Corporate Governance Reform as Institutional Innovation: The Case of Japan

Abstract

T o address the convergence-divergence debate in corporate governance, we conduct a multiple-case, multiple-level study to analyze the diffusion of governance innovation in Japan. We argue that Japanese systems of corporate governance neither fully converge to, nor completely diverge from, the Anglo-American model. Rather, Sony-the pioneer of corporate governance reforms-and its followers selectively adopted features from this model, decoupled them from the original context, and tailored them to fit to their own situations to generate governance innovation. However, we find that the spread of innovation across firms and institutional levels is far from linear and straightforward, and that other well-regarded firms raised strong opposition to the institutionalization of corporate governance reforms. Eventually, the Ministry of Justice revised the Commercial Code to legitimize different systems, which led to the emergence of diverse corporate governance practices.Based on the results of our study, we construct an analytical framework to examine innovation diffusion in light of conflicting institutional pressures for change and continuity. Our analysis adds complexity to the convergence-divergence debate by identifying the creation of hybrid corporate governance systems and the nonlinear evolution of such systems as a result of interactions across multiple levels. We show the various degrees of decoupling from the Anglo-American model and identify the antecedents. We then extend the conventional focus of innovation research on diffusion across firms to examine diffusion across institutional levels. We also contribute to institutional theory by offering insights into organizational field formation and the conceptualization of the state in shaping institutional change and continuity.

Culture and Corporate Governance: The Influence of Language and Religion in Switzerland

“…The process of introducing these programs in Germany was different from that in America, as the local institutional context and the boundaries of Germanic welfare capitalism have been given due consideration. Similarly, Yoshikawa et al (2007) show that the introduction of some Anglo-American corporate governance practices in Japan was subjected to debate at firm and at institutional level, which resulted in Japanese firms adapting them to suit the limits of the country's context. Both of these case studies explain how governance practices evolve as hybrid systems, displaying elements of path dependence and convergence.…”

“…Doidge et al (2007) find that country characteristics explain the variation of a firm's governance better than firm characteristics can. The convergence process is hampered by factors at the firm level, but also at the institutional and the national level (Aguilera and Jackson 2003;Denis and McConnell 2003;Buck and Shahrim 2005;Yoshikawa et al 2007).…”

Wary managers: Unfavorable environments, perceived vulnerability, and the development of trust in foreign enterprises in China

“…Our field research took us on an ''iterative, cyclic learning journey'' (Edmondson & McManus, 2007: 1174. Nevertheless, we observed procedures that would enhance the validity and reliability of our research (Schweizer, 2005;Yoshikawa, Tsui-Auch, & McGuire, 2007). To enhance construct validity, we relied on the triangulation of the data with other sources whenever possible.…”

Governance Codes and Types of Issuer - An Empirical Research on a Global Sample

“…Insert Table 3 Table 4 shows that the four most frequent recommendations are the Anglo-Saxon shareholder-value model based key governance principles (Collier & Zaman, 2005;Yoshikawa et al 2007;Aguilera & Cuervo-Cazurra, 2009). 70 codes out of 72 include a recommendation about the board composition, 69 about the separation of CEO and Chair.…”