IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ant/wpaper/2009004.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Board independence, CEO duality and firm performance: A quantile regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • RAMDANI, Dendi
  • VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN, Arjen

Abstract

We study the effect of board independence and CEO duality on firm performance for a sample of stock-listed enterprises from Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand, applying Quantile Regression. Quantile Regression is more powerful than standard linear regression, as reflected in the Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression method, since Quantile Regression can produce estimates for all conditional quantiles of the distribution of a response variable, whereas OLS regression only estimates the conditional mean effects of a response variable. Moreover, Quantile Regression is better able to handle violations of the standard assumptions of normality, homoscedasticity and absence of outliers. Indeed, we find that the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance variables is different across the conditional quantiles of the distribution of firm performance, something OLS would leave unidentified. This finding suggests that estimating the quantile effect of a response variable can well be more insightful than estimating only the mean effect of this response variable, particularly so when the data violate assumptions required to perform OLS regression, as is often the case in corporate governance research.

Suggested Citation

  • RAMDANI, Dendi & VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN, Arjen, 2009. "Board independence, CEO duality and firm performance: A quantile regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand," Working Papers 2009004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ant:wpaper:2009004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repository.uantwerpen.be/docman/irua/62cede/f52924f7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ruth V. Aguilera & Igor Filatotchev & Howard Gospel & Gregory Jackson, 2008. "An Organizational Approach to Comparative Corporate Governance: Costs, Contingencies, and Complementarities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 475-492, June.
    2. Cornett, Marcia Millon & Marcus, Alan J. & Tehranian, Hassan, 2008. "Corporate governance and pay-for-performance: The impact of earnings management," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 357-373, February.
    3. Michael Rosholm & Helena Skyt Nielsen, 2001. "The public-private sector wage gap in Zambia in the 1990s: A quantile regression approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 169-182.
    4. Khaled Elsayed, 2007. "Does CEO Duality Really Affect Corporate Performance?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1203-1214, November.
    5. Daily, Catherine M. & Dalton, Dan R., 1992. "The relationship between governance structure and corporate performance in entrepreneurial firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 375-386, September.
    6. Geoffrey C. Kiel & Gavin J. Nicholson, 2003. "Board Composition and Corporate Performance: how the Australian experience informs contrasting theories of corporate governance," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 189-205, July.
    7. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-325, June.
    8. Omar Arias & Walter Sosa-Escudero & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Individual heterogeneity in the returns to schooling: instrumental variables quantile regression using twins data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 7-40.
    9. Angel López-Nicolás & Jaume García & Pedro J. Hernández, 2001. "How wide is the gap? An investigation of gender wage differences using quantile regression," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 149-167.
    10. Koenker, Roger W & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1978. "Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 33-50, January.
    11. José A. F. Machado & José Mata, 2001. "Earning functions in Portugal 1982-1994: Evidence from quantile regressions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 115-134.
    12. Brian K. Boyd, 1995. "CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 301-312.
    13. Raul A. Barreto & Anthony W. Hughes, 2004. "Under Performers and Over Achievers: A Quantile Regression Analysis of Growth," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(248), pages 17-35, March.
    14. Omar Al Farooque & Tony Van Zijl & Keitha Dunstan & AKM Waresul Karim, 2007. "Corporate Governance in Bangladesh: Link between Ownership and Financial Performance," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1453-1468, November.
    15. Demsetz, Harold, 1983. "The Structure of Ownership and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 375-390, June.
    16. Fama, Eugene F, 1980. "Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(2), pages 288-307, April.
    17. Pi, Lynn & Timme, Stephen G., 1993. "Corporate control and bank efficiency," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(2-3), pages 515-530, April.
    18. Saibal Ghosh, 2006. "Do board characteristics affect corporate performance? Firm-level evidence for India," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(7), pages 435-443.
    19. Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 2003. "Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: a survey of the economic literature," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, vol. 9(Apr), pages 7-26.
    20. Lex Donaldson & James H. Davis, 1994. "Boards and Company Performance ‐ Research Challenges the Conventional Wisdom," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(3), pages 151-160, July.
    21. Buchinsky, Moshe, 1994. "Changes in the U.S. Wage Structure 1963-1987: Application of Quantile Regression," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 405-458, March.
    22. Rajeev Goel & Rati Ram, 2004. "Quantile-regression estimates of cigarette demand elasticities for the United States," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 28(3), pages 413-421, September.
    23. Manning, Willard G. & Blumberg, Linda & Moulton, Lawrence H., 1995. "The demand for alcohol: The differential response to price," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 123-148, June.
    24. Moshe Buchinsky, 2001. "Quantile regression with sample selection: Estimating women's return to education in the U.S," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 87-113.
    25. Coles, Jeffrey L. & Daniel, Naveen D. & Naveen, Lalitha, 2008. "Boards: Does one size fit all," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 329-356, February.
    26. Rajeswararao S. Chaganti & Vijay Mahajan & Subhash Sharma, 1985. "Corporate Board Size, Composition And Corporate Failures In Retailing Industry[1]," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 400-417, July.
    27. Koenker, Roger & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1982. "Robust Tests for Heteroscedasticity Based on Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 43-61, January.
    28. 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.
    29. Rosenstein, Stuart & Wyatt, Jeffrey G., 1990. "Outside directors, board independence, and shareholder wealth," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 175-191, August.
    30. Cheung, Yan-Leung & Rau, P. Raghavendra & Stouraitis, Aris, 2006. "Tunneling, propping, and expropriation: evidence from connected party transactions in Hong Kong," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 343-386, November.
    31. Klein, April, 1998. "Firm Performance and Board Committee Structure," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 275-303, April.
    32. Gilbert W. Bassett Jr. & Hsiu-Lang Chen, 2001. "Portfolio style: Return-based attribution using quantile regression," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 293-305.
    33. Jason Abrevaya, 2001. "The effects of demographics and maternal behavior on the distribution of birth outcomes," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 247-257.
    34. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 8-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    35. Eduardo Pontual Ribeiro, 2001. "Asymmetric labor supply," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 183-197.
    36. Catherine M. Daily & Dan R. Dalton, 1993. "Board of Directors Leadership and Structure: Control and Performance Implications," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 17(3), pages 65-81, April.
    37. Dong‐Sung Cho & Jootae Kim, 2007. "Outside Directors, Ownership Structure and Firm Profitability in Korea," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 239-250, March.
    38. Bernard S. Black & Hasung Jang & Woochan Kim, 2006. "Does Corporate Governance Predict Firms' Market Values? Evidence from Korea," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 366-413, October.
    39. Roger Koenker & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Quantile Regression," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 143-156, Fall.
    40. Rajeev Goel & Edward Hsieh & Michael Nelson & Rati Ram, 2006. "Demand elasticities for Internet services," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(9), pages 975-980.
    41. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 08-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    42. Agrawal, Anup & Knoeber, Charles R., 1996. "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 377-397, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nirosha Hewa Wellalage & Stuart Locke, 2013. "Capital structure and its determinants in New Zealand firms," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 852-866, November.

    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. RAMDANI, Dendi & VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN, Arjen, 2009. "Board independence, CEO duality and firm performance: A quantile regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand," ACED Working Papers 2009003, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    2. Naeem Tabassum & Satwinder Singh, 2020. "Corporate Governance and Organisational Performance," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-48527-6, September.
    3. Afzalur Rashid, 2015. "Revisiting Agency Theory: Evidence of Board Independence and Agency Cost from Bangladesh," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 181-198, August.
    4. Aziz Jaafar & Lynn Hodgkinson & Mao-Feng Kao, 2019. "Ownership Structure, Board of Directors and Firm Performance: Evidence from Taiwan," Working Papers 19011, Bangor Business School, Prifysgol Bangor University (Cymru / Wales).
    5. Yuan George Shan, 2019. "Managerial ownership, board independence and firm performance," Accounting Research Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 32(2), pages 203-220, July.
    6. Hussein Abedi Shamsabadi & Byung-Seong Min & Richard Chung, 2016. "Corporate governance and dividend strategy: lessons from Australia," International Journal of Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(5), pages 583-610, October.
    7. Tulung, Joy Elly & Ramdani, Dendi, 2017. "Independence, Size and Performance of the Board an emerging market research," MPRA Paper 112180, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 12 Jan 2018.
    8. Le, Quyen & Vafaei, Alireza & Ahmed, Kamran & Kutubi, Shawgat, 2022. "Independent directors' reputation incentives and firm performance – an Australian perspective," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    9. Fidanoski, Filip & Mateska, Vesna & Simeonovski, Kiril, 2013. "Corporate Governance and Bank Performance: Evidence from Macedonia," MPRA Paper 46773, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Mar 2013.
    10. Isabel-María García-Sánchez, 2010. "The effectiveness of corporate governance: board structure and business technical efficiency in Spain," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 18(3), pages 311-339, September.
    11. Martin Kyere & Marcel Ausloos, 2021. "Corporate governance and firms financial performance in the United Kingdom," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 1871-1885, April.
    12. Panagiotis Staikouras & Christos Staikouras & Maria-Eleni Agoraki, 2007. "The effect of board size and composition on European bank performance," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-27, February.
    13. Phillip C. James, 2020. "Understanding the Impact of Board Structure on Firm Performance: AComprehensive Literature Review," International Journal of Business and Social Research, LAR Center Press, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, January.
    14. Volonté, Christophe, 2015. "Boards: Independent and committed directors?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 25-37.
    15. Phillip C. James, 2020. "Understanding the Impact of Board Structure on Firm Performance: AComprehensive Literature Review," International Journal of Business and Social Research, MIR Center for Socio-Economic Research, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, January.
    16. Mukesh Nepal & Rajat Deb, 2022. "Board Characteristics and Firm Performance: Indian Textiles Sector Panorama," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 47(1), pages 74-96, February.
    17. Nicola Moscariello & Michele Pizzo & Dmytro Govorun & Alexander Kostyuk, 2019. "Independent minority directors and firm value in a principal–principal agency setting: evidence from Italy," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(1), pages 165-194, March.
    18. James, Hui Liang & Borah, Nilakshi & Lirely, Roger, 2022. "The effectiveness of board independence in high-discretion firms," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 103-117.
    19. Chenglong Zheng & Roy Kouwenberg, 2019. "A Bibliometric Review of Global Research on Corporate Governance and Board Attributes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-25, June.
    20. Khalifa, Maha & Othman, Hakim Ben & Hussainey, Khaled, 2018. "The effect of ex ante and ex post conservatism on the cost of equity capital: A quantile regression approach for MENA countries," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 239-255.

    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:ant:wpaper:2009004. 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: Joeri Nys (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ftufsbe.html .

    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.