Self Enforced Mechanisms of Corporate Governance: Evidence from Managerial Turnover in Russia
AbstractManagerial entrenchment, an undeveloped market for top managerial labor force and the absence of clear market signals could prevent owners from firing management for poor performance. Top managerial turnover could improve firms’ performance by introducing new human capital and providing good incentives for a new manager if the previous CEO has been fired for poor performance. We evaluate the effectiveness of selfenforced corporate governance mechanisms by determining the causes of top management turnover and estimating consequences of management turnover on the subsequent corporate performance. We track all turnovers of CEO’s in the 110 largest Russian companies during a five year period (from 1997 to 2001) and classify each case of turnover according to the new position of the prior CEO and the origin of the new director.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR) in its series Working Papers with number w0051.
Length: 18 pages
Date of creation: Oct 2005
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 117418 Russia, Moscow, Nakhimovsky pr., 47, office 720
Phone: +7 (495) 105 50 02
Fax: +7 (495) 105 50 03
Web page: http://www.cefir.ru
More information through EDIRC
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2006-07-09 (All new papers)
- NEP-CIS-2006-07-09 (Confederation of Independent States)
- NEP-TRA-2006-07-09 (Transition Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Steven N Kaplan, 1994.
"Top Executives, Turnover and Firm Performance in Germany,"
CEPR Financial Markets Paper
0045, European Science Foundation Network in Financial Markets, c/o C.E.P.R, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
- Kaplan, Steven N, 1994. "Top Executives, Turnover, and Firm Performance in Germany," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 142-59, April.
- Steven N. Kaplan, 1993. "Top Executives, Turnover and Firm Performance in Germany," NBER Working Papers 4416, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- 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 764-90, August.
- Barberis, Nicholas & Boycko, Maxim & Shleifer, Andrei & Tsukanova, Natalia, 1996. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," Scholarly Articles 3451306, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Nicholas Barberis & Maxim Boycko & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1995. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," NBER Working Papers 5136, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Nicolas Barberis & Maxin Boycho & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1995. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1721, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Frederic Warzynski, 2000. "The Causes and Consequences of Managerial Change in Ukraine and the Complementarity of Reforms," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1743, Econometric Society.
- Groves, Theodore & Yongmiao Hong & John McMillan & Barry Naughton, 1995. "China's Evolving Managerial Labor Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 873-92, August.
- Kaplan, Steven N, 1994. "Top Executive Rewards and Firm Performance: A Comparison of Japan and the United States," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(3), pages 510-46, June.
- Weisbach, Michael S., 1988. "Outside directors and CEO turnover," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 431-460, January.
- Warner, Jerold B. & Watts, Ross L. & Wruck, Karen H., 1988. "Stock prices and top management changes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 461-492, January.
- Khanna, Naveen & Poulsen, Annette B, 1995. " Managers of Financially Distressed Firms: Villains or Scapegoats?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(3), pages 919-40, July.
- Claessens, Stijn & Djankov, Simeon, 1999. "Enterprise performance and management turnover in the Czech Republic," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 1115-1124, April.
- Yermack, David, 1996. "Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 185-211, February.
- Muravyev, Alexander & Bilyk, Olga & Grechaniuk, Bogdana, 2009.
"Firm Performance and Managerial Turnover: The Case of Ukraine,"
13685, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Muravyev, Alexander & Talavera, Oleksandr & Bilyk, Olga & Grechaniuk, Bogdana, 2009. "Firm Performance and Managerial Turnover: The Case of Ukraine," IZA Discussion Papers 4372, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Berezinets, Irina & Ilina, Yulia & Muravyev, Alexander, 2011. "CEO and Board Characteristics as Determinants of Private Benefits of Control: Evidence from the Russian Stock Exchange," IZA Discussion Papers 6256, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Julia Babich).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.