IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/ijmfpp/v6y2010i3p190-219.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The efficacy of principle-based corporate governance practices and firm financial performance: An empirical investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Krishna Reddy
  • Stuart Locke
  • Frank Scrimgeour

Abstract

Purpose - This paper seeks to address the effect that principle-based corporate governance practices have on the financial performance of large publicly-listed companies. In 2004, the New Zealand Securities Commission (NZSC) promulgated nine high level principles and guidelines for all business entities with an aim of improving corporate governance practices and boosting investor confidence in the New Zealand capital market. This event provides a point for empirically testing companies' responses. Design/methodology/approach - Panel data for the NZX top 50 companies over the period 1999-2007 are analysed using ordinary least squares (OLS) and two stage least squares (2SLS) regression techniques to evaluate whether: those firms that were continuously compliant with the NZSC requirements perform better; and the firm performance post-NZSC recommendations is better than pre-NZSC recommendations. Tobin's Findings - The findings indicate that large listed companies have universally adopted the Securities Commission recommendations, establishing subcommittees for audit and remuneration, and having a majority of non-executive/independent directors on the board which, on average, have seven members. There is support for the view that the NZSC recommendations have had positive influence on firm performance measured by Tobin's Research limitations/implications - This study provides empirical support for the corporate governance recommendations made by the NZSC in 2004, giving support to the principle-based corporate governance practices to be adopted in New Zealand. The sequential testing of each NZSC recommendation provides a comprehensive picture of performance outcomes which has not been achieved in prior research. The interdependency issues are of interest and the correlation between recommendations provides useful insights. Originality/value - This study offers insights for policy makers interested in adopting principle-based corporate governance practices within their country. Within New Zealand, public policy developments and stock exchange listing requirements/regulatory issues with associated compliance burdens are better informed as a consequence of the research.

Suggested Citation

  • Krishna Reddy & Stuart Locke & Frank Scrimgeour, 2010. "The efficacy of principle-based corporate governance practices and firm financial performance: An empirical investigation," International Journal of Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 6(3), pages 190-219, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:ijmfpp:v:6:y:2010:i:3:p:190-219
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/17439131011056224?utm_campaign=RePEc&WT.mc_id=RePEc
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    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. Agrawal, Anup & Mandelker, Gershon N., 1990. "Large Shareholders and the Monitoring of Managers: The Case of Antitakeover Charter Amendments," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(02), pages 143-161, June.
    2. repec:hrv:faseco:30747191 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:hrv:faseco:30728046 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Himmelberg, Charles P. & Hubbard, R. Glenn & Palia, Darius, 1999. "Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 353-384, September.
    5. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    6. Shleifer, Andrei & Wolfenzon, Daniel, 2002. "Investor protection and equity markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 3-27, October.
    7. Eliezer M. Fich & Anil Shivdasani, 2006. "Are Busy Boards Effective Monitors?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(2), pages 689-724, April.
    8. Morck, Randall & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1988. "Management ownership and market valuation," Scholarly Articles 29407535, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    9. Mehran, Hamid, 1995. "Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 163-184, June.
    10. Panayotis Kapopoulos & Sophia Lazaretou, 2007. "Corporate Ownership Structure and Firm Performance: evidence from Greek firms," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 144-158, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Demsetz, Harold, 1979. "Accounting for Advertising as a Barrier to Entry," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(3), pages 345-360, July.
    13. Claudio Loderer & Urs Peyer, 2002. "Board Overlap, Seat Accumulation and Share Prices," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 8(2), pages 165-192.
    14. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1997. " A Survey of Corporate Governance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(2), pages 737-783, June.
    15. McConnell, John J. & Servaes, Henri, 1990. "Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 595-612, October.
    16. Denis, Diane K. & McConnell, John J., 2003. "International Corporate Governance," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(01), pages 1-36, March.
    17. Mak, Y.T. & Kusnadi, Yuanto, 2005. "Size really matters: Further evidence on the negative relationship between board size and firm value," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 301-318, June.
    18. Rafael La porta & Florencio Lopez-De-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2002. "Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(3), pages 1147-1170, June.
    19. Demsetz, Harold & Lehn, Kenneth, 1985. "The Structure of Corporate Ownership: Causes and Consequences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(6), pages 1155-1177, December.
    20. Jorge Farinha, 2003. "Dividend Policy, Corporate Governance and the Managerial Entrenchment Hypothesis: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(9-10), pages 1173-1209.
    21. 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.
    22. 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(03), pages 377-397, September.
    23. 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.
    24. Begley, Joy & Feltham, Gerald A., 1999. "An empirical examination of the relation between debt contracts and management incentives," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 229-259, April.
    25. Demsetz, Harold & Villalonga, Belen, 2001. "Ownership structure and corporate performance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 209-233, September.
    26. Alfred Yawson, 2006. "Evaluating the Characteristics of Corporate Boards Associated with Layoff Decisions," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 75-84, March.
    27. Morck, Randall & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1988. "Management ownership and market valuation : An empirical analysis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 293-315, January.
    28. 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.
    29. Charlie Weir & David Laing, 2000. "The Performance-Governance Relationship: The Effects of Cadbury Compliance on UK Quoted Companies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 4(4), pages 265-281, December.
    30. Easterbrook, Frank H, 1984. "Two Agency-Cost Explanations of Dividends," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(4), pages 650-659, September.
    31. Clifford G. Holderness & Randall S. Kroszner & Dennis P. Sheehan, 1999. "Were the Good Old Days That Good? Changes in Managerial Stock Ownership Since the Great Depression," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(2), pages 435-469, April.
    32. Krishna Reddy & Stuart Locke & Frank Scrimgeour & Abeyratna Gunasekarage, 2008. "Corporate governance practices of small cap companies and their financial performance: an empirical study in New Zealand," International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(1), pages 51-78.
    33. 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.
    34. David Seidl, 2006. "Regulating organizations through codes of corporate governance," Working Papers wp338, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    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. Ji, Xu (Jane) & Boyle, Glenn, 2011. "New Zealand Corporate Boards in Transition: Composition, Activity and Incentives Between 1995 and 2010," Working Paper Series 4105, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    2. Arunima Haldar & S. V. D. Nageswara Rao & Kirankumar S. Momaya, 2016. "Can Flexibility in Corporate Governance Enhance International Competitiveness? Evidence from Knowledge-Based Industries in India," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 17(4), pages 389-402, December.
    3. Tariq, Yasir Bin & Abbas, Zaheer, 2013. "Compliance and multidimensional firm performance: Evaluating the efficacy of rule-based code of corporate governance," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 565-575.
    4. Yasser, Qaiser Rafique & Mamun, Abdullah Al, 2014. "Implications of Ownership Identity and Insider's Supermacy on the Economic Performance of the Liste Companies," MPRA Paper 61426, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Nguyen, Tuan & Locke, Stuart & Reddy, Krishna, 2014. "A dynamic estimation of governance structures and financial performance for Singaporean companies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1-11.

    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:eme:ijmfpp:v:6:y:2010:i:3:p:190-219. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman). General contact details of provider: http://www.emeraldinsight.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.