Reflections on the generalization of agency theory: Cross-cultural considerations

Johnson, Nancy Brown; Droege, Scott B.

doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.06.003

Cited by 45 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, we consider characteristics of agency relationships distinct from ''deliberate managerial malfeasance that drives the literature's usual framing of agency problems" (DeAngelo et al, 2008, p. 122). We posit that the social normative nature of culture significantly alters the character of agency relations (Ekanayake, 2004;Johnson and Droege, 2004) and determines the acceptance and legitimacy of different dividend payout strategies 0147-5967/$ -see front matter Ó 2010 Association for Comparative Economic Studies All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jce.2010.04.002 ure and severity of agency conflicts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture, agency costs, and dividends

Fidrmuc

Jacob

2010

Journal of Comparative Economics

153

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture, agency costs, and dividends

Fidrmuc

Jacob

2010

Journal of Comparative Economics

153

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Because shareholders cannot supervise the managers' performance in detail, problems may arise in the form of hidden information and hidden actions for the sake of personal interest that could have adverse impact on the principal. In addition, managers sometimes have more information than shareholders (asymmetry of information) (Johnson and Droege, 2004). Shleifer and Vishny (1997) and Young et al (2008) stated that there are two possible potential agency issues related to ownership, i.e.…”

Section: Agency Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ownership Structure and Company's Risk Taking Behaviour

Langit¹,

Adhariani²

2017

Proceedings of the International Conference on Business and Management Research (ICBMR-17)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to determine the effect of ownership structure on risk-taking behaviour among the companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in the period 2013 to 2015 with a total of 390 firm observations. Companies' risk-taking is measured through income volatility over five years. There are two types of corporate ownership structures investigated in this study: family ownership and foreign ownership. By using fixed effect panel regression, the results showed that both ownership structures have a significant negative effect upon the company's risk taking behaviour, which implies that family and foreign ownership can function effectively to mitigate excessive risk-taking behaviour in a company. Type of paper: Empirical

show abstract

“…Notwithstanding its influence, scholars have largely applied agency theory in ways that portray it as, to borrow the words of Dallas Cullen, 'ahistorical, universal and unchanging' (1994: 128). With the aim to address the latent universality present in the ways in which agency theory has been thus far deployed, Johnson and Droege (2004) contend that cross-cultural differences mitigate the theory's central assertions. Indeed, as they state, '[i]n some non-Western cultures, the group supersedes individual welfare; superiors are obeyed regardless of their credibility; sensitivity to risk runs high; and relationships trump material gains ' (325-326).…”

Section: Foucault and Cross-cultural Management Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contesting Hegemony through Genealogy

Prasad

2009

Int'l Jnl of Cross Cultural Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of organizational theory emanating from the field of management studies has been predicated on the Westocentric assumption of universality and has, therefore, been bereft of cultural contextualization. This is problematic insofar as such theories negate the lived realities of many non-Western peoples, particularly those who constitute members of systematically oppressed classes. With the aim to subvert the ethnocentric foundation upon which organizational studies has been traditionally grounded, this article illuminates the utility of Foucauldian thought on cross-cultural management research. It contends that Foucault's concept of genealogy can potentially serve as a theoretical purveyor from which to destabilize the myth of universality in organizational studies, and to contest the epistemological hegemony that has been afforded to Western organizational analysis. Finally, it concludes that the conscientious deployment of Foucauldian genealogy can discursively open up a multiplicity of perspectives in understanding cross-cultural organizational life. key words • cross-cultural research • ethnocentric bias • Foucault • organization studies CCM International Journal of Cross Cultural ManagementBy comparison, then, and in contrast to the various projects which aim to inscribe knowledges in the hierarchical order of power associated with science, a genealogy should be seen as a kind of attempt to emancipate historical knowledges from [the subjugated] subject, to render them, that is, capable of opposition and of struggle against the coercion of a theoretical, unitary, formal and scientific discourse. (Foucault, 1980: 85)

show abstract

Reflections on the generalization of agency theory: Cross-cultural considerations

Cited by 45 publications

References 43 publications

Culture, agency costs, and dividends

Culture, agency costs, and dividends

Ownership Structure and Company's Risk Taking Behaviour

Contesting Hegemony through Genealogy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About