Why Managers Hold Shares of Their Firms: An Empirical Analysis



given by the mean and statistical significance of the time series statistics of
these monthly estimates. Table 5 summarizes the results.

+ + + Please insert TABLE 5 about here + + +

Panel A presents results for raw returns. Column (1) gives the results of
an estimation where we do not include the dummy variable D(10%). The
influence of managerial ownership is positive, but not statistically signifi-
cant. This may be due to the large number of firms where the officer with
the highest managerial ownership only owns a very small fraction of the
company’s stocks (see Table 1). In these instances, incentives to engage in
value-enhancing efforts might be too small. Including the dummy variable
delivers more meaningful results; its influence is large in economic terms.
The point estimate of 0.65 (together with the estimate of -0.02 for the lin-
ear influence of Shrownpc) indicates that firms where one officer owns at
least 10% of the company’s shares deliver annual abnormal returns of 5.5%.
The influence of the 10% dummy is significant at the 5% level. The last two
columns summarize results using industry adjusted returns as dependent
variables. Consistent with the results from the portfolio approach, abnormal
returns are slightly lower now, as indicated by the point estimate of 0.6 for
the influence of the 10% dummy. They are still statistically significant at the
5% level. Overall, these results show that firms with a manager who owns
a large fraction of the company’s stocks outperform other firms even after
Gompers, Ishii, and Metrick (2003) also use institutional ownership as a control variable.
We do not have this data item available. However, in Gompers, Ishii, and Metrick (2003),
the influence of institutional ownership is never significant. Thus, we do not expect that
this omission influences our results.

18



More intriguing information

1. Migration and Technological Change in Rural Households: Complements or Substitutes?
2. The name is absent
3. DISCRIMINATORY APPROACH TO AUDITORY STIMULI IN GUINEA FOWL (NUMIDA MELEAGRIS) AFTER HYPERSTRIATAL∕HIPPOCAMP- AL BRAIN DAMAGE
4. Qualification-Mismatch and Long-Term Unemployment in a Growth-Matching Model
5. The Cost of Food Safety Technologies in the Meat and Poultry Industries.
6. A Note on Productivity Change in European Co-operative Banks: The Luenberger Indicator Approach
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. Economie de l’entrepreneur faits et théories (The economics of entrepreneur facts and theories)
10. Getting the practical teaching element right: A guide for literacy, numeracy and ESOL teacher educators