defense). Non‐target firms show no long‐term increase in debt‐to‐assets. We find little evidence to support the motivation hypothesis: while actual labor costs are lower for ESOP firms, after industry‐adjusting they tend to be unaffected or higher. We find that a few measures of firm financial performance [return‐on‐equity (ROE), return‐on‐assets (ROA), net profit margin (NPM)] do improve significantly, but this appears to be largely a short‐term effect. Industry‐adjusted holding period returns appear to be unaffected by the ESOP; however, ESOP firms that leverage show evidence of long‐term market underperformance. We conclude that ESOPs provide, at best, only a short‐term boost to corporate performance. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1