We examine how organizational form affects corporate payouts. Conglomerates pay out more than pure plays in both cash dividends and total payouts (cash dividends plus share repurchases). Furthermore, their payouts are more sensitive to cash flows compared to pure-play firms. The sensitivity of payouts to cash flow increases as the cross-segment correlation in a conglomerate decreases. Corporate payouts increase after mergers and acquisitions (M&As), especially among M&As in which acquirers and targets are less correlated. These results suggest that the coinsurance among different divisions of a conglomerate allows them to pay out more cash flow to their shareholders than pure-play firms.

IBM Finland, a small national subsidiary, was at once a Finnish business and an interface to much larger networks of technological innovation and knowledge sharing. We contextualize its development within a nested set of institutions and identities: IBM's Nordic operations, its European business, and its World Trade Corporation. Its development was profoundly shaped by Finland's unique geopolitical position during the Cold War. IBM's internal structures anticipated and paralleled those of the European Union, with mechanisms for international cooperation, for the creation of transnational identities, and for the resolution and regulation of disputes between national subsidiaries.

This paper specifies term structure dynamics by a recursive cascade of heterogeneously persistent factors. The cascade naturally orders economic shocks by their adjustment speeds, and generates smooth interest-rate curves in closed form. For a class of specifications, the number of parameters is invariant to the size of the state space, and the term structure converges to a stochastic limit as the state dimension goes to infinity. High-dimensional specifications fit observed term structure almost perfectly, match the observed low correlation between movements in different maturities, and produce stable interest-rate forecasts that outperform lower-dimensional specifications.

From its beginning, the American pottery industry had to contend with the presence of imports. At first, manufacturers coped by promoting their own products and striving to improve design and quality. However, when Japan began importing china in greater quantities, American potters faced a challenge unlike any before. Initial attempts to attack imports outright through boycotts met with limited success through World War II. Following the peace, Cold War economic policy designed to reintroduce Japan to the global market led to another round of increasing importation. U.S. potters decried the poor quality and low wages connected to Japanese china, yet could not agree on a strategy to overcome the growing number of imports. Some filed lawsuits over copied designs while others hoped to contract with the Japanese to import on their own terms. The failure of these manufacturers to unify in response to Japan proved one of the most damaging blows to this small industry.

We consider a model of chief executive officer (CEO) selection, dismissal, and retention. Firms with larger blockholder ownership monitor more; they get more information about CEO ability, which facilitates the dismissal of low-ability CEOs. These firms are matched with CEOs whose ability is more uncertain. For retention purposes, the compensation of these CEOs is more sensitive to firm value and relatively less sensitive to business conditions. Moreover, these CEOs receive lower salaries when CEO skills are sufficiently transferable. A diffusion of best monitoring practices increases competition for CEOs and raises CEO pay in all firms, including those with unchanged monitoring ability.

The business ethics and leadership literature has paid little attention to the analysis of virtue in the Socratic dialogues, but Plato’s account of virtue and persuasion offer relevant insights for business leaders. In the Republic, Plato’s description of five types of leaders offers a new perspective on leadership selection and development using the moral psychology of both virtuous and non-virtuous leaders. In this article, I explain Plato’s account of virtue and knowledge, his three-part moral psychology, the four cardinal virtues that virtuous leaders develop, and his continuum of five leader types. I apply Plato’s model to leadership issues in today’s corporate world and explain how the model can guide leaders, board members, and investors.

Grand et al. (2018) provide a critical treatment of the need for industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists to take active steps to ensure that ours is a robust and reliable science of organizations, the spirit of which the present authors wholeheartedly agree. One path toward ensuring that I-O psychology is rightly recognized as a robust science is by embracing the principles of Open Science. We argue that the move toward Open Science is beneficial for all six of the defining principles outlined by Grand et al. Open Science increases transparency, facilitates replication, and contributes to the accumulation and integration of research by increasing accessibility. Each of these factors helps to foster systematic, rigorous scientific practices, which, in turn, can lead to greater insights and understanding of organizational phenomenon through deductive, inductive, and abductive approaches to theory generation and refinement, ensuring that our field remains relevant for the foreseeable future. In this commentary, we highlight several initiatives that already exist to promote Open Science and explore others only alluded to by Grand et al.

One of the key characteristics of a rigorous and robust science is that it has the ability to self-correct when mistakes are made. The focal article by Grand et al. (2018) has plenty to say about what faithful actors can do to ensure a more robust industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology literature, but we were surprised at how little attention the issue of correcting the research record was given. To be clear, the target article mentions the issue of research misconduct and even cites an article from Leadership Quarterly (Atwater, Mumford, Schriesheim, & Yammarino, 2014) that deals specifically with the issue, but it does not include guidance on this issue for editors or publishers. This is not surprising. The issue of misconduct is one that produces a great deal of discomfort in academic circles (Wager, 2015), and when it is discussed, it is usually only in the vaguest terms (e.g., Banks et al., 2016). Moreover, as Grand and colleagues point out, it could be argued that the “gathering storm” of questionable research that has enveloped other fields such as social psychology seems distant. Perhaps to reassure us, the authors point to several articles showing that results of our field seem to be replicable, robust, and relevant. But are they?