This study investigates whether ‘prestigious’ multiple board membership is positively associated with firm performance. We employ Resource Dependency theory to explain why performance outcomes may be improved by the presence of ‘prestigious’ multiple directorships. Our analysis relies on extensive hand‐collected data on New Zealand company directorships. The results support the contention that ‘prestigious’ multiple directorships are related to better accounting and market performance. Conclusions reflect upon how Resource Dependency theory informs this phenomenon and how ‘prestigious’ board members may be a valuable resource for firms. We also reveal how these findings expose a new avenue for board governance research.
This research investigates whether auditor competition is associated with low audit fees and whether a country's implementation of mandatory audit firm rotation requirements as well as strong auditing and reporting standards weaken the negative effect of auditor competition on audit fees. Using 41,811 firm‐year observations from 10 emerging markets—specifically China, India, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Thailand, and Turkey—we find that auditor competition has a decreasing effect on audit fees. We also find that firms from countries with mandatory audit firm rotation requirements and strong auditing and reporting standards have higher audit fees than firms from countries with weak auditing and reporting standards and no mandatory audit firm rotation requirements. In the former countries, the negative relationship between auditor competition and audit fees is weaker than that for firms in the latter countries. Our results are robust to various specification tests, such as those for endogeneity issues, and alternative measures of country‐level institutional features. This study presents significant implications for regulators by providing evidence that both mandatory audit firm rotation requirements and the strength of auditing and reporting standards play an essential role in enhancing audit quality by curbing the negative effect of audit competition.
<p>This thesis contributes to the literature on Multiple Directorships (MDS) by providing new evidence that prestigious MDS are value enhancing relative to non-prestigious MDS for New Zealand listed companies. The recent debate surrounding the reasons for including multiple (busy) directors on the board as well as the diverse conclusions of prior studies on MDS draw attention to the fact that theoretically-informed possibilities of MDS are yet to be explored, especially in a setting where the higher incidence of MDS has been driven by a unique institutional environment. New Zealand is one example of such a setting. To explore one aspect of these issues, this research first asks whether there are firm ‘performance’ differences between prestigious MDS and non-prestigious MDS. The results of initial tests show that prestigious MDS have a positive influence on performance outcomes for their organizations, while there is a negative or no significant relationship between non-prestigious MDS and firm performance. These results also suggest a one-way causal effect of prestigious MDS on firm performance. Having determined the better value of prestigious MDS, the subsequent and primary question of this thesis is to explore ‘why’ differences may exist between the two categories of MDS. Three corporate governance theories, namely, Resource Dependence, Agency and Managerial Hegemony are employed to differentiate, and thus to help explain, the sources of prestigious MDS success. The results of the second set of tests reveal that the differences between prestigious and non-prestigious MDS can primarily be explained by firms’ needs for easier acquisition of critical resources, which are often associated with the level of agency conflicts and the presence of powerful CEOs. Empirical evidence then suggests that prestigious MDS potentially create value for New Zealand companies in terms of facilitating access to critical resources and minimizing agency conflicts as well as CEO influence on board oversight. The findings have potential policy implications, especially in an export-oriented economy with geographic isolation and small scale of population, such as New Zealand. Regulators, for instance, the Financial Markets Authority and Institute of Directors should be mindful of the need to retain expert (prestigious) directors and cautiously evaluate before initiating any new regulation regarding MDS.</p>
<p>This thesis contributes to the literature on Multiple Directorships (MDS) by providing new evidence that prestigious MDS are value enhancing relative to non-prestigious MDS for New Zealand listed companies. The recent debate surrounding the reasons for including multiple (busy) directors on the board as well as the diverse conclusions of prior studies on MDS draw attention to the fact that theoretically-informed possibilities of MDS are yet to be explored, especially in a setting where the higher incidence of MDS has been driven by a unique institutional environment. New Zealand is one example of such a setting. To explore one aspect of these issues, this research first asks whether there are firm ‘performance’ differences between prestigious MDS and non-prestigious MDS. The results of initial tests show that prestigious MDS have a positive influence on performance outcomes for their organizations, while there is a negative or no significant relationship between non-prestigious MDS and firm performance. These results also suggest a one-way causal effect of prestigious MDS on firm performance. Having determined the better value of prestigious MDS, the subsequent and primary question of this thesis is to explore ‘why’ differences may exist between the two categories of MDS. Three corporate governance theories, namely, Resource Dependence, Agency and Managerial Hegemony are employed to differentiate, and thus to help explain, the sources of prestigious MDS success. The results of the second set of tests reveal that the differences between prestigious and non-prestigious MDS can primarily be explained by firms’ needs for easier acquisition of critical resources, which are often associated with the level of agency conflicts and the presence of powerful CEOs. Empirical evidence then suggests that prestigious MDS potentially create value for New Zealand companies in terms of facilitating access to critical resources and minimizing agency conflicts as well as CEO influence on board oversight. The findings have potential policy implications, especially in an export-oriented economy with geographic isolation and small scale of population, such as New Zealand. Regulators, for instance, the Financial Markets Authority and Institute of Directors should be mindful of the need to retain expert (prestigious) directors and cautiously evaluate before initiating any new regulation regarding MDS.</p>
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.