IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/hsuopa/9.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Die Bedeutung der Kapitalmarktkommunikation für börsennotierte Unternehmen

Author

Listed:
  • Maas, Martina

Abstract

In der aktuellen Finanzmarktkapitalismusdebatte steht vor allem die Macht der Investoren im Mittelpunkt. Das Unternehmen als handelnder Akteur wird in dieser Debatte weitestgehend ausgeblendet. Um die Einflussmöglichkeiten des Managements zu untersuchen, wird in diesem Beitrag der Blick auf die Kapitalmarktkommunikation (IR) gerichtet. So zeigen Untersuchungen, dass diese Kommunikationsform sowohl von Investoren als auch vom Management als wichtigstes Beeinflussungsinstrument bewertet werden (Bassen 2002b). Aus diesem Grund untersucht dieser Beitrag, welche Einflussmöglichkeiten durch die Kapitalmarktkommunikation für das Management bestehen. Zur Untersuchung werden 13 Leitfadeninterviews mit IR-Managern und Personalberatern herangezogen, welche mittels der qualitativen Inhaltsanalyse ausgewertet werden. Ein zentrales Ergebnis des Beitrags ist, dass Unternehmen die Kapitalmarktkommunikation sehr strategisch zur Steuerung der Erwartungen der Kapitalmarktteilnehmer nutzen. Um aber strategisch Einfluss nehmen zu können, haben Unternehmen ihre Kapitalmarktkommunikation im Zeitverlauf professionalisiert. So werden nicht nur Vorstände in die IR-Arbeit eingebunden, sondern auch IR-Abteilungen vergrößert, die interne Berichterstattung zum Kapitalmarktgeschehen ausgebaut und Strategien zur Kommunikation mit Investoren und Analysten erarbeitet.

Suggested Citation

  • Maas, Martina, 2021. "Die Bedeutung der Kapitalmarktkommunikation für börsennotierte Unternehmen," Working Papers 9, Helmut Schmidt University, Research Cluster OPAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:hsuopa:9
    DOI: 10.24405/14460
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/266217/1/opal-wp09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.24405/14460?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simi Kedia & Laura T. Starks & Xianjue Wang, 2021. "Institutional Investors and Hedge Fund Activism," The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 10(1), pages 1-43.
    2. Doganova, Liliana & Eyquem-Renault, Marie, 2009. "What do business models do?: Innovation devices in technology entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1559-1570, December.
    3. Bing Han & Dongmin Kong & Shasha Liu, 2018. "Do Analysts Gain an Informational Advantage by Visiting Listed Companies?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 1843-1867, December.
    4. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1997. "A Survey of Corporate Governance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(2), pages 737-783, June.
    5. Maas, Martina, 2018. "Karrierewege im Berufsfeld Investor Relations – Exploration eines neuen Berufsfeldes anhand eines Mixed-Methods-Designs," Books, Rainer Hampp Verlag, number 9783957103253.
    6. repec:dar:wpaper:67097 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Manuel Kaiser & Elisabeth S. C. Berger, 2021. "Trust in the investor relationship marketing of startups: a systematic literature review and research agenda," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 491-517, April.
    8. Jiangyuan Wang & Guangqiang Liu & Qisong Xiong, 2020. "Institutional investors’ information seeking and stock price crash risk: nonlinear relationship based on management’s opportunistic behaviour," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(5), pages 4621-4649, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yang, Xia & Ma, Zhong, 2022. "Institutional investors’ corporate site visits and dividend payouts," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 697-716.
    2. Yanan Li & Wenjun Wang, 2022. "Company visits and mutual fund performance: new evidence on managerial skills," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(6), pages 504-521, October.
    3. Wang, Qiong & Qiu, Muqing, 2023. "Minority shareholders' activism and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    4. Jing Lu & Guohua Cao & Chuan Lin & Stavros Sindakis & Saloome Showkat, 2024. "Corporate Site Visits and Stock Price Crash Risk: The Role of Institutional Investors’ Knowledge Acquisitions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 9082-9114, June.
    5. Maas, Martina, 2023. "Investor Relations als Beruf: Eine Untersuchung zur Professionalisierung der Kapitalmarktkommunikation von Unternehmen," Working Papers 11, Helmut Schmidt University, Research Cluster OPAL.
    6. Gilberto E. Arce & Edgar Robles C., 2005. "Corporate Governance in Costa Rica," Research Department Publications 3218, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    7. Klapper, Leora F. & Love, Inessa, 2004. "Corporate governance, investor protection, and performance in emerging markets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 703-728, November.
    8. Fidrmuc, Jana P. & Jacob, Marcus, 2010. "Culture, agency costs, and dividends," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 321-339, September.
    9. Sang Cheol Lee & Mooweon Rhee & Jongchul Yoon, 2018. "Foreign Monitoring and Audit Quality: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    10. Tarek Roshdy Gebba & Mohamed Gamal Aboelmaged, 2016. "Corporate Governance of UAE Financial Institutions: A Comparative Study between Conventional and Islamic Banks," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 6(5), pages 1-7.
    11. Rym Ayadi & Emrah Arbak & Willem Pieter De Groen, 2012. "Executive Compensation and Risk-taking in European Banking," Chapters, in: James R. Barth & Chen Lin & Clas Wihlborg (ed.), Research Handbook on International Banking and Governance, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Wang, Peipei & Wen, Yuanji & Singh, Harminder, 2017. "The high-volume return premium: Does it exist in the Chinese stock market?," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 46(PB), pages 323-336.
    13. Rajesh K. Aggarwal & Andrew A. Samwick, 1999. "Executive Compensation, Strategic Competition, and Relative Performance Evaluation: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(6), pages 1999-2043, December.
    14. Jongmoo Jay Choi & Hoje Jo & Jimi Kim & Moo Sung Kim, 2018. "Business Groups and Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(4), pages 931-954, December.
    15. Heinrich, Ralph P., 1999. "Complementarities in Corporate Governance - A Survey of the Literature with Special Emphasis on Japan," Kiel Working Papers 947, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    16. Karbowski, Adam, 2009. "The corporate governance implications for China," MPRA Paper 73625, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Wei Huang & Hong Zhang & Abhinav Goyal & Jason Laws, 2019. "Internal capital market mergers in weak external market environment: An emerging market evidence," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 1486-1505, October.
    18. Nadia Saghi-Zedek & Amine Tarazi, 2015. "Droits de contrôle versus droits pécuniaires, crise financière et vulnérabilité des banques européennes," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(3), pages 527-535.
    19. Gad Jacek, 2020. "The association between disclosures on control system over financial reporting and mechanisms of corporate governance: Empirical evidence from Germany and Poland," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 56(4), pages 351-369, December.
    20. Yuliya Snihur & Llewellyn D. W. Thomas & Robert A. Burgelman, 2018. "An Ecosystem‐Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1278-1316, November.

    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:zbw:hsuopa:9. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bgbwhde.html .

    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.