Literature Review Women on boards and in TMTS and firm performance142 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 5 1 5 5 Event window 0 09 0 32 0 43 0 66 0 74 0 17 Difference Panel B Panel C mean 0 274 0 686 0 900 1 161 1 173 0 165 t value t test Difference Panel B Panel C median 0 07 0 38 0 41 0 54 0 44 0 38 0 363 1 118 0 905 1 421 1 224 0 602 z score Wilcoxon Rank Sum test This table presents cumulative abnormal stock returns of banks over several event windows around the layoff announcement date Abnor mal stock returns are computed using the market model Panel A reports cumulative abnormal stock returns for announcements by banks headquartered in the United States Panel B reports cumulative abnormal stock returns for announcements by banks headquartered in Wes tern Europe T test and Boehmer test are applied as parametric tests Corrado and Wilcoxon signed rank test are applied as non parametric tests Statistical significance of differences in mean and median values between Panel A and B is tested with parametric two sample test and Wilcoxon rank sum test and denote statistical significance at the 1 5 and 10 level Table 5 6 Stock price reactions to bank layoff announcements by bank location Panel A US banks only 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 5 1 5 5 Panel B Non US banks only 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 5 1 5 5 Event window 0 20 0 25 0 18 0 24 0 23 1 28 0 29 0 57 0 62 0 90 0 97 1 46 Cumulative abnormal return mean 0 09 0 29 0 03 0 26 0 18 0 89 0 17 0 67 0 45 0 80 0 62 1 27 median 0 690 0 705 0 519 0 598 0 464 1 528 1 464 1 976 2 020 2 446 2 467 2 255 t value t test 0 483 0 282 0 266 0 147 0 251 1 361 1 274 1 989 1 944 2 530 2 465 2 140 z score Boehmer 0 896 0 815 0 329 0 416 0 987 1 995 1 999 2 891 2 627 3 351 2 252 2 803 Corrado 1 095 0 870 0 694 0 767 0 523 1 745 1 971 2 518 2 224 2 970 2 646 3 053 z score Wilcoxon Signed Rank 79 79 79 79 79 79 131 131 131 131 131 131 N cases assess staff cuts as value decreasing measu res I find distinctly more negative returns for layoff announcements made by non US banks However the differences between both subsamples are sta tistically insignificant Results from the univariate analysis do not provide support for hypothesis 4 predicting that market reactions to layoff announ cements will differ depending on the strictness of employment protection legislation Therefore it has to be rejected The following table 5 6 shows the stock price reaction by the banks headquarter Layoffs and shareholder wealth

Vorschau DIRK-Forschungsreihe Band 21 Workforce diversity and personal policies Seite 142
Hinweis: Dies ist eine maschinenlesbare No-Flash Ansicht.
Klicken Sie hier um zur Online-Version zu gelangen.