No abstract

This study has two main objectives. The first one is to address the relationship between Economic Value Added (EVA) and Created Shareholders Value (CSV) in Jordanian public industrial firms (JPIF), comparing to the Return on Assets (ROA) over the period 2011-2015. The second objective is to address the possible superiority of EVA to ROA by explaining the changes in CSV for JPIF. In this study, CSV is measured using two models; Fernandez model and market value added model. Multiple and simple regressions were used in the study. These analyses have shown, generally, that the superiority of EVA in predicting and evaluating the CSV could be put into a conclusive and positive light compared to ROA. However, the results suggested that one financial measure cannot be enough to measure neither CSV nor firms" performance. Therefore, this study highly recommends that JPIF use a combination of different measure in assessing and evaluating their value and performance, especially modern indicators.

This paper aims at exploring how the mechanisms of corporate governance (audit committee size, CEO duality, board size, female board members and board composition) affect the firm performance. Based on data from 66 out of 69 firms, which represents (95.6%) of Jordanian publicly quoted manufacturing firms covering a five-year period (2008–2012), the use of multiple regression analysis was done for assessing how each of the mechanisms of corporate governance relates to firm performance. The empirical findings of this study suggest that size of firm and Tobin's Q and ROA shows a significant positive correlation, while leverage and ROA show significant correlations. Results indicate that CEO duality and size of board have negative correlation with ROA, while non-executive directors' proportion shows a positive correlation with ROA. No relationship was recognized between the female board members' proportion and audit committee size and ROA. Conversely, the variables of corporate governance do not show a relation with measure of market performance, which supports the argument that market-based performance measures are impartial when economic circumstances are normal in context of emerging markets. The paper provides insight into better understanding how the various mechanisms of corporate governance are related to the performance of firm given the scenario of a small emerging market of non-oil-producing country.

The purpose of this research is to investigate the influence of corporate board and audit committee characteristics on firm performance as measured by accounting-based ratios (earnings per share, return on asset, and return on equity) as well as the market-based measure (Tobin's Q). In addition, this research introduces political connections to examine whether it can moderate the relationship between corporate board characteristics and firm performance.The study reveals that a higher proportion of independent directors and CEO duality positively affected firm performance. However, board meetings and board financial experience have no affected firm performance. The study also shows that audit committee independence, audit committee size, and audit committee expertise are positively related to firm performance. In contrast, it finds no discernible impact of audit committee meetings on firm performance. Our findings also suggest that the beneficial influences of the corporate board, in terms of higher firm performance, are greater in firms with political connections. To the best of the researchers' knowledge, this is almost certainly the first analysis to examine the relation between the corporate board, audit committee characteristics, and firm performance, and the moderating effect of political connection of this relationship.

No abstract