2017
DOI: 10.1080/1226508x.2017.1374197
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effect of Interlocking Directors Network on Firm Value and Performance: Evidence from Korean-Listed Firms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
1
14
1
Order By: Relevance
“…So that a phenomenon that occurs in Indonesia, the directors who perform interlock produces an average of the high performance of the company. Therefore, this research does not match Roudaki and Bhuiyan (2015) and Nam and An (2018) with the result that interlock the company and director of a significant negative effect on the performance of the company.…”
Section: Model Regression With Dummy Variablescontrasting
confidence: 60%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…So that a phenomenon that occurs in Indonesia, the directors who perform interlock produces an average of the high performance of the company. Therefore, this research does not match Roudaki and Bhuiyan (2015) and Nam and An (2018) with the result that interlock the company and director of a significant negative effect on the performance of the company.…”
Section: Model Regression With Dummy Variablescontrasting
confidence: 60%
“…It was submitted Roudaki and Bhuiyan (2015) that the board of directors will be less attention to the occupied or to prefer other council in the use of time and eventually cause performance degradation on any one company. Research result Non and Franses (2007), Kaczmarek et al (2012) Roudaki and Bhuiyan (2015), and Nam and An (2018) showed negative results between the interlock on the performance of the company.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…However, personal bonds between companies can also have a negative effect on company performance (Croci & Grassi, 2014). Wellconnected directors can pursue opportunistic behavior (Fich, 2005;Nam & An, 2018;Perry & Peyer, 2005;Rosenstein & Wyatt, 1994) or may need to limit time and resources dedicated to the performance of their duties in each company (Core, Holthausen, & Larcker, 1999;Ferris, Jagannathan, & Pritchard, 2003;Fich & White, 2003;Hallock, 1997). The appointment of directors who are too busy to operate effectively usually translates into weaker control of management, lower company profitability, and limited performance sensitivity (Fich & Shivdasani, 2006).…”
Section: Ceo Network and Firm Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In all test models, we use a panel data analysis with fixed effects. Given that heterogeneity exists between corporate governance variables such as ownership structure, industry-year clustering effects should be adjusted (Nam and An, 2018).…”
Section: 21mentioning
confidence: 99%