IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ausman/v36y2011i3p349-370.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of capital proposal guidelines and perceived preparer biases on reviewers’ investment evaluation decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Mandy M Cheng
  • Habib Mahama

Abstract

Past literature has highlighted the importance of using reviewers in the evaluation of investment proposals. This study examines whether and how the decisions of these reviewers are influenced by a proposal’s conformance with company guidelines and practices, and the incentives facing the proposal preparer. Our experiment shows that, holding the proposal’s content constant, the reviewers’ evaluation decision is less favourable if the proposal does not follow the company guidelines. Further, we find that the preparer’s incentive to persist in a project negatively affects the proposal reviewers’ decisions only when the proposal deviates from company guidelines but not when it is compliant. This result suggests that company guidelines may lower the willingness of reviewers to make independent decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Mandy M Cheng & Habib Mahama, 2011. "The impact of capital proposal guidelines and perceived preparer biases on reviewers’ investment evaluation decisions," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 36(3), pages 349-370, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:ausman:v:36:y:2011:i:3:p:349-370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://aum.sagepub.com/content/36/3/349.abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karen Benson & Peter M Clarkson & Tom Smith & Irene Tutticci, 2015. "A review of accounting research in the Asia Pacific region," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 40(1), pages 36-88, February.

    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:sae:ausman:v:36:y:2011:i:3:p:349-370. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (SAGE Publications). General contact details of provider: http://www.agsm.edu.au .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.