2008
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1108860
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Peer Effects in Corporate Governance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
31
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
3
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Model (1) shows the first‐stage regression results. The country‐industry‐median ISS41 index is highly positive and significant, implying that it significantly explains firm‐level governance, consistent with the findings in John and Kadyrzhanova (). Models (2) and (3) show the second‐stage regression with the dividends‐to‐total‐assets ratio as the dependent variable.…”
Section: Robustness Testssupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Model (1) shows the first‐stage regression results. The country‐industry‐median ISS41 index is highly positive and significant, implying that it significantly explains firm‐level governance, consistent with the findings in John and Kadyrzhanova (). Models (2) and (3) show the second‐stage regression with the dividends‐to‐total‐assets ratio as the dependent variable.…”
Section: Robustness Testssupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Peer effects in corporate practices have been extensively investigated for their role in corporate governance (Gillan et al, 2004;John & Kadyrzhanova, 2008), corporate ecological responsiveness (Bansal & Roth, 2000), and corporate disclosure of climate change and environmental information (Reid & Toffel, 2009;Zeng et al, 2012). More specifically, organizations look to the strategic choices of their industrial peers in deciding whether to disclose environmental information (Zeng et al, 2012).…”
Section: Community Institutional Logicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Acquisitions involving bidders and targets in markets located farther apart are more likely to result in substantial restructuring (Alessandrini et al, 2008). Other studies examine location in relation to payout precommitment (John et al, 2011), board structure , regional peer effects in governance (John and Kadyrzhanova, 2008), local advantage in muni underwriting (Butler, 2008), and the role of geographic dispersion for employee relations (Landier et al, 2009).…”
Section: Geography and Bank Lendingmentioning
confidence: 99%