Corporate governance and life cycles in emerging markets

Esqueda, Omar A.; O’Connor, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.ribaf.2019.101077

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These authors compare the corporate governance performance with the life cycle of the organization and also tested other variables. The result of this study is consistent with the study conducted by Esqueda and O'Connor (2020), where it is stated that the life cycle approach is not a good predictor of corporate governance quality and corporate governance may vary depending upon the specific organizational conditions. Furthermore, result of this study contradicts with the study conducted by Loderer et al (2012), Filatotchev et al (2006 Note: HSD = honestly significant difference level, their BOD and related committees are not entirely effective.…”

Section: Measurement Of Maturity Levelssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Further to the above, one of the purposes of this study is to identify that CGM differs among different sectors or not. For the consistency and relevancy of result, this study's result is compared with the studies conducted by Esqueda and O'Connor (2020), Loderer, et al (2012), Filatotchev et al (2006) and O'Connor and Byrne (2015. These authors compare the corporate governance performance with the life cycle of the organization and also tested other variables.…”

Section: Measurement Of Maturity Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is corporate governance maturity measurable?

Rehman

Hashim

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to intend toward the measurement of corporate governance to identify its maturity levels within Omani public listed companies and also propose to identify whether corporate governance maturity (CGM) levels vary significantly between sectors or not. CGM is an innovation in the field of corporate governance, which assists organizations in achieving their objectives and satisfying shareholders. Design/methodology/approach This study used descriptive cross-sectional survey design. Data are collected by the internet-based tool and analyzed via SPSS. Findings This study found that corporate governance is measurable and can be measured to the levels of maturity. Moreover, this study identified that CGM does not differ among different sectors. From a total of 107 organizations, none of the organizations falls under the forming level and mature level. However, majority of organizations falls under normalized level followed by developing and established levels of maturity. Practical implications This study integrates significant empirical research and literature to broaden the potentials of CGM. This study provides a framework along with a calculation tool, which can be used by organizations, regulators and policymakers. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the maturity levels of Omani organizations are never being measured before. Moreover, past studies demonstrate single constituent relationship with CGM and not all four. Therefore, this study is distinctive from others by testing all four major components or constituents toward CGM.

show abstract

Section: Measurement Of Maturity Levelssupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Measurement Of Maturity Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is corporate governance maturity measurable?

Rehman

Hashim

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The research findings of Esqueda and O’Connor (2020) suggest that firms improve corporate governance to reduce agency costs and increase value. The investigation of the relationship between corporate governance and performance should incorporate other contextual factors such as investment opportunities that a firm has (Hutchinson and Gul, 2004).…”

Section: Study Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Audit committee versus other governance mechanisms and the effect of investment opportunities: evidence from Palestine

Abdeljawad

Oweidat

Saleh

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to explore how the presence of an audit committee is associated with other corporate governance mechanisms, i.e. board structure, ownership structure and quality of external audit. The present study evaluated whether the presence of the audit committee complements or substitutes other governance mechanisms in Palestinian companies. Moreover, the effect of investment opportunities on the relationship between the formation of the audit committee and the quality of the auditor was addressed. Design/methodology/approach The association between the formation of the audit committee and other governance variables was modelled as a binary logistic model. The sample comprising 44 firms listed on Palestine exchange for the period between 2013 and 2017, amounting to 220 firm-year observations. Findings Based on the investigation, the results have indicated that board independence, the distinction between the chairman and chief executive officer function, ownership concentration and audit quality enhance the chance of audit committee formation, implying complementary effect. Contrastingly, board size and board ownership serve as a substitute to audit committee formation. It has also been found that investment opportunities act as an effective moderating factor that strengthens the relationship between audit quality and the formation of the audit committee. Originality/value The study provides valuable insight into the interaction between multiple corporate governance mechanisms within the economy of Palestine where the external uncertainty is high and investment opportunities are constrained by the decisions of the occupying authority. The findings may help regulators and policymakers in Palestine alongside those of other countries with similar environmental features to revise and update their corporate governance codes to ensure that the best control can be achieved, subsequently attracting more foreign and domestic investments.

show abstract

“…And the number of Independent directors doesn't encourage performance [13]. Not internal drivers stimulate Corporate governance changes, but also external factors like the level of stock exchange listing [14].…”

Section: Ownership Separation From Control Link With Board Of Directors Life Cycle and Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate governance in connection with performance and digital

Dimitriev¹,

Красильникова

2020

SHS Web of Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article concerned issues, related to the characteristics of Corporate governance and performance. The characteristics of Corporate governance are pervasive: ownership structure, separation from control, Board of directors, protection of rights. For Russian companies traditional organizational characteristics of life cycle stages are not decisive. Currently there is a tendency for owners to get out from management and focus on social, environmental results. The ownership of private insiders is the highest at the stage of formation, and the foreign ownership rises at the stage of growth. Based on the model was estimated significant positive impact of companies’ age on an increase in property rights, ownership and control, protecting minority investors encourages R&D. Results of estimation of 62 countries in 2020 represented significant positive relation Technology factors: adaptive attitudes, business agility, IT integration with performance and Corporate governance. An increase in digital is associated with a higher quality of Corporate governance.

show abstract

Corporate governance and life cycles in emerging markets

Cited by 30 publications

References 55 publications

Is corporate governance maturity measurable?

Is corporate governance maturity measurable?

Audit committee versus other governance mechanisms and the effect of investment opportunities: evidence from Palestine

Corporate governance in connection with performance and digital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About