The distress of commercial companies is considered one of the most critical stages leading to the liquidation and termination of the business. This danger increases in the context of poor management, stagnation, and the occurrence of crises and external circumstances that affect the company’s ability to cope. Rules regarding financial restructuring of distressed commercial companies may be regarded as the most prominent legal framework adopted by Emirati, Kuwaiti and French legislators to address the instability and distress of commercial enterprises and to provide solutions to mitigate the risk of bankruptcy and liquidation. It is a preventive measure aimed at reaching an agreement between the debtor and creditors to resolve the disturbances or difficulties faced by the company, which may affect its obligations to others. Therefore, financial restructuring is considered a mean of prevention and rescue for commercial companies, and the success of this rescue is linked to the debtor’s cooperation and seriousness in overcoming such issue.

Investors and company managements often rely on traditional performance evaluation indicators, such as return on equity, return on assets, and other financial ratios, to explain changes in a company’s market value added (MVA). However, the effectiveness of these traditional measures in explaining market value fluctuations remains uncertain. This research aims to investigate the impact of various profitability measures, namely return on equity, gross profit margin, operating profit margin, and return on assets, on explaining changes in the MVA of pharmaceutical and chemical companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange. To achieve the study’s objectives, we analyzed the published financial statements of a sample consisting of 14 industrial companies out of a total of 53 companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange during the period from 2008 to 2022. Relevant financial indicators were extracted from these statements to serve the purposes of the study. Correlation coefficients were employed to measure the extent to which the independent variables (profitability measures) could interpret changes in the dependent variable (MVA). One of the most significant findings of the study is that three dimensions of profitability measures have a statistically significant impact on explaining changes in the MVA of pharmaceutical and chemical companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange, albeit to varying degrees. This suggests that traditional profitability measures still play a crucial role in influencing market perceptions of a company’s value, despite the potential limitations of these measures in capturing the full scope of a company’s performance and potential.

This study aimed to examine the impact of Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) scores and Country Governance Indicators (CGI) on companies’ value. The study procedures were carried out by creating a linear empirical model where the dependent variable was companies’ value. In addition, the variables of interest in the model were ESG scores and CGI. Analysis was carried out on annual data from 278 non-financial Asian companies spanning 11 years from 2011–2021. The feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) method was used for estimation due to the presence of serial correlation and heteroscedasticity in the data obtained. The results showed the presence of a positive relationship and correlation between ESG scores and companies’ value. Meanwhile, CGI had a negative impact, revealing the potential difficulties caused by country governance framework. This study also found a positive correlation between CGI and ESG on company value. These findings have important practical contributions emphasizing the significance of ESG factors in improving companies’ value and the complex relationship between country governance and corporate valuation.

This paper aims to investigate the determinants of performance for insurance companies in Tunisia from 2004 to 2017. Namely, we consider three dimensions of determinants; those related to firms’ microenvironment, macroenvironment and meso or industry environment. The performance of insurance companies is measured using three criteria: Return On Assets (ROA), Return On Equity (ROE), and Combined Ratio. The independent variables are categorized into three groups: microeconomic variables (Firm Size, Financial leverage, Capital management risk, Volume of capital, and Age of the firm), meso-economic variables (Concentration ratio and Insurance Sector Size), and macroeconomic variables (Inflation, Unemployment, and Population Growth). The General Least Squares (GLS) regression technique is employed for the analysis. The study reveals that the financial performance of Tunisian insurance companies is positively influenced by firm size, capital amount, and risk capital management. On the other hand, it is negatively influenced by leverage level, industry size, concentration index, inflation, and unemployment. In terms of technical performance, the capital amount of the firm, industry size, age of the firm, and population growth have a positive impact. However, firm size, leverage, concentration index, and risk capital management negatively affect technical performance. This paper contributes to the existing literature by examining the determinants of performance specifically for insurance companies in Tunisia. Besides the classical proxies of performance, this paper has the originality of using the technical performance which is the most suitable for the case of Insurance companies.

This study aims to elucidate the impact of marketing investment dimensions (MTS, MTOE, ROMI) on profitability indicators (ROA, ROE, GPM, OPM) and sustainable growth indicators (SGR, ARG) for service companies. The study population consisted of 135 service companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange. A purposive sample of 55 companies was selected from this population. Financial reports and statements from 2018–2022 for these companies were analyzed to achieve the study objectives, employing appropriate statistical methods like multiple regression to test hypotheses. Previous literature shows conflicting results regarding the relationship between marketing investment dimensions and profitability/sustainable growth. Some studies found positive impacts, while others did not. This study contributes to this debate by providing statistical evidence. The results show that higher MTS, MTOE, and ROMI have a positive impact on SGR, OPM and ROA but a negative impact on GPM, ARG, and ROE. This underscores that marketing investments should be viewed in conjunction with overall operating expenses. Companies that control other expenses and increase the marketing investment proportion of total operating expenses may achieve better financial performance. Marketing investment metrics can serve as useful diagnostics and measures of effectiveness for improving marketing profitability, financial performance, and growth. In summary, this study statistically demonstrates the nuanced impacts of marketing investments on service company profitability and sustainable growth indicators. The results emphasize analyzing marketing spends in context of broader expenses and overall company financial health.

Our study investigates the relationship between firm profitability, board characteristics, and the quality of sustainability disclosures, while examining the moderating effects of financial leverage and external audit assurance. A key focus is the distinction between Big 4 and non-Big 4 audit firms. Using data from Malaysia’s top 100 publicly listed organizations from 2018 to 2020, we analyze sustainability reports based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards. Unexpectedly, our results indicate a negative association between firm profitability and board characteristics, challenging traditional assumptions. We find that non-Big 4 audit firms significantly enhance sustainability disclosure quality, contradicting the widely held belief in the superiority of Big 4 firms. Our finding introduces the “Big 4 dilemma” in the Malaysian context and calls for a reassessment of audit firm selection practices. Our study offers new perspectives on the strategic role of board composition and audit firm selection in advancing sustainability disclosures, urging Malaysian organizations to evaluate audit firms on criteria beyond the global prestige of Big 4 firms to improve sustainability reporting.