Search results

Initial public offerings (IPOs) have been a focus of qualitative and quantitative research since the 1960s. However, the majority of research emanates from the fields of finance and management, with very little coming from the field of ethics. In this paper, we attempt to fill this gap by answering the question: Does the IPO process change a company’s ethical culture? In order to answer this question we examined S-1 filings made by companies before they went public. We used text-mining techniques to identify words that are uniquely related to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in those filings. We then used linear regression to compare those word counts to data produced by CSRHub. Companies that include words related to CSR tend to score better on various CSR measures. This evidence can support several explanatory theories, such as companies that take the time and effort to discuss CSR concepts in their S-1s make ethics a priority and therefore score higher on CSR ratings. Similarly, companies that had never formally thought about their ethical culture might feel, under the pressure of an IPO, to think about what kind of company the owners and leadership want it to be in the long run. Our study only analyzed companies three years post-IPO and did not control for certain variables. This paper is the first of its kind to discuss and, more importantly, attempt to quantify the impact of the IPO process on a company’s ethical culture. We hope that by understanding how the IPO process influences companies in terms of ethics, companies can more easily develop and maintain ethical cultures pre- and post-IPO.

The purpose of this chapter is to expose the limitations of the equity-based crowdfunding provisions of the 2012 JOBS Act. These provisions have received much attention because they have the potential to open funding opportunities to countless underfunded entrepreneurs and small businesses. In addition, they can provide everyday investors with new ways to diversify their portfolios. However, the author asserts that the JOBS Act is unlikely to be successful in its current incarnation, because it overly burdens the entrepreneur with reporting and accountability requirements, among other things. The author resolves these issues by articulating a regulatory alternative to the JOBS Act.

This chapter reviews the general requirements for equity-based crowdfunding under the 2012 JOBS Act. It also reviews the various approaches individual states and other countries have taken to promote equity-based crowdfunding.

The existing law and proposed regulations for equity-based crowdfunding under the JOBS Act are overly burdensome and will impair the ability of entrepreneurs and small-businesses to successfully use equity-based crowdfunding throughout the United States. Regulators and other lawmakers need to adopt new rules focused on protecting consumers via spending limits.

Most of the research is based on theory, because the equity-based regulations have not been finalized or implemented at the federal level. However, the United States can learn much from the equity-based crowdfunding efforts of individual states and other countries.

This chapter’s critique is designed to engage lawmakers, regulators, entrepreneurs, and small businesses in a new discussion about equity-based crowdfunding regulations.