Corporate governance mechanisms, accounting results and stock valuation in Canada
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between corporate governance practices or mechanisms and firm value, as measured by accounting and market data. Design/methodology/approach – Partial least square analyses were performed on a sample of 355 observations from 199 Canadian listed companies. The greater variability allowed under the Canadian principles-based institutional setting than under the rules-based USA SOX environment is well-suited for these tests. Findings – Results suggest that some governance practices, namely the percentage of independent directors on the board, the use of stock options and the frequency of board meetings are significantly and negatively related to the firm's net book value or income. However, most individual governance practices appear to have no significant impact on the firms’ market value. Research limitations/implications – The potential interrelationships between corporate governance practices and contextual variables are not specifically taken into account, except for the firms’ industrial sector. It is also possible that certain governance mechanisms jointly impact firm value. Practical implications – This study does not support the current emphasis by regulators on governance practices which mainly concern the monitoring function of the board as opposed to its strategic one. Originality/value – The paper uses Canada as a laboratory where companies are “invited” rather than “required” to follow corporate governance best practices. This greater corporate discretion in the choice of governance practices provides the variability necessary to test the effect of governance on firm value. Furthermore, in the interest of triangulation, a model seldom seen in the governance literature is used to examine the impact of governance mechanisms on firm value and performance, as measured by accounting and market data.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 8 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=ijmf Email:
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Aboody, David, 1996. "Market valuation of employee stock options," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1-3), pages 357-391, October.
- Ittner, Christopher D. & Lambert, Richard A. & Larcker, David F., 2003. "The structure and performance consequences of equity grants to employees of new economy firms," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-3), pages 89-127, January.
- Vafeas, Nikos, 1999. "Board meeting frequency and firm performance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 113-142, July.
- Khaled Elsayed, 2007. "Does CEO Duality Really Affect Corporate Performance?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1203-1214, November.
- 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.
- Jianxin (Daniel) Chi, 2005. "Understanding the Endogeneity Between Firm Value and Shareholder Rights," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 34(4), Winter.
- repec:tpr:qjecon:v:118:y:2003:i:1:p:107-155 is not listed on IDEAS
- Brown, Lawrence D. & Caylor, Marcus L., 2006. "Corporate governance and firm valuation," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 409-434.
- Gani, Lindawati & Jermias, Johnny, 2006. "Investigating the effect of board independence on performance across different strategies," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 295-314.
- Roger M. Kunz & James J. Angel, 1996. "Factors Affecting the Value of Stock Voting Rights: Evidence from the Swiss Equity Market," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 25(3), Fall.
- Peter Klein & Daniel Shapiro & Jeffrey Young, 2005. "Corporate Governance, Family Ownership and Firm Value: the Canadian evidence," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(6), pages 769-784, November.
- Swee-Sum Lam & Bey-Fen Chng, 2006. "Do executive stock option grants have value implications for firm performance?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 249-274, May.
- Paul A. Gompers & Joy L. Ishii & Andrew Metrick, 2001.
"Corporate Governance and Equity Prices,"
NBER Working Papers
8449, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1995.
"A Survey of Corporate Governance,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1741, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 1991.
"The Effects of Board Composition and Direct Incentives on Firm Performance,"
Financial Management Association, vol. 20(4), Winter.
- Hermalin, B.E. & Weisbech, M.S., 1991. "The Effects of Board Composition and Direct Incentives on Firm Performance," Papers 91-02, Rochester, Business - Financial Research and Policy Studies.
- Chung, Kee H. & Elder, John & Kim, Jang-Chul, 2010. "Corporate Governance and Liquidity," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(02), pages 265-291, April.
- Lucian Bebchuk & Alma Cohen & Allen Ferrell, 2009. "What Matters in Corporate Governance?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 783-827, February.
- Armand Picou & Michael Rubach, 2006. "Does Good Governance Matter to Institutional Investors? Evidence from the Enactment of Corporate Governance Guidelines," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 55-67, 04.
- Bai, Chong-En & Liu, Qiao & Lu, Joe & Song, Frank M. & Zhang, Junxi, 2004. "Corporate governance and market valuation in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 599-616, December.
- Wolfgang Drobetz & Andreas Schillhofer & Heinz Zimmermann, 2004. "Corporate Governance and Expected Stock Returns: Evidence from Germany," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 10(2), pages 267-293.
- Mark L. Defond & Rebecca N. Hann & Xuesong Hu, 2005. "Does the Market Value Financial Expertise on Audit Committees of Boards of Directors?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, 05.
- Michael C. Jensen, 2005. "Agency Costs of Overvalued Equity," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 34(1), Spring.
- Akhigbe, Aigbe & Martin, Anna D., 2006. "Valuation impact of Sarbanes-Oxley: Evidence from disclosure and governance within the financial services industry," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 989-1006, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijmfpp:v:8:y:2012:i:4:p:332-343. 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: (Louise Lister)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.