Corporate governance,capital structure and firm performance: Evidence from Thailand

We examine the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance for a panel sample of 493 firms of non-financial firms in Thailand during the period 2001–2014. We find that for the full sample, corporate governance is not associated with financial leverage and firm performance. Leverage has a positive effect on firm performance. When we split firms into small and large firm subsamples, we observe some influence of corporate governance. The negative effect of audit committee size on firm performance is evident for large firms while the effect of audit reputation on firm performance is evident for small firms only. Furthermore, financial leverage mediates the effect of audit committee size on firm performance for the large firms.     

Corporate governance and family firm performance during the Global Financial Crisis

We investigate the impact of corporate governance on accounting and market performance relationships of family firms during the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). We expect the monitoring aspects of corporate governance to complement the long-term orientation of family firms, improving the value relevance of accounting and market performance during times of exogenous financial shocks such as the GFC. We find that the family-firm value is more sensitive to book value than earnings changes. We also find better corporate governance, irrespective of whether it is a family firm or non-family firm, is associated with better accounting and market performance during the GFC.     

Corporate governance and firm performance

How is corporate governance measured? What is the relationship between corporate governance and performance? This paper sheds light on these questions while taking into account the endogeneity of the relationships among corporate governance, corporate performance, corporate capital structure, and corporate ownership structure. We make three additional contributions to the literature:First, we find that better governance as measured by the Gompers, Ishii, and Metrick [Gompers, P.A., Ishii, J.L., and Metrick, A., 2003, Corporate governance and equity prices, Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(1), 107–155.] and Bebchuk, Cohen and Ferrell [Bebchuk, L., Cohen, A., and Ferrell, A., 2004, What matters in corporate governance?, Working paper, Harvard Law School] indices, stock ownership of board members, and CEO-Chair separation is significantly positively correlated with better contemporaneous and subsequent operating performance.Second, contrary to claims in GIM and BCF, none of the governance measures are correlated with future stock market performance. In several instances inferences regarding the (stock market) performance and governance relationship do depend on whether or not one takes into account the endogenous nature of the relationship between governance and (stock market) performance.Third, given poor firm performance, the probability of disciplinary management turnover is positively correlated with stock ownership of board members, and board independence. However, better governed firms as measured by the GIM and BCF indices are less likely to experience disciplinary management turnover in spite of their poor performance.     

Corporate governance and operating performance of Chinese listed firms

In this paper, we investigate the impact of corporate governance on firm performance and valuation in China. Our study introduces a composite measure of corporate governance to measure the association between corporate governance and Chinese firms’ performance and valuation. Because agency theory suggests that companies with better corporate governance standards perform better, we propose that better governed Chinese firms would have greater performance and higher valuation. We find that our composite measure of corporate governance is positively and significantly associated with firm performance and valuation. These findings have implications for policy makers, researchers, managers, and investors in general and those in emerging markets in particular.     

Corporate governance and firm value at dual class firms

This study explores whether corporate governance at dual class firms differs from that of their single class counterparts and whether firm value at dual class firms is associated with governance. Employing a sample of 1309 U.S. dual class firm‐year observations for the period 1996–2006, we show evidence that dual class firms are more likely to employ more shareholder rights provisions while exhibiting lower board and board committee independence than single class firms. The results also show that shareholder rights increase while board provisions decrease in wedge at dual class firms. Further findings underscore that firm value at dual class firms decreases in wedge, and increases in shareholder rights and in board‐related provisions, particularly in director independence. While strong board‐related governance at dual class firms is significantly positively related to firm value in a multivariate setting, shareholder rights are significantly associated with firm value only in instances of the weakest board provisions. Following unification, firms employ more antitakeover provisions while strengthening their board and board committee independence.     

Excessive managerial entrenchment,corporate governance,and firm performance

This paper investigates the differential impact of positive and negative excessive managerial entrenchment on the CEO turnover-performance sensitivity, CEO compensation, and firm performance. We measure the degree of managerial entrenchment using the E-index introduced by Bebchuk et al. (2009). Our findings suggest that an increase in excess CEO entrenchment reduces the likelihood of CEO turnover due to poor performance. We also show a positive association between excessive entrenchment and CEO compensation as managers gain more power and authority when they are entrenched. On the other hand, excess CEO entrenchment has an inverse correlation with firm performance and firm value. Overall, we propose that excessive managerial entrenchment has a converse impact on board monitoring and shareholders’ welfare.     

Corporate governance and firm value: Evidence from Chinese state-controlled listed firms

The association between corporate governance and firm value has been extensively studied in Chinese listed firms. Based on the characteristics of their ultimate shareholders, Chinese listed firms can be categorised as (1) central state-controlled, (2) local state-controlled or (3) non-state-controlled. Some scholars have described Chinese government policy as ‘zhuada fangxiao’, thus suggesting that the corporate governance mechanisms (CGMs) of central state-controlled listed firms (SCLFs) are better than those of local state-controlled listed firms. Therefore, this paper specifically examines the influence of CGMs on the value of central SCLFs and local SCLFs. Analysis of 2006 firm-year observations from 2007 to 2009 suggests that the aggregate ownership of other large shareholders and the remuneration of top executives exhibit different effects on firm value in central and local SCLFs. The results also provide evidence that there is no endogenous effect of firm value on the ownership of the largest shareholder in central and local SCLFs.     

Corporate governance norms and practices

We evaluate the impact of corporate governance on the valuation of firms in a large cross-section of countries. Unlike previous work, we differentiate between minimally accepted governance attributes that are satisfied by all firms in a given country and governance attributes that are adopted at the firm level. This approach allows us to differentiate between firm-level and country-level corporate governance, thus contributing to an ongoing debate in the literature about whether governance attributes are largely determined by country factors or firm characteristics. Despite the costs associated with improving corporate governance at the firm level, we find that many firms choose to adopt governance provisions beyond those that are adopted by all firms in the country, and that these improvements in corporate governance are positively associated with firm valuation. Firms that choose not to adopt sound governance mechanisms tend to have concentrated ownership and sizeable free cash flow, consistent with agency theories based on self-interested managers and controlling shareholders. Our results indicate that the market rewards companies that are prepared to adopt governance attributes beyond those required by laws and common corporate practices in the home country.     

On the relation between corporate governance compliance and operating performance

Better corporate performance has been cited as one of the main benefits of adopting good corporate governance structures within organisations. However, in contrast to theory, a prior European study (Bauer et al., 2004) reports evidence of a negative relationship between corporate governance and corporate performance. This study re‐examines this relationship, and reports evidence of a positive relationship between the extent of compliance with international best practices concerning board structure and functioning and operating performance when operating performance is measured by the return on assets (ROA). This result is robust to controlling for the firms’ compliance with best practices in other governance areas, and holds for some other governance dimensions, namely disclosure of corporate governance and the range of takeover defences. Further tests indicate that greater compliance with international best practices concerning board structure and functioning is significantly associated with reporting less income from asset disposals and that studying a performance measure that includes this item obscures the inherently positive relationship between operating performance and the extent of compliance with international best practices regarding board structure and functioning. The results provide some support for an oftencited motivation for the adoption of good governance practices, and provide explicit evidence that the measure of operating performance is crucial in examining firm‐level operating performance.     

Corporate social performance,ownership structure,and corporate governance in France

Empirical evidence of the influence of shareholders and governance practices on corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies is mixed, and most studies have been conducted in the United States. This study of the French market and its unique characteristics reveals the forms of shareholding and CSR implementations, thereby shedding new light on the influence of shareholders on corporate social performance (CSP). Specifically, with a sample of French listed companies, the authors investigate how ownership concentration, ownership type, and governance practices relate to CSP. The geography of capital is relevant, but little evidence arises of the importance of shareholders’ identity. That is, neither family nor institutional shareholders influence CSP, and large shareholders seem to place less emphasis on CSR, suggesting that they are reluctant to invest in it. Finally, the results related to good governance practices are mixed, but board independence provides a foundation for good CSR.     

Corporate governance and incentives in German companies: Evidence from top executive turnover and firm performance

This paper examines executive turnover—both for management and supervisory boards—and its relation to firm performance in the largest companies in Germany in the 1980s. Turnover of the management board increases significantly with poor stock performance and particularly poor (i.e. negative) earnings, but is unrelated to sales growth and earnings growth. These turnover-performance relations do not vary with measures of stock ownership and bank voting power. Supervisory board appointments and turnover also increase with poor stock performance, but are unrelated to other measures of performance.     

Ownership concentration and firm risk: The moderating role of mid-sized blockholders

This study analyzes the relationship between mid-sized blockholders and firm risk. We show that ownership structure matters for firm risk beyond the first largest blockholder. Firms with multiple blockholders take more risk than firms with just one blockholder, even when controlling for the stake of the largest blockholder. Consistent with the diversification argument, we find that firm risk increases by 22% when the number of blockholders increases from one to two. Our results are robust to controlling for blockholder type and firm characteristics. We carry out various robustness checks to tackle endogeneity issues. More generally, we provide evidence that firms’ decisions are affected by mid-sized blockholders and not merely the largest blockholder. This is in line with theoretical predictions.     

Corporate governance and risk management: The role of risk management and compensation committees

This paper examines the role of compensation and risk committees in managing and monitoring the risk behaviour of Australian financial firms in the period leading up to the global financial crisis (2006–2008). This empirical study of 711 observations of financial sector firms demonstrates how the coordination of risk management and compensation committees reduces information asymmetry. The study shows that the composition of the risk and compensation committees is positively associated with risk, which, in turn, is associated with firm performance. More importantly, information asymmetry is reduced when a director is a member of both the risk and compensation committees which moderate the negative association between risk and firm performance for firms with high risk.     

Executive pay dispersion,corporate governance,and firm performance

Much of the research on management compensation focuses on the level and structure of executives’ pay. In this study, we examine a compensation element that has not received so far considerable research attention—the dispersion of compensation across managers—and its impact on firm performance. We examine the implications of two theoretical models dealing with pay dispersion—tournament versus equity fairness. Tournament theory stipulates that a large pay dispersion provides strong incentives to highly qualified managers, leading to higher efforts and improved enterprise performance, while arguments for equity fairness suggest that greater pay dispersion increases envy and dysfunctional behavior among team members, adversely affecting performance. Consistent with tournament theory, we find that firm performance, measured by either Tobin’s Q or stock performance, is positively associated with the dispersion of management compensation. We also document that the positive association between firm performance and pay dispersion is stronger in firms with high agency costs related to managerial discretion. Furthermore, effective corporate governance, especially high board independence, strengthens the positive association between firm performance and pay dispersion. Our findings thus add to the compensation literature a potentially important dimension: managerial pay dispersion.

Mutual monitoring and corporate governance

Mutual monitoring in a well-structured authority system can mitigate the agency problem. I empirically examine whether the number two executive in a firm, if given authority, incentive, and channels for communication and influence, is able to monitor and constrain the potentially self-interested CEO. I find strong evidence that: (1) measures of the presence and extent of mutual monitoring from the No. 2 executive are positively related to future firm value (Tobin’s Q); (2) the beneficial effect is more pronounced for firms with stronger incentives for the No. 2 to monitor and with higher information asymmetry between the boards and the CEOs; and (3) mutual monitoring is a substitute for other governance mechanisms. The results suggest that mutual monitoring provides important checks and balances on CEO power.     

中小企业板上市公司股权结构、公司治理与企业绩效:基于随机前沿生产函数的分析

本文通过构建深圳中小企业板上市公司股权结构影响企业绩效的复合随机前沿生产函数,利用2006—2008年面板数据对中小企业的股权结构和企业绩效的关系进行了经验研究,结果表明中小企业的股权集中度与企业绩效之间显著正相关,这与国内文献中对大公司的经验研究结果一致,表明当前上市公司的股权集中有利于公司治理改善和企业绩效的提高。但是第一大股东持股比率却与绩效负相关,这与对大公司的研究结论相反,表明在中小企业中存在较为明显的"隧道挖掘"现象,"一股独大"在中小企业中并不利于公司治理。研究结果还表明,国家、法人、外资或个人对公司治理的绩效无显著差异;流通股比重、高管持股、研发人员投入等都与企业绩效不相关;中小企业具有较强的股权融资倾向,不符合"啄食顺序"的资本结构理论。     

Audit committee characteristics and firm performance during the global financial crisis

We address the question ‘do governance enhancing audit committee (AC) characteristics mitigate the firm performance impact of significant‐adverse‐economic events such as the Global Financial Crisis (GFC)?’ Our analysis reveals that smaller audit committees with more experience and financial expertise are more likely to be associated with positive firm performance in the market. We also find that longer serving chairs of audit committees negatively impacts accounting performance. However, accounting performance is positively impacted where ACs include blockholder representation, the chair of the board, whose members have more external directorships and whose chair has more years of managerial experience. We contribute to the growing body of research on the impact of audit committee governance attributes on performance during times of financial distress.     

The effect of corporate culture on firm performance: Evidence from China

This study examines whether corporate culture promotion affects firm performance in China in terms of firm market value, firm financial performance and innovation output. We find consistent evidence that corporate culture promotion is negatively related to firm market value, positively related to innovation output and not significantly related to firm financial performance. In addition, the negative effect of corporate culture promotion on firm market value is driven by small firms and firms located in less developed provinces. Furthermore, we find that some specific corporate culture promotions, such as innovation culture promotion and integrity culture promotion, are not related to firm value or financial performance. However, innovation culture promotion is positively associated with innovation output.     

Environmental,social and governance (ESG) activity and firm performance: a review and consolidation

Interest in why firms conduct environmental, social and governance (ESG) activity is longstanding and increasing. Our understanding, however, remains fragmented with alternative accounts that seek to explain the relationship between ESG performance (ESGP) and corporate financial performance (CFP). This paper reviews alternative accounts for the relationship and finds that the weight of empirical evidence shows a positive, statistically significant but economically modest ESGP–CFP link, consistent with theoretical expectations. This economically modest relationship suggests ESG activity is unlikely to be primarily motivated by narrow measures of CFP. Further scholarship viewing ESG as part of overall firm activity would be constructive.     

Diversification strategy,efficiency, and firm performance: Insight from emerging market

We investigate further the inconsistencies of the diversification-performance link by introducing efficiency as moderating factor. A data of 319 firms was used to conduct a panel data analysis excluding the financial sector industries and the results show three important findings. First, industrial diversification shows a significant contribution in performance improvement while international diversification shows no effect on performance. Yet, international-conglomerate shows a significant negative relationship with performance. Meanwhile, the efficiency results are contrary to our conjecture. We find that efficiency is a factor to enhance performance, but it is not the moderating variable on the diversification-performance link. This implies that the efficiency of the firm has no connection with the link between diversification and performance.