IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxivy2021ispecial1-part1p281-310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comply or Explain Principle in the Context of Corporate Governance in Companies Listed at the Warsaw Stock Exchange

Author

Listed:
  • Elzbieta Izabela Szczepankiewicz
  • Joanna Blazynska
  • Beata Zaleska

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this article is to evaluate to what extent Corporate Governance Statements (CGS) prepared by companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange (GPW) are consistent with Best Practice for GPW Listed Companies. Design/Methodology/Approach: In the first part we applied critical review of subject literature and the monographic method. In the second part, the content analysis method was used, and the basic source material were the CGS for 2018 and 2019. The study group consisted of all WIG20, MWIG40 and sWIG80 companies listed on Warsaw Stock Exchange that submitted their 2018and 2019 reports (280 reports). The CGS were studied using methods including content analysis, comparative and descriptive analysis, and induction. Findings: The analysed CGS helped to answer the question to what extent GPW listed companies pursue the “comply or explain” principle regarding compliance with corporate governance principles and recommendations specified in Best Practice for GPW. The authors investigated whether and to what extent Best Practice is applied and whether the disclosures are useful for the stakeholders. The results indicate that the examined companies follow different approaches to the corporate governance reporting obligations. Practical Implications: Indicating the gap between the expected and the actual scope of disclosures regarding the corporate governance in CGS, which are the primary source of non-financial information for a listed company. Originality/value: The study leads to a general conclusion that the imperfect scope of the reported corporate governance information, as well as the quality and usefulness of the disclosures, consists both in the alignment between Best Practice for GPW Listed Companies and currently applicable regulations in Poland, and in the way, companies choose to follow the said document. The study fills a research gap in non-financial disclosures in annual reports. The paper also indicates directions for further study.

Suggested Citation

  • Elzbieta Izabela Szczepankiewicz & Joanna Blazynska & Beata Zaleska, 2021. "Comply or Explain Principle in the Context of Corporate Governance in Companies Listed at the Warsaw Stock Exchange," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 281-310.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special1-part1:p:281-310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ersj.eu/journal/2042/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ruth V. Aguilera & Valentina Marano & Ilir Haxhi, 2019. "International corporate governance: A review and opportunities for future research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(4), pages 457-498, June.
    2. Christine Mallin & Giovanna Michelon & Davide Raggi, 2013. "Monitoring Intensity and Stakeholders’ Orientation: How Does Governance Affect Social and Environmental Disclosure?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 29-43, April.
    3. Aws AlHares, 2020. "Corporate governance and cost of capital in OECD countries," International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 1-21, January.
    4. Martynova, M. & Renneboog, L.D.R., 2010. "A Corporate Governance Index : Convergence and Diversity of National Corporate Governance Regulations," Discussion Paper 2010-17, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    5. Ghulam Abid & Binish Khan & Zeeshan Rafiq & Alia Ahmed, 2014. "Theoretical Perspectives of Corporate Governance," Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 3(4), pages 166-175, December.
    6. 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, April.
    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. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special1:p:281-310 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Elżbieta Izabela Szczepankiewicz & Joanna Błażyńska & Beata Zaleska & Farid Ullah & Windham Eugene Loopesko, 2022. "Compliance with Corporate Governance Principles by Energy Companies Compared with All Companies Listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-28, September.
    3. Tamer Elshandidy & Mohamed Elsayed & Hossam Omara & Abhijit Sharma, 2025. "Board diversity faultlines and textual social and environmental disclosures," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 64(3), pages 1129-1163, April.
    4. Nurlan Orazalin & Mady Baydauletov, 2020. "Corporate social responsibility strategy and corporate environmental and social performance: The moderating role of board gender diversity," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1664-1676, July.
    5. Miroslav Nedelchev, 2018. "Bibliometric Review of Corporate Governance Theories and Methods," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 4, pages 126-145.
    6. Ishmael Tingbani & Lyton Chithambo & Venancio Tauringana & Nikolaos Papanikolaou, 2020. "Board gender diversity, environmental committee and greenhouse gas voluntary disclosures," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2194-2210, September.
    7. Jiali Liu & Xinran Xie & Yu Duan & Liang Tang, 2023. "Peer effects and the mechanisms in corporate capital structure: evidence from Chinese listed firms," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 14(1), pages 295-326, March.
    8. Patricia Crifo & Marc-Arthur Diaye & Rim Oueghlissi, 2014. "Measuring the effect of government ESG performance on sovereign borrowing cost," CIRANO Working Papers 2014s-37, CIRANO.
    9. Tang, Ryan W., 2023. "Institutional unpredictability and foreign exit−reentry dynamics: The moderating role of foreign ownership," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 58(2).
    10. Klaus E. Meyer & Chengguang Li & Andreas P. J. Schotter, 0. "Managing the MNE subsidiary: Advancing a multi-level and dynamic research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 0, pages 1-39.
    11. Bu, Maoliang & Xu, Liang & Tang, Ryan W., 2023. "MNEs’ transfer of socially irresponsible practices: A replication with new extensions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 58(2).
    12. G. Tomas M. Hult & Forrest V. Morgeson III & Udit Sharma & Claes Fornell, 2022. "Customer satisfaction and international business: A multidisciplinary review and avenues for research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(8), pages 1695-1733, October.
    13. Federica Nieri & Luciano Ciravegna & Ruth V. Aguilera & Elisa Giuliani, 2019. "Larger, more internationalized, better behaved? A configurational study of em erging market multinational enterprises' involvement in corporate wrongdoing," Discussion Papers 2019/255, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    14. Jia Xu & Jiuchang Wei & Liangdong Lu, 2019. "Strategic stakeholder management, environmental corporate social responsibility engagement, and financial performance of stigmatized firms derived from Chinese special environmental policy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 1027-1044, September.
    15. Efrat Dressler & Yevgeny Mugerman, 2023. "Doing the Right Thing? The Voting Power Effect and Institutional Shareholder Voting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 1089-1112, April.
    16. Nurlan Orazalin, 2020. "Do board sustainability committees contribute to corporate environmental and social performance? The mediating role of corporate social responsibility strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 140-153, January.
    17. Dang, Rey & Houanti, L'Hocine & Sahut, Jean-Michel & Simioni, Michel, 2021. "Do women on corporate boards influence corporate social performance? A control function approach," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    18. Jianhua Yin & Sen Wang, 2018. "The effects of corporate environmental disclosure on environmental innovation from stakeholder perspectives," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(8), pages 905-919, February.
    19. Karin Jõeveer, 2013. "What do we know about the capital structure of small firms?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 479-501, August.
    20. Charles H. Cho & Matias Laine & Robin W. Roberts & Michelle Rodrigue, 2018. "The Frontstage and Backstage of Corporate Sustainability Reporting: Evidence from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Bill," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 865-886, October.
    21. Zabihollah Rezaee & Ling Tuo, 2019. "Are the Quantity and Quality of Sustainability Disclosures Associated with the Innate and Discretionary Earnings Quality?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 763-786, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special1-part1:p:281-310. 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: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    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.