Can informal corporate governance mechanisms mitigate diversification discount? Evidence from Malaysia

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine whether any specific informal corporate governance mechanisms under consideration in this study, namely, political connection, business group affiliation and ownership concentration, are able to mitigate the diversification discount for emerging-market diversified firms using Malaysia as an examination lab. Design/methodology/approach The study uses a sample data of the entire non-financial public-listed firms in Malaysia over a 12-year period from 2001 to 2012. The generalized method of moments estimators are employed to account for the endogeneity of both corporate governance and diversification. Findings This study finds that business group affiliation particularly with large size can help to mitigate the diversification discount whereby political connection and ownership concentration magnify the discount. The finding is robust to alternative diversification measurements, to alternative methods and to endogeneity bias. Research limitations/implications This result implies that diversified firms with affiliation to large business groups are able to reduce the magnitude of the discounted value of diversification. Practical implications This study helps managers, shareholders and investors to evaluate their current/future investments related to firms with diversified business segments. This study also provides implications for policymakers and regulatory bodies to assess the adequacy and competency of the current corporate governance frameworks in place. Originality/value This study incorporates the country-specific institutional dimension in designing a research framework that is more relevant in examining the influential effect of governance-related characteristics on the diversification-firm value relationship in an emerging market.

Corporate diversification and stock price crash risk: Do female directors matters? Evidence from Malaysia

“…The massive scale of corporate diversification efforts that has taken place and a clear economic significance of these conglomerates has since attracted great attention from the academic researchers and practitioners alike for almost two and half decades from 1990s to mid-2010s. To date, the dominant topic has always been focusing on the financial performance and value impact of diversification (e.g, Berger & Ofek, 1995;Lins & Servaes, 2002;Fauver et al, 2003;Hoechle et al, 2012;Lee, 2013;Lee et al, 2012;Lee & Hooy, 2018a;2018b) and there is still a lack of studies examining the risk aspect of corporate diversification in spite of its role played in the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. In this study, we aim to examine whether diversified firms would experience higher or lower stock price crash risk.…”

The Value of Diversification, Managerial Ability and Corporate Governance: Evidence from Malaysian Firms

“…Lang and Stulz (1994) popularised Tobin's q. Many studies have utilised Tobin's q in studies of diversification and firm value (e.g., Khanna & Palepu, 2000;Lins & Servaes, 2002;Lee & Hooy, 2018). Tobin's q is a firm's market value divided by its replacement value (Chung & Pruitt, 1994).…”

“…ue (e.g., Khanna & Palepu, 2000;Lins & Servaes, 2002;Lee & Hooy, 2018). a firm's market value divided by its replacement value (Chung & Pruitt, 1994).…”

Agency motives and the corporate diversification decision: perspectives of corporate executives in Nigeria

“…Although there is no consensus regarding the performance effects of corporate diversification, one dominant strand of the literature is the diversification discount strand (Gopal et al , 2021; Pidun et al , 2019). This strand maintains that diversified firms underperform focused firms (Berger and Ofek, 1995; Borah et al , 2018; Lee and Hooy, 2018). Despite the diversification discount, many firms continue to diversify and diversified firms continue to feature prominently in many economies (D’Aveni, 2017; Gopal et al , 2021; Guerras-Martín et al , 2020; Mackey et al , 2017; Matvos et al , 2018; Pidun et al , 2019; Schommer et al , 2019; Wernerfelt, 2022).…”