Meta-analysis of corporate governance in Asia
-
Received March 26, 2018;Accepted June 4, 2018;Published June 19, 2018
-
Author(s)Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1430-6601Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4026-2094
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.15(2).2018.24
-
Article InfoVolume 15 2018, Issue #2, pp. 267-280
- TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ
-
Cited by6 articlesJournal title: Journal of Governance and RegulationArticle title: Corporate governance and firm performance in the emerging market: A review of the empirical literatureDOI: 10.22495/jgrv10i1art10Volume: 10 / Issue: 1 / First page: 96 / Year: 2021Contributors: Isaac Francis Antwi, Carla Carvalho, Cecília CarmoJournal title: Review of Managerial ScienceArticle title: The impact of female directorship on firm performance: a systematic literature reviewDOI: 10.1007/s11846-023-00677-2Volume: 18 / Issue: 3 / First page: 913 / Year: 2024Contributors: Syed Mujahid Hussain, Nisar Ahmad, Fatima Fazal, Angeliki N. MenegakiJournal title:Article title:DOI:Volume: / Issue: / First page: / Year:Contributors:Journal title: Problems and Perspectives in ManagementArticle title: Implementation of corporate governance, family ownership, and family-aligned board: Evidence from IndonesiaDOI: 10.21511/ppm.20(4).2022.02Volume: 20 / Issue: 4 / First page: 14 / Year: 2022Contributors: Erma Setiawati, Eskasari Putri, Nashirotun NisaJournal title:Article title:DOI:Volume: / Issue: / First page: / Year:Contributors:Journal title: Banks and Bank SystemsArticle title: A meta-analysis of determinants influencing bank employees’ satisfactionDOI: 10.21511/bbs.18(3).2023.05Volume: 18 / Issue: 3 / First page: 49 / Year: 2023Contributors: Nuttaprachya Nantavisit, Long Kim, Udom Dorn
- 1821 Views
-
287 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Research on corporate governance has been conducted extensively over the past few decades. However, the result of various studies failed to produce conclusive insight. This study is aimed at identifying, classifying, analyzing and interpreting previous research on corporate governance in Asia by using meta-analytical approach. By using the HOMA (Hedges-Olkin Meta-Analytical) procedures, the current study collected eighty articles from journals ranging from 1999 until 2017. Data were gathered from empirical scientific papers. Through rigorous research process, the current study found that most previous research on corporate governance in Asia observed the patterns of influence of various types of ownership structure and board characteristics on corporate performance. Ownership by family, government, and management tend to have a negative impact on performance, whilst institutional ownership and foreign ownership show positive effect on performance. The study reveals inconsistent result for frequency of board meetings, existence of family members on board, outside director, and board independence towards performance. Similar finding appeared for the relationship of performance to women on board and CEO duality. CGPI as the Corporate Governance Perception index and board size were found to have a positive consistency on performance. Apart from limitations of the study, the result suggests that there exists institutional and environmental specificity in the study of corporate governance in Asia that may be different from other context of study so that future researcher need to take a precaution of this matter.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)G02, G20, G30
-
References106
-
Tables3
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Studies included in meta-analysis
- Table 2. Variables, observation, and measurements
- Table 3. HOMA result
-
- Abdullah, F., Shah, A., & Khan, S. U. (2012). Firm performance and the nature of agency problems in insiders-controlled firms: Evidence from Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, 4(51), 161-182.
- Abdullah, S. N., & Ismail, K. N. I. K. (2013). Gender, Ethnic and Age Diversity of the Boards of Large Malaysian Firms and Performance. Jurnal Pengurusan, 38, 27-40.
- Abraheem Saleem Salem Alzoubi (2016). Ownership structure and earnings management: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management, 24(2), 135-161.
- ADB (2000). Corporate Governance and Finance in Asia; a Study of Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand. Manila.
- Amran, N. A., & Ahmad, A. C. (2009). Family Business, Board Dynamics and Firm Value: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 7(1), 53-74.
- Arshad, R., Nor, R. M., & Noruddin, N. A. A. (2011). Ownership structure and interaction effects of firm performance on management commentary disclosures. Journal of Global Management, 2(2).
- Bebchuk, L. A., Kraakman, R., & Triantis, G. (2000). Stock Pyramids, Cross-ownership, and Dual Class Equity: The Creation and Agency Costs of Separating Control from Cash Flow Rights. In R. K. Morck (Ed.), Concentrated Corporate Ownership (pp. 212-237). Chicago: The University Chicago Press.
- Berle, A. A., & Means, G. C. (1977). The Modern Corporations and Private Property. New Brunswick: Transaction Publisher.
- Binh, D. T. T., & Giang, H. T. H. (2012). Corporate Governance and Performance in Vietnamese Commercial Banks. Journal of Economics and Development, 14(2), 72-95.
- Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Wan, J. C. C. (2003). Turnaround in East Asian Firms: Evidence from Ethnic Overseas Chinese Communities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(6), 519-540.
- Bukair, A. A., & Rahman, A. A. (2015). Bank performance and board of directors attributes by Islamic banks. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 8(3), 291-309.
- Cai, D., Luo, J., & Wan, D. (2012). Family CEOs: Do they benefit firm performance in China? Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(4), 923-947.
- Chaganti, R., & Damanpour, F. (1991). Institutional ownership, capital structure, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 12(7), 479- 491.
- Chen, V. Z., Li, J., & Shapiro, D. M. (2011). Are OECD-prescribed “good corporate governance practices” really good in an emerging economy? Asia Pacific Journal Management, 28(October 2009), 115-138.
- Cheng, S., & Firth, M. (2005). Ownership, Corporate Governance and Top Management Pay in Hong Kong. Corporate Governance, 13(2).
- Cheung, Y., Connelly, J. T., Estanislao, J. P., Limpaphayom, P., Lu, T., & Utama, S. (2014). Corporate Governance and Firm Valuation in Asian Emerging Markets. Corporate Governance in Emerging Markets.
- Cheung, Y., Connelly, J. T., Jiang, P., & Limpaphayom, P. (2011). Does Corporate Governance Predict Future Performance? Evidence from Hong Kong. Financial Management, 40(1), 159-197.
- Cheung, Y., Jiang, K., Mak, B. S. C., Tan, W., Journal, S., Issue, S., … Tan, W. (2013). Corporate Social Performance, Firm Valuation, and Industrial Difference: Evidence from Hong Kong. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(4), 625-631.
- Chitnomrath, T., Evans, R., Christopher, T., & Evans, R. (2011). Corporate governance and post-bankruptcy reorganisation performance Evidence from Thailand. Asian Review of Accounting, 19(1), 50-67.
- Choi, S., & Hasan, I. (2005). Ownership, Governance, and Bank Performance: Korean Experience. Financial Markets, Institution & Instrument, 14(4).
- Christie, A. A., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1994). Efficient and Opportunistic Choices of Accounting Procedures: Corporate Control Contests. The Accounting Review, 69(4), 539-566.
- Chu, W. (2009). The influence of family ownership on SME performance: Evidence from public firms in Taiwan. Small Business Economics, 33(3), 353-373.
- Chung, H., & Chan, S. (2012). Ownership structure, family leadership, and performance of affiliate firms in large family business groups. Asia Pacific Journal Management, 29, 303-329.
- Chung, R., Firth, M., & Kim, J.-B. (2002). Institutional monitoring and opportunistic earnings management. Journal of Corporate Finance, 8(1), 29-48.
- Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J., & Lang, L. (1999). Expropriation of Minority Shareholders: Evidence from East Asia. World Bank Policy Research, 2088.
- Claessens, S., Djankov, & Lang, L. (2000). The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58, 81-112.
- Colpan, A. M., & Yoshikawa, T. (2012). Performance Sensitivity of Executive Pay: The Role of Foreign Investors and Affiliated Directors in Japan. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(6), 547-561.
- Cui, H., & Mak, Y. T. (2002). The relationship between managerial ownership and firm performance in high R&D firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 8(4), 313-336.
- Dah, M. F. M., Zainon, S., Zakaria, N. B., & Omar, N. (2016). Ethical values and competitiveness within concentrated ownership structure in Malaysia. Malaysian Accounting Review, 15(2), 57-76.
- Darmadi, S. (2013). Corporate governance disclosure in the annual report An exploratory study on Indonesian Islamic banks. Humanomics, 29(1), 4-23.
- Denis, D. K., & McConnel, J. J. (2003). International Corporate Governance. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38(1), 1-36.
- Detthamrong, U., Chancharat, N., & Vithessonthi, C. (2017). Corporate governance, capital structure and firm performance: Evidence from Thailand. Research in International Business and Finance, 42, 689-709.
- Dhnadirek, R., & Tang, J. (2003). Corporate Governance Problems in Thailand : Is Ownership Concentration the Cause ? Asia Pacific Business Review, 10(2), 121-138.
- Djankov, S. (1999). The restructuring of insider‐dominated firms: A comparative analysis. Economics of Transition, 7(2), 467-479.
- Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship Theory or Agency Theory: CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49-64.
- Douma, S., George, R., & Kabir, R. (2006). Foreign and domestic ownership, business groups, and firm performance: Evidence from a large emerging market. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7), 637-657.
- Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency Theory: an Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74.
- Eng, L. L., & Mak, Y. T. (2003). Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22, 325-345.
- Essen, M. van, Oosterhout, J. H. van, & Carney, M. (2012). Corporate boards and the performance of Asian firms: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(4), 873-905.
- Filatotchev, I., Jackson, G., & Nakajima, C. (2013). Corporate governance and national institutions: A review and emerging research agenda. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(4), 965-986.
- Finkeilstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella, A. A. (2009). Strategic Leadership; Theory and Research on Executive, Top Management Teams, and Boards. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Gedajlovic, E., & Shapiro, D. M. (2002). Ownership structure and firm profitability in Japan. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 565-575.
- Geyskens, I., Krishnan, R., & Steenkamp, J.-B. (2009). A Review and Evaluation of Meta-Analysis Practices in Management Research. Journal of Management, 35(2).
- Giannarakis, G., Konteos, G., & Sariannidis, N. (2014). Financial, governance and environmental determinants of corporate social responsible disclosure. Management Decision, 52(10), 1928-1951.
- Goyal, V. K., & Park, C. W. (2002). Board leadership structure and CEO turnover. Journal of Corporate Finance, 8(1).
- Guo, L., Tang, L., & Yang, S. X. (2012). Corporate governance and market segmentation: evidence from the price difference between Chinese A and H share. Rev Quantitative Financial Accounting.
- Haji, A. A., & Mubaraq, S. (2015). The implications of the revised code of corporate governance on firm performance A longitudinal examination of. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 5(3), 350-380.
- Haniffa, R., & Mohammad, H. (2006). Corporate Governance Structure and Performance of Malaysian Listed Companies. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 33(7), 1034-1062.
- Hedges, L. V, & Olkim, I. (1985). Statistical Methods in Meta- Analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 20(1).
- Ho, J. L. Y., Wu, A., & Xu, S. X. (2011). Corporate Governance and returns on information technology investment: evidence from an emerging market. Strategic Management Journal, 32(6), 595-623.
- Hodgson, A., Lhaopadchan, S., & Buakes, S. (2011). How informative is the Thai corporate governance index? A financial approach. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 19(1), 53-79.
- Hsu, W., & Petchsakulwong, P. (2010). The Impact of Corporate Governance on the Efficiency Performance of the Thai Non- Life Insurance Industry. The International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics, 35, 28-49.
- Hu, H. W., Tam, O. K., & Tan, M. G.-S. (2010). Internal governance mechanisms and firm performance in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27(4), 727-749.
- Huei, N. S. (2014). How does group affiliation affect the diversivication performance of family-controlled firms in Malaysia? A governance perspective. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 10(2), 81-115.
- Husnin, A. I., Nawawi, A., & Salin, A. S. A. P. (2016). Corporate governance and auditor quality – Malaysian evidence Corporate governance and auditor quality – Malaysian evidence. Asian Review of Accounting, 24(2), 202-230.
- Ibrahim, H., & Samad, F. A. (2011). Agency costs, corporate governance mechanisms and performance of public listed family firms in Malaysia. S. Afr.J.Bus. Management, 42(3), 17-26.
- Ika, S. R., Dwiwinarno, T., & Widagdo, A. K. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Indonesian public listed companies. In SHS Web of Conferences.
- Iskandar, T. M., Hassan, N. H., Sanusi, Z. M., & Mohamed, Z. M. (2017). Board of Directors and Ownership Structure: A Study on Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Malaysia. Jurnal Pengurusan, 49.
- Jaffar, R., & Abdul-Shukor, Z. (2016). The role of monitoring mechanisms towards company’s performance Evidence from politically connected. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 6(4), 408-428.
- Jaffar, R., Mardinah, D., & Ahmad, A. (2013). Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure practices: Evidence from a two tier board systems in Indonesia. Jurnal Pengurusan, 39.
- Jamaluddin, A., Mastuki, N., & Ahmad, A. E. (2009). Corporate Governance Reform and the Value Relevance of Equity Book Value and Earnings in Malaysia. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 7(2), 41-59.
- Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm, Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
- Jensen, M. C., & Warner, J. B. (1988). The Distribution of Power Among Corporate Managers, Shareholders, and Directors. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(1), 3-24.
- Jiang, Y., & Peng, M. W. (2011). Are family ownership and control in large firms good, bad, or irrelevant? Asia Pacific Journal Management, 28, 15-39.
- Kamardin, H., Latif, R. A., Mohd, K. N. T., & Adam, M. C. (2014). Multiple Directorships and the Monitoring Role of the Board of Directors: Evidence from Malaysia. Jurnal Pengurusan, 42, 51-62.
- Khan, A., Muttakin, M. B., & Siddiqui, J. (2013). Corporate governance and corporate governance social responsibility disclosure: Evidance from and emerging economy. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(2), 207-223.
- Khatab, H., Masood, M., Zaman, K., Saleem, S., & Saeed, B. (2010). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: A Case study of Karachi Stock Market. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 2(1), 39-43.
- Kim, Y. (2005). Board Network Characteristics and Firm Performance in Korea. Corporate Governance, 13(6), 800-808.
- Kuada, J., & Gullestrup, H. (1998). The Cultural Context of Corporate Governance, Performance Pressures, and Accountability. In I.S. Demirag (Ed.), Corporate Governance, Accountability and Pressures to Perform an International Study (pp. 25-56). Connecticut: JAI Press Inc.
- Kumar, N., & Singh, J. P. (2012). Outside Directors, Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: Empirical Evidence from India. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting, 4(2), 39- 56.
- La-Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate Ownership Around the World. The Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471-517.
- Lannoo, K. (1999). A European Perspective on Corporate Governance. Journal of Common Market Studies, 37(2), 269-294.
- Lee, J.-H., Choi, C., & Kim, J. M. (2012). Outside directors’ social capital and firm performance: A complex network approach. Social Behavior and Personality, 40(8), 1319-1332.
- Lu, J., Xu, B., & Liu, X. (2009). The Effect of Corporate Governance and Institutional Environments on Export Behaviour in Emerging Economies; Evidence from China. Management International Review, 49(4), 455-478.
- Marimuthu, M. (2017). Ownership Structure and Firm Value: An Insider Ownership Effect. Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal, 9(1), 658-666.
- Martin‐Ortega, O. (2008). Business and Human Rights in Conflict. Ethics & International Affairs, 22(3), 273-283.
- Martynov, A. (2009). Agents or stewards? Linking managerial behavior and moral development. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(2), 239.
- Mehdi, M., Sahut, J.-M., & Teulon, F. (2017). Do corporate governance and ownership structure impact dividend policy in emerging market during financial crisis? Journal of Applied Acoounting Research, 18(3), 274-297.
- Moerland, P. W. (1995). Alternative Disciplinary Mechanism in Different Corporate System. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 26(1), 17-34.
- Moradi, N. S., Aldin, M. M., Heyrani, F., & Iranmahd, M. (2012). The Effect of Corporate Govemance, Corporate Financing Decision and Ownership Structure on Finni Performance: A Panel Data Approach from Tehran Stock Exchange. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 4(6), 86-94.
- Nakamura, M. (2011). Corporate governance and managerial reforms in Japan. The Journal of Japanese Studies, 37(2), 493-497.
- OECD (2014). OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. Rev. Account. Stud. (Vol. 7).
- Oh, W. Y., Chang, Y. K., & Martynov, A. (2011). The Effect of Ownership Structure on Corporate Social Responsibility: Empirical Evidence from Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(2), 283-297.
- Pan, L.-H., Lin, C.-T., & Chen, K. C. (2013). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: The Case of Chinese ADRs. The International Journal of Finance, 25(1).
- Phan, P. H., Lee, S. H., & Lau, S. C. (2003). The performance impact of interlocking directorates.pdf. Journal of Managerial Issues, XV(3), 338-352.
- Phung, D. N., & Le, T. P. V. (2013). Foreign Ownership, Capital Structure and Firm Performance : Empirical Evidence from Vietnamese Listed Firms. The IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, XII(2), 40-59.
- Prabowo, M., & Simpson, J. (2011). Independent directors and firm performance in family controlled firms : evidence from Indonesia. Asian-Pacific Economic Literature.
- Ramdani, D., & Witteloostuijn, A. Van. (2010). The Impact of Board Independence and CEO Duality on Firm Performance: A Quantile Regression Analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and. British Journal of Management, 21, 607- 626.
- Saleh, N. M., Ridhuan, M., & Abdul, C. (2009). Ownership structure and intellectual capital performance in Malaysia. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 5(1), 1-29.
- Setiawan, D., Bandi, B., Phua, L. K., & Nugroho, I. T. (2016). Ownership structure and dividend policy in Indonesia. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 10(3), 230-252.
- Shan, Y. G., & Mclver, R. P. (2011). Corporate governance mechanisms and financial performance in China: panel data evidence on listed non financial companies. Asia Pacific Business Review, 17(3), 301-324.
- Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1986). Large Shareholders and Corporate Control. Journal of Political Economy, 94(3), 461-488.
- Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). A Survey of Corporate Governance. The Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737-782.
- Siagian, F., Siregar, S. V, & Rahadian, Y. (2013). Corporate governance, reporting quality, and firm value : evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 3(1), 4-20.
- Siagian, F. T. (2011). Ownership Structure and Governance Implementation: Evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 1(3), 187-202.
- Sing, T. F., & Sirmans, C. (2008). Does Real Estate Ownership Matter in Corporate Governance? Journal of Property Research, 25(1), 23-43.
- Tam, O. K., & Tan, M. G. (2007). Ownership, Governance and Firm Performance in Malaysia. Corporate Governance, 15(2), 208-223.
- Tong, S., & Junarsin, E. (2013). Do Private Firms Outperform SOE Firms after Going Public in China Given their Different Governance Characteristics? Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 15(2), 133-170.
- Tuan, N. Van, & Tuan, N. A. (2016). Corporate governance structures and performance of firms in Asian market: A comparative analysis between Singapore and Vietnam. Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, 7(2), 112-140.
- Utama, C. A., Utama, S., & Amarullah, F. (2017). Corporate governance and ownership structure: Indonesia evidence. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 17(2), 165-191.
- Wahab, E. A. A., Pitchay, A. A., & Ali, R. (2015). Culture, corporate governance and analysts forecast in Malaysia. Asian Review of Accounting, 23(3), 232-255.
- Wahyudin, A., & Solikhah, B. (2017). Corporate governance implementation rating in Indonesia and its effects on financial performance. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 17(2), 250-265.
- Yasser, Q. R., Mamun, A. Al., & Hook, M. (2017). The impact of ownership structure on financial reporting quality in the east. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 25(2), 178-197.
- Yatim, P. (2011). Underpricing and board structure: An investigation of Malaysian initial public offerings (IPOs). Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 7(1), 73-93.
- Yiu, D. W., Su, J., & Xu, Y. (2012). Alternative financing and private firm performance. Asia Pacific Journal Management.
- Zabri, S. M., Ahmad, K., & Wah, K. K. (2016). Corporate Governance Practices and Firm Performance: Evidence from Top 100 Public Listed Companies in Malaysia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35, 287-296).
-
Does board composition have an impact on CSR reporting?
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 15, 2017 Issue #2 pp. 19-35 Views: 4473 Downloads: 1719 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯCorporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting plays a key role in management control, particularly in light of the increased demand for non-financial reporting after the financial crisis of 2008–2009. This literature review evaluates 47 empirical studies that concentrate on the influence of several board composition variables on the quantity and quality of CSR reporting. The author briefly introduces the research framework that underpins current empirical studies in this field. This is followed by a discussion of the main variables of board composition: (1) committees (audit and CSR committees), (2) board independence, (3) board expertise, (4) CEO duality, (5) board diversity (gender and foreign diversity), (6) board activity, and (7) board size. The author, then, summarizes the key findings, discusses the limitations of the existing research and offers useful recommendations for researchers, firm practice and regulators.
-
Corporate governance and financial performance: an empirical analysis of selected multinational firms in Nigeria
Gideon Tayo Akinleye , Odunayo Olarewaju , Bamikole Samson Fajuyagbe doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.17(1).2019.02Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 17, 2019 Issue #1 pp. 11-18 Views: 3410 Downloads: 570 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis study focused on corporate governance and performance of selected Nigerian multinational firms from 2012 to 2016. Specifically, the study focused on the effect of board size, activism and committee activism on return on asset and firm growth rate. Secondary data collected from four multinational firms were analyzed via static panel estimation techniques. While board size and board activism exerted significant negative impact on return on asset, committee activism exerted insignificant impact. The results of the study further showed that board size and board activism exert insignificant negative impact on firm’s growth rate, while committee activism insignificantly spurs firm’s growth rate. Decisively, discoveries from this study reflect that corporate governance has significant negative impact on return on asset, but has insignificant influence on the growth rate of Nigerian multinational firms. Based on these findings, the authors recommended that corporate governance dynamics in firms world over should be reconsidered, such that it gives credence to more than just numbers of persons or meetings held, but the main reasons and deliberations in such meetings. It was also recommended that excessive increase in magnitude or frequency of meetings held by board of directors cum committee should be avoided.
-
Impact of corporate governance mechanisms on financial reporting quality: a study of Indian GAAP and Indian Accounting Standards
Faozi A. Almaqtari , Abdulwahid Abdullah Hashed , Mohd Shamim , Waleed M. Al-ahdal doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(4).2020.01Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 18, 2020 Issue #4 pp. 1-13 Views: 2962 Downloads: 612 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThe present study examines the impact of corporate governance mechanisms on financial reporting quality under Indian GAAP and Indian Accounting Standards (Ind. AS). A sample of 97 companies listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange is selected. Corporate governance mechanisms have been considered as independent variables, and financial reporting quality is the dependent variable. Corporate governance is measured by board effectiveness (board size, independence, diligence, and expertise), audit committee attributes (size, independence, diligence, and expertise), foreign ownership, and audit quality. Descriptive statistics, correlation, and OLS regression are conducted to estimate the results. The study results reveal that board characteristics and audit committee attributes, except for audit committee diligence, have a significant effect on financial reporting quality. However, the impact of board diligence and audit committee attributes is negative. Foreign ownership has no contribution to financial reporting quality, but audit quality has a significant effect. The findings of the study have considerable implications for regulators, policymakers, managers, investors, analysts, and academicians. More emphasis should be given to compliance with Ind. AS, and an oversight body for compliance with Ind. AS should be established.
Acknowledgment
This publication was supported by Deanship of Scientific Research, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj, Saudi Arabia.