Corporate governance and dynamics capital structure: evidence from Vietnam

This paper examines the relationship between corporate governance and speed of adjustment (SOA) of capital structure for listed firms in Vietnam from 2000 to 2016. We first examine the literature on the influence of crucial corporate governance mechanisms, including gender diversity and managerial ownership, on SOA. Empirically, we then find that board size, board independence, gender diversity, and managerial ownership significantly increase SOA, but CEO duality significantly decreases it. We discuss some policy implications for firms and Vietnamese authorities.     

The impact of board quality and nomination committee on corporate bankruptcy

This paper examines the effects of board quality on the relationship between corporate bankruptcy and nomination committee effectiveness. We argue that the proportion of outside directors, a proxy of board quality, arguably captures the extent of board control and resources. Based on dataset from 1835 firm-year observations for 98 bankrupt and 269 non-bankrupt UK listed non-financial firms between 1994 and 2011 and using the agency and resource dependence theories, we predict and find that nomination committee effectiveness negatively affects corporate bankruptcy and that board quality mitigates the negative effects. The results lend support to the notion that firms benefit from board quality in terms of outside directors' ability to monitor CEO on behalf of shareholders and also provide advice, counsel and legitimacy to the firm. This study extends the present research on corporate bankruptcy by providing evidence on the impact of board quality and nomination committee effectiveness on UK corporate bankruptcy.     

The effects of board structure on corporate performance: Evidence from East African frontier markets

The effectiveness of the well-known corporate governance practices may not be universal due to fundamental differences in the environments under which firms operate. By using hand-collected data from all the non-financial firms listed on the unexplored East African frontier markets (i.e., Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda), we examine the effect of board characteristics on the performance of firms. Our results show that board size has a negative and significant effect on firm performance. The presences of foreigners and civil servants on the board play positive roles on financial performance, where the agency and resource dependence theories apply. Further, we find that board members with higher education also contribute to firm performance. These findings still hold when we consider the 2008–2009 financial crisis period. Overall, we show that in a business climate where ownership is largely dominated by few shareholders, the conventional governance mechanisms do not work effectively.     

Board gender composition,board independence and sustainable supply chain responsibility

The consideration of social and environmental factors in companies’ supply chain is a prevalent research topic because stakeholders are now inquisitive about the social and environmental impacts of companies’ suppliers. Using a sample of S&P 500 firms, we find that board gender composition and board independence are positively associated with sustainable supply chain responsibility (SSCR). We also identify three channels (CEO duality, sustainability committee and sensitive industries) through which board gender composition and board independence affect SSCR, where board gender composition consistently explains SSCR, but the effect of board independence is less pronounced in firms with CEO duality and firms with a sustainability committee. Finally, we explore the reason for the less-pronounced findings for board independence in our subsample analyses and find that, compared with independent female directors who continue to display significant associations with SSCR, independent male directors do not engender SSCR across the three subsample tests.     

Board governance and bank performance: A meta- analysis

Using a database of 56 studies on corporate governance in the banking industry that were published between 2007 and 2019, this study performs a meta-analytic review to examine the impact of board governance on bank performance. We investigate how board size, CEO duality, outside directors, and female directors on board play a role in determining bank performance. Variations in the relationship between board governance and bank performance that attribute to moderating effects of potential moderators, including the system of corporate governance, bank performance measures, the definitions of governance variables, publication quality, and endogeneity concerns, are also encapsulated. Our study shows that bank performance is positively associated with larger boards and a high proportion of outside and female directors, supporting the resource dependence theory. We find that the moderating variables considerably alter the link between board governance and bank performance. The study offers ways to enhance board effectiveness by enforcing governance practices in the banking systems based on each countries’ legal and institutional framework and suggests reconsidering mandates for smaller boards and duality on boards of banking firms.     

Managerial ownership,board monitoring and firm performance in a family‐concentrated corporate environment

Using data from Hong Kong, a market that has family‐concentrated ownership structure, we examine the relation between managerial ownership, the board of directors and firm performance. We first conduct analysis on the managerial ownership and firm performance to derive the turning points where either ‘convergence of interest’ or ‘entrenchment’ effect of managerial ownership is dominant. Based on these estimated turning points, we find that at low and high level of ownership, effective board mitigates the entrenchment effect associated with managerial ownership; at medium level of ownership, board effectiveness is less demanded. These findings suggest that managerial ownership and board monitoring are substitutes in mitigating the agency problem between managers and shareholders. We also find that effective board curbs the excessive compensation by entrenched managers to themselves at low level of managerial ownership.     

Interdependencies of female board member appointments

We investigate the appointments of female board members of Japanese corporations together with the corporations’ performance. We relate the presence of female board members to the board and ownership networks of the corresponding firms. We find that firms with female board members often show above average performance. We also find that corporate boards and the corresponding members show homophily with respect to gender in their networks. The observed homophily leads to interdependencies in the appointments of new board members. New appointments of female board members are more likely at firms with ties to other boards with female board members.     

Does CEO duality constrain board independence? Some evidence from audit pricing

This study examines whether CEO duality affects the association between board independence and demand for higher quality audits, proxied by audit fee. The findings show that there is a positive association between board independence and audit fees. This result is consistent with findings of Carcello et al. (2002) that more independent boards demand higher audit quality and effort. However, this positive association is only present in firms without CEO duality, thus suggesting that CEO duality constrains board independence. The results support recommendations against CEO duality by showing that dominant CEOs may compromise the independence of their board of directors. Additionally, evidence is provided that board size (the number of directors on the board) is positively associated with audit fee pricing. This is consistent with prior studies that indicate that larger board sizes are associated with inefficiency and negative firm performance.     

The differential effects of classified boards on firm value

Classified boards actually benefit firms that have low monitoring costs and greater needs for advisory services. Previous literature has emphasized the entrenchment effect of classified boards. However, we find that this adverse impact of classified boards can be offset or even superseded by the potential benefits of board classification for firms who hope to benefit from the advisory services of their independent directors. We show that firms with greater advising needs appoint more outside directors with diverse attributes and expertise, qualifications that enhance the ability to provide useful advice to managers. Furthermore, in such firms, board classification is associated with higher performance sensitivity of forced CEO turnover and better acquisition performance. Conversely, in firms with high monitoring costs, board classification hurts managerial equity-based incentives and risk-taking incentives. These findings suggest how and through which channels classified boards engender the differential effects on firm value.     

Determinants of corporate ownership and board structure: evidence from Singapore

This study examines the determinants and interrelationships among corporate ownership and board structure characteristics using a sample of Singapore listed firms. The institutional environment in Singapore differs from that in many developed Western economies in several important respects, including a weak market for corporate control, more concentrated stock ownership, and significant government ownership in many private sector firms.Three characteristics—board composition, board leadership structure and board size—are used to capture the monitoring ability of the board. These board characteristics are assumed to be endogenously determined, together with two ownership characteristics, managerial ownership and blockholder ownership. We use two-stage least squares regression to estimate the determinants of board and ownership characteristics. Our findings indicate that corporate ownership and board structures are related, and that there are significant interrelationships among board structure characteristics. The proportion of outside directors is negatively related to managerial ownership, board size and government ownership. The use of a dual leadership structure is positively related to blockholder ownership, and negatively related to regulation and to CEO tenure.     

Do gender diverse boards enhance managerial ability?

We examine the link between board gender diversity and managerial ability to transform corporate resources into revenue. Drawing on a sample of U.S firms during the period 2001–2016, we find a positive and economically meaningful association between female directors on boards and managerial ability, particularly when female directors are in monitoring roles on the board. The documented effect is stronger when using a tenure weighted measure of female representation on boards; and more pronounced for firms that have three or more women on the board of directors, in line with the critical mass hypothesis. We uncover that critical mass of female directors in monitoring roles is particularly conducive to enhancing managerial ability. Our channel analysis tests further reveal a distinctive tendency of firms with more gender diverse boards to shape the human capital of the firm by promoting managers with more generalist managerial skills. We find consistent results when we employ propensity score matching estimates and difference-in-differences using sudden deaths of female directors as a potential shock to address endogeneity concerns. We discuss implications for theory and policy.     

Do powerful chief executives influence the financial performance of UK firms?

Drawing on a framework from agency theory, we examine the relation between the decision-making power of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and the financial performance of 468 United Kingdom (UK) publicly listed companies (plcs) using a dynamic panel data estimation method for the six years 2003–2008. We measure CEO power using a ‘power index’ which captures the extent to which the autonomy of the CEO to make unilateral decisions could influence firms' financial performance. To test for robustness, our analysis is conducted using different measures of financial performance. Our results reveal that, consistent with previous UK research, CEO power, as defined by CEO-Chair duality, CEO-tenure and CEO share ownership, is negatively related to financial performance. We also find that concentrated ownership is inversely related to the performance of UK plcs. CEO's compensation and board structure, however, do not appear to be related to the financial performance of the UK plcs.     

Determinants of board structure: Evidence from Australia

Linck et al. (2008) investigate the determinants of board structure in the US, an environment that features high litigation risk and low ownership concentration. In contrast, using a hand-collected data set that includes information from more than 1000 firms, this paper investigates the determinants of board structure in Australia, an environment that features low litigation risk and high ownership concentration. Multivariate analyses suggest that whereas board size and board independence increase with firm size, CEO duality decreases with firm size. Additional tests suggest that high ownership concentration increases board size, decreases board independence and increases CEO duality. These results imply that if high litigation risk against directors (as in the US) plays a monitoring role in corporate governance, ownership concentration appears to offer an alternative governance mechanism in countries such as Australia, which feature low litigation risk.     

The Interrelationship Between Managerial Ownership and Board Structure

Abstract:  The paper tests the hypothesis that high managerial ownership entrenches managers by allowing the CEO to create a board that is unlikely to monitor. The results show a strong negative relationship between the level of managerial ownership and corporate governance factors, such as, the split of the roles of the CEO and the Chairman, the proportion of non-executive directors, and the appointment of a non-executive director as a Chairman. I also find that companies with low managerial ownership are more likely to change their board structure to comply with the Cadbury (1992) recommendations. The results suggest that managers, through their high ownership, choose a board that is unlikely to monitor. Overall, the findings cast doubt on the effectiveness of the board as an internal corporate governance mechanism when managerial ownership is high.     

International comparative analysis of the association between board structure and the efficiency of value added by a firm from its physical capital and intellectual capital resources

This study investigates the link between corporate board features and corporate performance for a sample of 286 publicly traded firms from South Africa (84 firms), Sweden (94 firms), and the UK (108 firms). Corporate board features considered are board composition, inside director ownership, duality and board size. In contrast to prior literature, performance is defined as the efficiency of value added (VA) rather than in financial terms. Further, the analysis examines the association between board features and efficiency of VA and each of the firm's physical capital (PC) and intellectual capital (IC), respectively. Finally, the present study analyzes the association between board features and corporate performance conjointly. Comparable to general findings from studies using U.S. data, the empirical analysis as a whole did not discern consistent significant link between the four board features and corporate performance across the three nations. However, individual board features are found to influence corporate performance in isolated cases. Overall, results provide evidence that even under different sociopolitical and economic conditions, governance needs vary across firms. Consequently, these findings do not lend support to the notion that uniform board structures should be mandated.     

Corporate governance and firm value during a financial crisis

The main purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effects of management ownership and other corporate governance variables on Hong Kong firms’ stock performance following the onset of the Asian Financial Crisis (1997–98). Our results show that Hong Kong firms with a more concentrated management (executive board) ownership displayed better capital market performance during the 13-month period of the Crisis. We also find that firms with more equity ownership by non-executive directors, and in which the positions of CEO and board chairperson were occupied by the same individual experienced a smaller stock price decline. Our findings are consistent with the notion that there is a greater alignment of insiders with outside owners, rather than the expropriation by insiders who have the opportunity to divert value, for firms with higher levels of management ownership during an unexpected capital market crisis.     

董事会留有前任总经理会如何影响公司资源调整？——基于成本粘性视角的实证分析

本文从成本粘性这一视角,研究了董事会留有前任总经理对公司资源调整的影响。结果发现,董事会留有前任总经理会提高成本粘性,此效应在管理层持股比例较低、非国有控制和行业竞争程度较低的公司中更强;进一步研究还发现,前任总经理无论是留任为董事长还是其他董事,都会提高成本粘性;无论是在家族企业还是非家族企业,董事会留有前任总经理均能提高成本粘性。上述结果表明董事会留有前任总经理会导致公司资源投入“易增难减”,其原因是前任总经理会阻止公司向下调整资源。从前任总经理积累的知识、经验和社会关系对资源调整成本的影响和前任总经理对现任管理层代理问题的影响这两个视角不能完全解释上述结果。本文既从成本粘性这一视角增进了我们对董事会留有前任总经理的经济后果的认识,也从董事会留有前任总经理这一视角丰富了成本粘性影响因素的研究,有助于政府部门规范公司在董事会中留任前任总经理的行为,对公司通过调整董事会结构以提高资源配置效率也具有启示意义。     

Media coverage,board structure and CEO compensation: Evidence from Taiwan

This paper investigates the relationship between CEO cash compensation and media coverage of firms, analyst forecasts and board structure using data from the Taiwan Stock Exchange. We find that, other things being equal, CEO cash compensation is much higher for firms with greater media coverage, firms with more positive news, firms with more analyst forecasts, and firms with larger institutional holdings. There is little evidence that board size and board independence affect CEO cash compensation, and CEO duality is negatively associated with CEO cash compensation     

Corporate board and board committee independence,firm performance,and family ownership concentration: An analysis based on Hong Kong firms

This study examines whether the relationship between corporate board and board committee independence and firm performance is moderated by the concentration of family ownership. Based on a sample of Hong Kong firms, we find no significant association between the independence of corporate boards or board committees and firm performance in family firms, whereas board independence is positively associated with firm performance in non-family firms. Additionally, our findings show that the proportion of independent directors on the corporate boards of family firms is lower than that of non-family firms, but we find no significant difference in the representation of independent directors on the key committees of corporate boards between family and non-family firms. Overall, these results suggest that the “one size fits all” approach required by the regulatory authorities for appointing independent directors on corporate boards may not necessarily enhance firm performance, especially for family firms. Thus, the requirement to appoint independent directors to the corporate boards of family firms needs to be reconsidered.     

Managerial ownership and firm performance: Evidence from China's privatizations

We examine the relationship between managerial ownership and firm performance for a sample of Chinese State-owned enterprises (SOEs) privatized over the period 1992-2000. The results indicate that managerial ownership has a positive effect on firm performance. Although return on assets (ROA) and return on sales (ROS) decline post-privatization, firms with high managerial ownership and, specially, high CEO ownership, exhibit a smaller performance decline. The difference is highly significant, with or without controlling for residual state ownership and changes in the firm's operating environment. We also find that the influence on firm performance becomes less significant at higher levels of CEO ownership. In contrast, performance continues to increase with managerial ownership. This finding suggests that, beyond a certain point, the distribution of shares would be more effective if extended to the whole management team instead of being limited to the chief executive.