Accountability and value enhancement roles of corporate governance

We examine the twin roles of accountability and value enhancement of corporate governance in the context of financial reporting. We investigate the accountability role by examining the association between governance structures and abnormal accruals, and the value enhancement role by investigating the association between abnormal accruals explained by governance structures and future performance. We differentiate between governance mechanisms that have direct roles in the financial reporting process (audit related) from mechanisms that have indirect roles (board related). We find that independent and active audit committees and independent boards are important governance attributes for financial reporting. We show that both audit‐related and board‐related governance structures are value enhancing.     

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.

Government ownership,corporate governance and tax aggressiveness: evidence from China

This study investigates how government ownership and corporate governance influence a firm's tax aggressiveness. Using Chinese listed companies during 2003–2009, we find that compared with government‐controlled firms, non‐government‐controlled firms pursue a more aggressive tax strategy. In particular, non‐government‐controlled firms with a higher percentage of the board shareholdings and with a CEO who also serves as the board chairman are more aggressive. For government‐controlled firms, we find that board shareholding has an impact on tax aggressiveness and it does not differ between local and central government‐controlled firms. However, local government‐controlled firms in less developed regions where the implementation of corporate governance measures is generally less effective are more tax aggressive than those in other regions.     

Corporate ownership,corporate governance reform and timeliness of earnings: Malaysian evidence

This paper provides the first evidence showing that ownership concentration and the identity of the largest shareholder matter to the timeliness of corporate earnings, measured by a stock price-based timeliness metric and the reporting lag. Using panel data of 1276 Malaysian firms from 1996 to 2009, we find a non-linear relationship between concentrated ownership, measured by the largest shareholding in a firm, and the reporting lag but not the timeliness of price discovery. Although firms with government as the largest shareholder and political connections have a significantly shorter reporting lag, only the former are timelier in price discovery. Firms with family and foreigners as the largest shareholder however are less timely in price discovery. While the reporting lag is shorter in the period after the integration of the Malaysian Code of Corporate Governance (MCCG) into Bursa listing rules, its impact on the timeliness of price discovery is mostly immaterial.     

跨国多元化的绩效研究：回顾与展望

近年来我国企业的跨国多元化经营发展迅速,然而国内有关跨国多元化的绩效研究较为少见。本文通过对相关研究成果进行回顾,归纳出跨国多元化变量的计量特点和其与公司绩效的关系模型种类,并对未来研究方向进行展望,为我国学者在未来跨国多元化的研究中提供了参考和借鉴。     

Discussion of ‘Government ownership,corporate governance and tax aggressiveness: evidence from China’

In this article, I discuss several aspects of the paper by Chan et al. (2013). After a brief introduction, the next three sections discuss the hypothesized links between government ownership, corporate governance, institutional factors and tax avoidance in Chan et al. (2013). The fifth section investigates some possible extensions on tax research in the setting of China, while the sixth section concludes this discussion.     

Initial public offer pricing,corporate governance and contextual relevance: Australian evidence

This study examines the relationship between initial public offer (IPO) corporate governance, IPO pricing and possible contextual relevance. A comprehensive inventory of IPO governance attributes is modelled. A positive association is reported between the inventory and IPO initial returns. This relationship is attenuated for IPOs where a diminished price relevance of governance structure is posited: smaller scale firms and/or those with alternative monitoring agents in place. Relevance appears modified and even supplanted by particular corporate priorities or the presence of other monitoring mechanisms. These contexts inform the motivation of key players regarding whether and how to act in response to the governance signal.     

Growth,governance and corporate payout policy

We show that when growth opportunities decreased following the end of the Cold War, defence firms responded by increasing total payout. This change in policy was largely driven by increased stock buybacks as opposed to changes in cash dividends and primarily by firms that faced stronger external governance. On the other hand, firms with weaker internal governance that were more severely affected by the reduced growth chose to alter the mix of payout at the expense of repurchases. Overall, our findings (i) demonstrate a causal link where exogenous shocks to growth cause payout policy changes, (ii) support the role of internal governance in payout policy design where entrenched managers pre‐commit to higher dividends and (iii) emphasize the monitoring role of external governance in mitigating agency costs of free cash flow.     

Adopting better corporate governance: Evidence from cross-border mergers

Cross-border mergers allow firms to alter the level of protection they provide to their investors, because target firms usually import the corporate governance system of the acquiring company by law. Therefore, cross-border mergers provide a natural experiment to analyze the effects of changes in corporate governance on firm value, and on an industry as a whole. We construct measures of the change in investor protection induced by cross-border mergers in a sample of 7330 ‘national industry years’ (spanning 39 industries in 41 countries in the period 1990–2001. We find that the Tobin's Q of an industry — including its unmerged firms — increases when firms within that industry are acquired by foreign firms coming from countries with better shareholder protection and better accounting standards. We present evidence that the transfer of corporate governance practices through cross-border mergers is Pareto improving. Firms that can adopt better practices willingly do so, and the market assigns more value to better protection.     

Small firms and the value of improvements in corporate governance mechanisms

Since 2002, many firms have been required to alter their board of directors and committees to increase management monitoring. Kinney and McDaniel (1989) and Chhaochharia and Grinstein (2007) provide empirical evidence suggesting that investments in corporate governance may differ based on firm size, and that under-investing in monitoring may be more pronounced in smaller firms. To further test whether the benefits of recent changes in companies' governance mechanisms accrue to smaller firms that have underinvested in governance, we examine the stock market reaction to changes in board structure over the twenty-four months following the passage of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act. We construct a new composite measure of board structure and regress buy-and-hold abnormal returns on changes that occur in the Board Structure Index, finding that improvements in corporate governance quality result in economically significant abnormal returns accruing only to the smaller firms with weak initial board structures.     

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.     

The effect of accounting firm mergers on the market for audit services: New Zealand evidence

This article examines the outcomes of accounting firm mergers using data about the frequency of audit switches, the numbers of partners in the respective firms, and perceptions revealed in interviews with partners. Evidence from client switches does not show any evidence that the mergers were followed by cost reductions, or of collusion to force prices up. The effects of the mergers appear to have been elsewhere—the merging firms reduced partner numbers substantially, increasing partner leverage so that individual remaining partners were better off. Data from interviews confirm these findings, and show that the culture of individual firms had a significant effect on determining which group of partners controlled the merged firm.     

Accounting conservatism and corporate governance

We predict that firms with stronger corporate governance will exhibit a higher degree of accounting conservatism. Governance level is assessed using a composite measure that incorporates several internal and external characteristics. Consistent with our prediction, strong governance firms show significantly higher levels of conditional accounting conservatism. Our tests take into account the endogenous nature of corporate governance, and the results are robust to the use of several measures of conservatism (market-based and nonmarket-based). Our evidence is consistent with the direction of causality flowing from governance to conservatism, and not vice versa, indicating that governance and conservatism are not substitutes. Finally, we study the impact of earnings discretion on the sensitivity of earnings to bad news across governance structures. We find that, on average, strong-governance firms appear to use discretionary accruals to inform investors about bad news in a timelier manner.

Consumption-smoothing in a small, cyclically volatile open economy: Evidence from New Zealand

New Zealand's current account of the balance of payments has been persistently in deficit since the early 1970s and increased markedly during the late 1990s. Should this cause significant concern, for such a small, cyclically volatile open economy? Our results show that VAR1 and VAR2 forms of the traditional intertemporal consumption-smoothing model reflect very satisfactorily the volatile directions and turning points observed, that the data are not consistent with consumption-tilting to the present, and that New Zealand has had considerable success to date in consumption-smoothing around its average 5% current account deficit. Perhaps more unexpectedly, a Bergin–Sheffrin-type model of a small open economy with variable interest rates and exchange rates has not performed noticeably better.     

Corporate governance, investor protection, and performance in emerging markets

We use recent data on firm-level corporate governance (CG) rankings across 14 emerging markets and find that there is wide variation in firm-level governance in our sample and that the average firm-level governance is lower in countries with weaker legal systems. We explore the determinants of firm-level governance and find that governance is correlated with the extent of the asymmetric information and contracting imperfections that firms face. We also find that better corporate governance is highly correlated with better operating performance and market valuation. Finally, we provide evidence that firm-level corporate governance provisions matter more in countries with weak legal environments.     

The association between corporate governance and earnings quality: Further evidence using the GOV-Score

This paper reexamines the relation between corporate governance and quality of earnings using a summary governance measure. Prior research has used many surrogates for corporate governance including size and composition of board of directors, existence and composition of audit committee, and extent of institutional ownership. However, the criticism of the extant research has been that corporate governance comprises many facets and is not uni-dimensional. In this study we fill this void by using the Gov-Score developed by Brown and Caylor [Brown, D., and Caylor, M.L., (2006). Corporate governance and firm valuation. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 25, 409-434.] to measure corporate governance. In the post-Sarbanes-Oxley period, we find evidence of a significant inverse relationship, namely higher levels of corporate governance are associated with lower absolute discretionary accruals and higher quality of earnings. Furthermore, our results suggest that only firms in the highest category of corporate governance experience significantly improved quality of earnings. Finally, as a test of robustness, we document that corporate governance is negatively associated with small earnings surprises. This implies that firms with weak corporate governance are more likely to manage earnings in order to meet or beat analyst forecasts.     

Operating performance changes associated with corporate mergers and the role of corporate governance

We find that corporate governance characteristics of acquiring firms (board ownership, board size, and block-holder control) have an economically and statistically significant impact on operating performance changes following mergers. We also show that dispersion of intra-board ownership stakes is an important but heretofore overlooked factor when judging the influence of ownership on the outcomes of corporate choices. Finally, we present evidence that suggests the market sometimes under- or overreacts to merger news when initially revaluing merger partners but corrects any miscalculation following the consummation of the merger.     

Liquidity,ownership concentration,corporate governance,and firm value: Evidence from Thailand

We examine the interactions among ownership structure, liquidity, and corporate governance in an important emerging market. The results suggest that firms with more concentrated ownership experience significantly lower stock liquidity. Large shareholders are assumed to possess private information, leading to information asymmetry and thus a higher adverse selection cost. As a result, higher ownership concentration is associated with less liquidity. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that corporate governance plays a significant role in the relationship between ownership and liquidity in Thailand.     

Liberalization, corporate governance and the performance of privatized firms in developing countries

This paper seeks to provide an answer to the following question: when and how does privatization work? Using a sample of 230 firms headquartered in 32 developing countries, we document a significant increase in profitability, efficiency, investment and output. Our analysis shows that the changes in performance vary with the extent of macro-economic reforms and environment, and the effectiveness of corporate governance. In particular, economic growth is associated with higher profitability and efficiency gains, trade liberalization is associated with higher levels of investment and output, while financial liberalization is associated with higher output changes. Further, control relinquishment by the government is a key determinant of profitability, efficiency gains and output increases. Finally, we find higher improvements in efficiency for firms in countries in which stock markets are more developed and where property rights are better protected and enforced. These results for a sample of developing countries differ from those reported in a contemporaneous study by D'Souza et al. [D'Souza, J., Megginson, W.L., Nash, R.C., 2001. Why do privatized firms improve performance? Evidence from developed countries. Unpublished working paper. University of Oklahoma] which focuses on developed countries. These diverging findings suggest that privatization in developing countries indeed obeys to particular constraints and has a dynamic of its own.     

Corporate governance and firm operating performance

Using a unique dataset provided by Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), we relate 51 governance provisions to firm operating performance as proxied by return on assets and return on equity. We identify six corporate governance provisions that are significantly and positively linked to return on assets, return on equity or both using at least two of our six regressions. We examine nine governance provisions that have been recently mandated by the three major U.S. stock exchanges, and we find none of them to be significantly and positively related to firm operating performance. Our results reveal that the governance provisions recently mandated by the U.S. stock exchanges are less closely linked to firm operating performance than are those not so mandated.