CEO behavior and sustainability performance: the moderating role of corporate governance

Abstract

PurposeThis paper explores how the tension between a firm's CEO overconfidence feature and externally observable hubris attribute may determine the level of corporate sustainability performance. This work also contemplates the impact of the moderator “corporate governance practices.”Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a sample of 658 firm-year-observations using a sample of European real estate firms indexed on Stoxx Europe 600 Index from 2006 to 2019. To test the developed hypotheses, feasible generalized least square (FGLS) regression is applied.FindingsFindings suggest that a good corporate governance score strengthens the positive effect of the psychological bias (CEO overconfidence) on corporate sustainability performance while it fails to attenuate the negative effect of the cognitive bias (CEO hubris).Research limitations/implicationsThe research provides an overview of the impact of CEO personality traits on the corporate sustainability performance level in the European real estate sup-sector. As corporate governance can have a major impact to control these traits, the authors recommend European real estate companies to improve their corporate governance practices.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the existent literature this gap with two empirical novelties: (1) providing a novel insight into sustainability involvement using a sample of European real estate sup-sector and (2) investigating the moderating effect on the link between CEO psychological and cognitive biases and sustainability performance. This study provides empirical evidence that entrenchment problems arising from CEO hubris would not be mitigated by a good corporate governance practice.

The Practice of Enterprise Risk Management and Sustainable Performance in Jordan

“…This concept represents an organization's ability to efficiently utilize its finite resources over time, reduce waste, and implement best practices (Aksoy et al, 2020). Corporate sustainability is assessed and quantified through three dimensions: economic, environmental, and social performance (Kouaib et al, 2021;Shad et al, 2019;Tze San et al, 2022). A study by Mousa et al (2022) found that organizations with superior sustainable performance are more likely to be able to lessen the negative effects of crises, like the current pandemic.…”

Analysis of Corporate Governance and Corporate Sustainability Performance in the Indonesian Context

“…This approach claims that the decision to invest in environmental, social and governance activities is viewed as the manifestation of the managerial agency issues in the firms (Castillo-Merino & Rodríguez-Pérez, 2021;Ferrell et al, 2016). On the contrary, in the modern business upholding the sustainable concept, managers are demanded not only to maximize the wealth of the stakeholders through the economic aspect but also to resolve the social and environmental issues (So et al, 2021;Masud et al, 2018;Kouaib et al, 2021;Farooq et al, 2021;Kend, 2015). In the Indonesian context, the government started to regulate the implementation of social and environmental responsibilities through the Laws on Limited Companies in 2007 (Tjahjadi et al, 2021).…”

A Systematic Review of Corporate Governance and Sustainability Performance: Pre- And Post- Sustainable Development Goals Adoption Period

“…A powerful CEO could enhance a company's disclosure on social and environmental contexts (Gerged, 2021). Various researchers have attested that the CEO has a significant role in the explanation of socially responsible and sustainable activities (Cho et al, 2019;Kouaib et al, 2021). Thus, companies with good corporate governance practices will be more environmentally responsible.…”