IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/worbus/v38y2003i4p348-360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do outside directors and new managers help improve firm performance? An exploratory study in Russian privatization

Author

Listed:
  • Peng, Mike W.
  • Buck, Trevor
  • Filatotchev, Igor

Abstract

In the context of privatization and restructuring in Russia, we test two standard agency theory hypotheses, namely, (1) outside board members and (2) new managers are positively related to firm performance. Based on a survey of 314 privatized firms, the evidence offers little support for the hypotheses. Historically, results refuting theories have been launch pads for scientific progress. Our findings, therefore, raise interesting questions about whether the underlying theory is appropriate, whether there are methodological problems, or whether there are institutional factors in Russia's transition economy that need to be accounted for when we test agency theory in a new setting. We address these questions and discuss their implications for corporate governance theory, practice, and public policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng, Mike W. & Buck, Trevor & Filatotchev, Igor, 2003. "Do outside directors and new managers help improve firm performance? An exploratory study in Russian privatization," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 348-360, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:worbus:v:38:y:2003:i:4:p:348-360
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951603000543
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saul Estrin, 2002. "Competition and Corporate Governance in Transition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 101-124, Winter.
    2. Simeon Djankov & Peter Murrell, 2002. "Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: A Quantitative Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 739-792, September.
    3. Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 1988. "The Determinants of Board Composition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(4), pages 589-606, Winter.
    4. Jeffry M. Netter & William L. Megginson, 2001. "From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 321-389, June.
    5. Meyer, Klaus E., 2002. "Management challenges in privatization acquisitions in transition economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 266-276, January.
    6. Mike W. Peng, 2004. "Outside directors and firm performance during institutional transitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 453-471, May.
    7. Jan Svejnar, 2002. "Transition Economies: Performance and Challenges," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 3-28, Winter.
    8. Roman Frydman & Cheryl Gray & Marek Hessel & Andrzej Rapaczynski, 1999. "When Does Privatization Work? The Impact of Private Ownership on Corporate Performance in the Transition Economies," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(4), pages 1153-1191.
    9. Barberis, Nicholas & Maxim Boycko & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1996. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 764-790, August.
    10. Trevor, Igor, Mike Buck Filatotchev Wright, 1998. "Agents, Stakeholders and Corporate Governance in Russian Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 81-104, January.
    11. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    12. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-746, August.
    13. Sergei Aukutsionek, 1997. "Measuring progress towards a Market economy," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 141-172.
    14. Edward J. Zajac & James D. Westphal, 1994. "The Costs and Benefits of Managerial Incentives and Monitoring in Large U.S. Corporations: When is More not Better?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 121-142, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhaumik, Sumon Kumar & Estrin, Saul, 2007. "How transition paths differ: Enterprise performance in Russia and China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 374-392, March.
    2. Sumon Bhaumik & Saul Estrin, 2003. "Why Transition Paths Differ: Russian and Chinese Enterprise Performance Compared," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 525, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    3. Ichiro Iwasaki, 2007. "Enterprise Reform And Corporate Governance In Russia: A Quantitative Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(5), pages 849-902, December.
    4. Saul Estrin & Jan Hanousek & Evzen Kocenda & Jan Svejnar, 2009. "The Effects of Privatization and Ownership in Transition Economies," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(3), pages 699-728, September.
    5. Asaftei, Gabriel & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2010. "Market power, EU integration and privatization: The case of Romania," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 340-356, September.
    6. Peter F. Orazem & Milan Vodopivec, 2009. "Do Market Pressures Induce Economic Efficiency? The Case of Slovenian Manufacturing, 1994–2001," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(2), pages 553-576, October.
    7. Trien Le & Amon Chizema, 2011. "State ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the Chinese listed firms," Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, Faculty of Economics, Vilnius University, vol. 2(2).
    8. Filatotchev, Igor & Wright, Mike & Uhlenbruck, Klaus & Tihanyi, Laszlo & Hoskisson, Robert E., 2003. "Governance, organizational capabilities, and restructuring in transition economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 331-347, November.
    9. Zorica Kalezić, 2015. "Ownership Concentration and Firm Performance in Transition Economies: Evidence from Montenegro," Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, Central bank of Montenegro, vol. 4(3), pages 5-64.
    10. Eskil Goldeng & Leo A. Grünfeld & Gabriel R. G. Benito, 2008. "The Performance Differential between Private and State Owned Enterprises: The Roles of Ownership, Management and Market Structure," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(7), pages 1244-1273, November.
    11. Polona Domadenik & Janez Pra??nikar & Jan Svejnar, 2003. "Defensive and Strategic Restructuring of Firms during the Transition to a Market Economy," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 541, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    12. Trien Le & Trevor Buck, 2011. "State ownership and listed firm performance: a universally negative governance relationship?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 15(2), pages 227-248, May.
    13. Trien Vinh Le & Jonathan P. O'Brien, 2010. "Can Two Wrongs Make a Right? State Ownership and Debt in a Transition Economy," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(7), pages 1297-1316, November.
    14. Lu, Susan Feng & Dranove, David, 2013. "Profiting from gaizhi: Management buyouts during China’s privatization," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 634-650.
    15. Chen, Ruiyuan & El Ghoul, Sadok & Guedhami, Omrane & Wang, He, 2017. "Do state and foreign ownership affect investment efficiency? Evidence from privatizations," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 408-421.
    16. Jan Hanousek & Ev??en Ko?enda & Jan Svejnar, 2004. "Ownership, Control and Corporate Performance After Large-Scale Privatization," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2004-652, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    17. Gupta, Nandini & Ham, Jhon C. & Svejnar, Jan, 2008. "Priorities and sequencing in privatization: Evidence from Czech firm panel data," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 183-208, February.
    18. Klara Sabirianova Peter & Jan Svejnar & Katherine Terrell, 2012. "Foreign Investment, Corporate Ownership, and Development: Are Firms in Emerging Markets Catching Up to the World Standard?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(4), pages 981-999, November.
    19. Svejnar, Jan & Hagemejer, Jan & Tyrowicz, Joanna, 2018. "Are Rushed Privatizations Substandard? Analyzing Firm-level Privatization under Fiscal Pressure," CEPR Discussion Papers 12991, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Li, Hongbin & Rozelle, Scott, 2004. "Insider privatization with a tail: the screening contract and performance of privatized firms in rural China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 1-26, October.

    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:eee:worbus:v:38:y:2003:i:4:p:348-360. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620401/description#description .

    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.