No abstract

This study examines the relationship between board and ownership structures and firm performance in an environment of severe political and economic crisis. Using panel data from the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE) for the period 2000-2005, we split the period into prepresidential election period (2000)(2001)(2002) (a relatively stable political and economic period) and post-presidential election period (2003)(2004)(2005)) (a hostile political and economic period) to capture the differences in the political and economic landscape. We find that board size, ownership concentration and executive directors' share ownership increased whilst the proportion of nonexecutive directors reduced in the post-presidential election period. Employing a system Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) approach, we find that performance is positively related to board size and ownership concentration in the post-(but not in the pre-) presidential election period. The results also show that performance is negatively related to executive directors' share ownership in the post-presidential election period, but positively related in the pre-presidential election period. The proportion of non-executive directors is negative and significant in both periods. These findings support the notion that the effects of board and ownership structures depend on the nature of the firm's environment, and therefore have important implications for policy-makers.

Purpose -This study investigates the relative value relevance of accounting measures based on Chinese Accounting Standards (CAS) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in relation to both A-and B-share markets during three distinct phases (1994-1997, 1998-2000 and 2001-2004) over which CAS were progressively harmonized with IFRS. Design/methodology/approach -Using data for 86 Chinese listed companies which issued both A-and B-shares, we employ the price model to test for the association between CAS-and IFRSbased accounting information, and A-and B-share prices. The J-test was employed to determine the relative value relevance of the information based on the two sets of accounting standards. Findings -Overall, we find that for both the A-and B-share markets, both CAS-based and IFRSbased accounting information are value relevant, but IFRS-based information is more value relevant than the CAS-based information. However, the magnitude of the differences between the explanatory powers of the CAS-and IFRS-based accounting information narrowed significantly in the 2001-2004 period in both the A-and B-share markets. The results are robust to the deflator used and the stock exchange on which the companies are listed. Practical implications -The results have implications for China and other transitional economies attempting to integrate IFRS with a uniform accounting system. Originality/value -The paper provides the first comprehensive empirical evidence as to whether or not the progressive harmonization of CAS with IFRS improved the value relevance of CASbased accounting in China and contributes to the debate on the (ir)relevance of IFRS in emerging and transitional economies.

This study examines the relationship between corporate governance mechanisms and company performance as measured by economic value added (EVA), return on assets (ROA) and Tobin's Q. A multiple regression model is used to compare the association between corporate governance mechanisms and company performance for 158 companies listed on the JSE Securities Exchange (formerly known as the Johannesburg Stock Exchange) for the year 2012. We report four main results. First, board size is found to be negatively and significantly related to EVA suggesting that firms with smaller boards perform better than those with larger boards. Second, the relationship between Tobin's Q and the proportion of non-executive directors (NEDs) on the board is both positive and significant, suggesting that companies with higher proportions of NEDs seem to perform better than those with lower proportions of NEDs. Third, frequency of board meetings is negatively and significantly related to both the ROA and the Tobin's Q suggesting that companies which hold board meetings less frequently appear to perform better than those holding board meetings more frequently. Fourth, the relationship between company size and two performance measures (EVA and ROA) is both positive and significant, suggesting that larger companies seem to perform better than smaller ones. Furthermore, the association between leverage and the ROA is negative and marginally significant, suggesting that companies with less debt appear to perform better than those with more debt. Overall, based on the number and strength of associations between board characteristics and the measures of performance, we conclude that Tobin's Q has a better association with board characteristics than both EVA and ROA. The study also shows that the majority of firms listed on the JSE comply with the King III propositions that the majority of board members be NEDs and that the majority of the NEDs be independent.

No abstract