This study aims to analyze the strategic leadership model, business model innovation, and product innovation to improve performance of State-Owned Business Enterprise. This study employed a quantitative research method and reported the results of a survey using a questionnaire with a population of 28 SOEs in Indonesia engaged in the food and fertilizer industry. Analysis was carried out using SmartPLS software, which consists of descriptive statistics, measurement model evaluation, structural model evaluation, and hypothesis testing. Results of this study indicate that influence of strategic leadership is significant on business model innovation. The influence of business model innovation is significant on product innovation and on company performance. However, influences of strategic leadership on company performance and product innovation are not significant, and influence of product innovation on company performance is also not significant. Strategic leadership has a significant impact on the decision-making process, thus it can facilitate organizations to implement effective strategies designed to achieve optimal performance. Companies that implement strategic leadership have potential to improve performance through the implementation of good planning, motivating, directing, developing employee capabilities in product innovation and business model innovation, as well as communicating company's long-term vision or goals.

The relationship between behavioural characteristics (both rational and irrational measures) and capital structure determinants has been empirically validated. This study examines the influence of the behavioural traits of overconfidence and optimism on capital structure determinations by IDX-listed public Indonesian firms’ (Tbks) management. This is statistically tested via a comprehensive hypothesis modelling construct that includes empirically validated capital structure determinants (market timing, profitability, tangibility, size and their impacts on stock price). Panel regression PLS and path analysis were performed on stock price data and financial metrics extracted from the 2013–2020 financial statements of 55 Tbks from the LQ-45 and Kompas-100 stock indices. This study found that Optimism, Market Timing and Adjusted Debt on Market Timing are not determinants of capital structure for Tbks, while Overconfidence and the control variables Firm Profitability, Firm’s Asset Tangibility and Firm Size were statistically validated as capital structure determinants. Overconfidence (as a behavioural bias) is observed to have significant negative influence on management’s capital structure determinations, while Optimism has insignificant positive influence. The less aggressive leveraged models adopted by the sampled Tbks may indicate that implemented good principles of corporate governance have played a role in preventing capital structure determinations skewed by managements’ behavioural biases or psychological tendencies.

This study examines whether capital structure determinations by Indonesian publicly listed firms (Tbks) are influenced by the behavioural biases of overconfidence and optimism, with the underlying rationality frameworks being framed by relevant financial information and impacted by decision-makers’ demographic attributes. Data were obtained from survey respondents and statistically analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling to identify the indicators of causative dynamics within the hypothesised relationships. Sampled Tbks’ management (CEOs/CFOs) displayed the inherent behavioural traits of overconfidence and optimism in their capital structure determinations. However, such behavioural variables were not statistically proven to significantly influence capital structure decision-making and, hence, were not validated as capital structure determinants. The pecking order framework was revealed to have a significant framing effect on capital structure decision-making by sampled managers. Sampled managers’ demographic attributes and backgrounds were found to be capital structure determinants but did not have a mediating or moderating influence on the modelled relationship between behavioural variables and capital structure.

This study aimed to analyze the impact of government ownership on Indonesia’s SOE’s financial performance, measured by Return on Assets (ROA) and Return on Equity (ROE) of 20 SOEs that are listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during the period 2013 – 2019, using the panel data models. According to the results, government ownership has a positively significant impact on the firm performance (ROA and ROE). Furthermore, the results show that along with government shares, debt to equity ratio, dividend payout ratio, and log of total assets also have significant relationships to the firm performance.

This paper finds that in ASEAN-4, the micro loan characteristics: loan amount and LIBOR whilst the macro characteristics: inflation, net export and GDP growth influence the loan spread in the project finance. However, simultaneously at the country level, the determinants of the loan spread are distinctive to each country’s infrastructure industry characteristic. The paper’s main contribution relates to the determinants of the project finance loan spread at the country level and regional level, ASEAN-4. The purpose of this paper is to fathom the critical risk factors behind the project finance loan pricing differential across the ASEAN-4 countries. Hence, the policy makers, project developers and lenders can have a better understanding of the drivers behind the project finance loan spread pricing. The study adopted an ordinary least square (OLS) regression methodology and collected data from ASEAN-4 countries consisting of Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand.

This research aims to fill the gap in sustainable insurance product study. The central research question of this research is how to develop a fair pricing framework in order to design a sustainable financial product. Current profit testing method is arguably lack of policyholder considerations. The profitability decision under current method only considers profit margin for company. There is no profitability measurement for policyholder. To improve fairness under current pricing, the proposed study proposes a concept of equity in risk between company and policyholder. In order to establish equity in risk, profitability for policyholder needs to be defined and risk measure Conditional Tail Expectation (CTE) for company and policyholder is proposed as a solution. Fairness is achieved if CTE between company and policyholder falls within certain range. CTE generated under new framework could be used as a reference point to all stakeholders to assess the fairness of Unit Linked price. The target population for the study was any regular premium Unit Link product. This research used simple random sampling. From the population consisting of 34 companies 20 samples were drawn. Data is taken from the Indonesian Financial Service Authority. The data used is from the time period between 1 January 2015 and 30 June 2019. Using the CTE, this study finds that most of the Unit Linked pricing are far from fair. It is recommended that companies could be more efficient in their operating and distribution cost in order to be fairer to policyholder and therefore will make the product more sustainable.

The yield curve is the building block of fair value in pricing bonds. It has been used by market participants for their asset valuations, Central Bank and Government’s Treasury for monetary, interest rate and borrowing decisions. The official yield curve construction in Indonesia government bond is based on Svensson model which is widely accepted and used by several countries. The objective is to find more accurate fair price from yield curve as the alternative of IBPA government bond curve as the baseline. This research takes observation on three alternative yield curve models in comparison with the baseline Svensson Model to price several series of benchmark and non-benchmark bonds. Fair price is further tested with One-Way ANOVA and Post Hoc in order to find the significance between models. The results show that alternative models are performing better in determining the fair value prices of the government bonds compared to the baseline model.