IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v197y2025ics0148296325002723.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does ESG rating divergence exacerbate management tone manipulation? − Empirical evidence based on MD&A text

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Wenjiao
  • Sun, Ziyuan
  • Wang, Lan

Abstract

ESG rating divergence has garnered significant attention, yet research often overlooks the management’s response strategies. Using a sample of Chinese listed firms from 2015 to 2021, this study found that greater environmental, social, and governance (ESG) divergence is associated with more positive tones in the annual report’s Management Discussion and Analysis section. Thus, the management may engage in tone manipulation. Rating discrepancies increase operational risks and information asymmetry, prompting the management to adjust their tone. Applying fraud triangle theory, the study shows that tone manipulation is more likely under high public environmental concern, weak internal controls, and an inadequate legal environment. Additionally, ESG-sensitive firms, those based in Eastern China, those with high ESG ratings, and state-owned enterprises are more likely to adjust their tone in response to rating divergence. These findings underscore the strategic narrative adjustments that firms undertake when faced with inconsistent ESG ratings.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Wenjiao & Sun, Ziyuan & Wang, Lan, 2025. "Does ESG rating divergence exacerbate management tone manipulation? − Empirical evidence based on MD&A text," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:197:y:2025:i:c:s0148296325002723
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115449
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296325002723
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115449?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:197:y:2025:i:c:s0148296325002723. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.