This paper examines whether common institutional ownership is associated with CEO connectedness across firms. We document that higher common ownership between two same-industry firms predicts a greater likelihood that a newly appointed CEO has preexisting social ties to the incumbent CEO of the peer firm. To address endogeneity, we use mergers among institutional investors in a stacked difference-in-differences design. In a hiring-firm-peer panel that carries connection status forward from the most recent appointment, exposure to a merger-induced common blockholder approximately doubles the probability that the pair is observed in a connected-CEO state. In a broader firm-pair panel, it increases the probability of CEO connections by 48.7%. We further document that gaining CEO connections through another firm’s CEO appointment is associated with improvements in peer firms’ returns on assets and Tobin’s Q, in both OLS and IV specifications. Peer firms that gain such a connection also experience positive abnormal returns around other firms’ CEO hiring announcements, corresponding to an average increase of $112.5 million in shareholder value. These performance patterns suggest that CEO connections may be valuable from a portfolio-level perspective. Consistent with this interpretation, the association between common ownership and CEO connections is concentrated among product-similar and organizationally complex firms and strengthens after the 2008–2009 financial crisis, when connections appear more valuable. Our findings point to CEO connection as a potential governance channel through which common institutional ownership is linked to firm outcomes, complementing prior work on executive compensation, shareholder voting, and board interlocks.

We study how deposit competition affects a bank's decision to securitize mortgages. Exploiting the state-specific removal of deposit market caps across the U.S. as a source of competition, we find a 7.1 percentage point increase in the probability that banks securitize mortgage loans. This result is driven by an 11 basis point increase in deposit costs and corresponding reductions in banks' deposit holdings. Our results are strongest among banks that rely more on deposit funding. These findings highlight a hitherto undocumented and unintended regulatory cause that motivates banks to adopt the originate-to-distribute model.

Using the universe of high school and college admissions data in Croatia, we geocoded nearly half a million students’ residential addresses to investigate how their college and major choices are influenced by older neighbors and peers. Using an RDD to exploit time and program variation in admission cutoffs, we find that having an older neighbor who was admitted to and enrolled in a program increases a student’s probability of applying to the program by about 20%. We find that this effect consistently holds only for the closest neighbors, both in terms of distance and age difference. Female students are more likely to be influenced by older neighbors’ choices, and male older neighbors’ admission has a larger impact on both male and female students compared to female older neighbors. The effect is stronger if the student-neighbor pair lives in a region that does not have its own university, implying that the value of information in rural areas is higher. We find evidence that students don’t follow their older neighbors to less competitive programs; instead, they are more likely to apply for the same programs their older neighbors were admitted to when the program is more prestigious. Next, we utilize the variation in weight scheme of Croatia’s college study programs to show evidence, beyond college choices, of how older neighbors affect the human capital formation of their younger peers. The main channel through which we observe this effect is during high school, through specialization in the subjects needed to gain admittance to older neighbors’ college programs. These findings shed light on the intricate dynamics shaping educational decisions and underscores the significant role older neighbors play in guiding younger peers toward specific academic pathways.

How do beliefs on admission probability influence application choices? In this study, we empirically investigate whether and how admission probability is reflected in application choices in a centralized admission system. We exploit a novel setting of a dynamic deferred acceptance mechanism as employed in Croatia with hourly information updates and simultaneous application choices. This setting allows us to explore within-applicant strategic adjustments as a reaction to changing signals on admission probability. We show in an RDD analysis that applicants react to negative signals on admission probability with an increased propensity to adjust their application choices by 11-23%. Additionally, we show how application strategies evolve over time, while applicants learn about their admission probability. The group most-at-risk to remain unmatched improves their application choices by applying to programs with a higher admission probability towards the application deadline. Yet, we also identify a popular and potentially harmful strategy of applying to safer programs before applying to more risky “reach” programs. About a quarter of applicants have the potential to improve their application choices by resorting their application choices.

We analyze how creditor rights affect the nonsynchronicity of global corporate credit default swap spreads (CDS-NS). CDS-NS is negatively related to the country-level creditor-control rights, especially to the “restrictions on reorganization” component, where creditor-shareholder conflicts are high. The effect is concentrated in firms with high investment intensity, asset growth, information opacity, and risk. Pro-creditor bankruptcy reforms led to a decline in CDS-NS, indicating lower firm-specific idiosyncratic information being priced in credit markets. A strategic-disclosure incentive among debtors avoiding creditor intervention seems more dominant than the disciplining effect, suggesting how strengthening creditor rights affects power rebalancing between creditors and shareholders.

This paper studies whether common ownership affects the direction of technological change. We develop a task-based model in which commonly owned firms internalize wage externalities from labor market rivals, increasing incentives to automate. We establish causality by exploiting institutional investor mergers in a dynamic DiD design, using U.S. data on institutional ownership, establishment-level employment, and automation patents. When institutional investor mergers increase common ownership among labor market rivals, the annual probability of those firms producing an automation patent increases by 3.79 percentage points and employment growth falls by 3.8 percentage points on average. Both effects disappear without labor market overlap.

Using a newly collected dataset at the plant level from 2014 to 2018, we provide the first microscopic portrait of robotization in Germany and study the correlates of robot adoption. Our descriptive analysis uncovers five stylized facts: (1) Robot use is relatively rare. (2) The distribution of robots is highly skewed. (3) New robot adopters contribute substantially to the recent robotization. (4) Robot users are exceptional. (5) Heterogeneity in robot types matters. Our regression results further suggest plant size, high-skilled labor share, exporter status, and labor shortage to be strongly associated with the future probability of robot adoption.

We investigate whether employees in Germany benefit from public bank guarantees in terms of employment probability and wages. To that end, we exploit the removal of public bank guarantees in Germany in 2001 as a quasi-natural experiment. Our results show that bank guarantees lead to higher employment, but lower wage prospects for employees after working in affected establishments. Overall the results suggest that employees do not benefit from bank guarantees.

Establishment closures have lasting negative consequences for the workers displaced from their jobs. We study how these consequences vary with the amount of skill mismatch that workers experience after job displacement. Developing new measures of occupational skill redundancy and skill shortage, we analyze the work histories of individuals in Germany between 1975 and 2010. We estimate difference-in-differences models, using a sample of displaced workers who are matched to statistically similar non-displaced workers. We find that displacements increase the probability of occupation change eleven-fold. Moreover, the magnitude of post-displacement earnings losses strongly depends on the type of skill mismatch that workers experience in such job switches. Whereas skill shortages are associated with relatively quick returns to the earnings trajectories that displaced workers would have experienced absent displacement, skill redundancy sets displaced workers on paths with permanently lower earnings. We show that these differences can be attributed to differences in mismatch after displacement, and not to intrinsic differences between workers making different post-displacement career choices.

This paper proposes to explain the productivity growth slowdown with the poaching of disruptive inventors by firms these inventors threaten with their research. I build an endogenous growth model with incremental and disruptive innovation and an inventor labor market where this defensive poaching takes place. Incremental firms poach more as they grow, which lowers the probability of disruption and makes large incremental firms even more prevalent. I perform an event study around disruptive innovations to confirm the main features of the model: Disruptions increase future research productivity, hurt incumbent inventors and raise the probability of future disruption. Without disruption, technology classes slowly trend even further towards incrementalism. I calibrate the model to the global patent landscape in 1990 and show that the model predicts 52% of the decline of disruptive innovation until 2010.