IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/corgov/v5y1997i4p214-223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of the Cadbury Code on Selection of Directors and Board Composition in UK Newly‐quoted Companies, 1990–1994

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Doble

Abstract

The publication in the UK of the Cadbury Report and its associated Code of Best Practice focused attention on the conduct and structure of boards in large companies. The Code suggested that greater financial accountability would be facilitated by increasing the number of non‐executive directors, creating new sub‐committees and ensuring that the power of the chair is limited. Surveys amongst FT100 companies show that their compliance with the Cadbury Code has been rapid and virtually complete (Bostock [1995], Cadbury [1995]); less attention has been paid to the compliance of small and medium‐sized companies. The approach that is taken in this survey is to investigate the board structures chosen by these enterprises as they prepare for stock market listing. Companies are prepared for market with the advice of professional advisors who it is assumed have a reputational interest in the success of the issue; therefore, they advance corporate governance structures that satisfy potential investors’ expectations. Such companies are making their boards anew and should represent best‐practice. This paper examines whether current practice in small and medium‐sized companies conforms to the prescribed model for UK boards. It is concluded that the Cadbury Code is not the only model for emergent small to medium sized companies and that the market does not value its adoption in all cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Doble, 1997. "The Impact of the Cadbury Code on Selection of Directors and Board Composition in UK Newly‐quoted Companies, 1990–1994," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(4), pages 214-223, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:5:y:1997:i:4:p:214-223
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8683.00063
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8683.00063
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8683.00063?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:5:y:1997:i:4:p:214-223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0964-8410&site=1 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.