Corporate governance and firm performance: does sovereign rating matter?

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the impact of sovereign rating and corporate governance on performance of Latin American companies between 2004 and 2018. Design/methodology/approach This study performed a multilevel regression with fixed and random coefficients for 823 companies and verified the impacts of country, firm and time levels on the performance variation. The study alternated return on assets and Tobin’ Q as dependent variables and measured governance using the following variables: board size, chief executive officer/chairman duality, CEO/board member duality, dummy for the chairman as a former CEO, audit committee, independence and expertise of the audit committee. Findings Latin American companies performed better when their respective countries have a better sovereign rating and when they adopt better board of directors and audit committee mechanisms. Sovereign rating assumes distinct roles depending on the presence or absence of governance variables. Rating and governance may be substitute mechanisms to protect investors. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to investigate the impacts of sovereign rating on firm performance in the Latin American scenario. The use of governance metrics – for example, the audit committee expertise and the dummy for chairman as a former CEO – is innovative in Latin American studies.

Environmental, social and governance impact on financial performance: evidence from the Levant countries

“…Many recent studies have highlighted the importance of corporate governance in improving company performance (Erena et al , 2021; Jesuka and Peixoto, 2021). Wasara and Ganda (2019) argue that social disclosure positively affects the return on investment in Johannesburg-listed mining companies, which improves the financial performance of the companies.…”

Corporate governance, CEO compensation, and corporate performance: evidence from India

“…The second category of the independent variable is corporate performance (CP), measured through return on equity (Kohli, 2018; Leyva-Townsend et al , 2021). The control variables include firm size (Jiang et al , 2009; Thompson and Adasi Manu, 2021; Farooq et al , 2022), firm age (Conyon and He, 2012; Abang’a et al , 2022), leverage (Khan, 2022; Wang, 2022) and risk (Kohli and Gill, 2019; Jesuka and Peixoto, 2022). Further, the industry and year dummies were also included to capture industry and year effects.…”

An empirical investigation of firm performance through corporate governance and information technology investment with mediating role of corporate social responsibility: Evidence from Saudi Arabia telecommunication sector

“…It is not commonly acknowledged, despite the fact that there have been several researches that suggest a weakly positive correlation between the two. In addition, there is not nearly enough study done on how CSR could improve the performance of corporations ( Jesuka and Peixoto, 2022 ). It is evident that businesses are faced with a changing environment; however, there is a lack of coordination between the findings of previous research and those of the most recent research.…”

“…It was believed that the number of board members and the people who served on the various committees were key factors in determining a company’s level of success. According to the Resource Dependency Theory, it is essential for directors to serve on the boards of other organizations to create ties and acquire access to resources in the form of relevant knowledge ( Jesuka and Peixoto, 2022 ). This is because serving on the boards of other organizations gives directors access to a larger pool of potential resource providers.…”