IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijcgov/v6y2015i1p42-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multiple stakeholder approach to nonprofit board effectiveness: the employee perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Nina Nguyen
  • Denise M. Jepsen

Abstract

Although the multiple stakeholder approach is a well-known theory of board evaluation, employees are an understudied but important stakeholder group. This study seeks to understand the ways in which employees' perception of the effectiveness of their board of directors can influence employee attitudes and behaviour. Using responses from 166 employees in a nonprofit registered club, the study shows that employees do form an impression of the effectiveness of their board. Furthermore, employees' perception of effectiveness of the board was positively related to their perception of the quality of their relationship with the organisation and negatively related to their intention to leave. These findings offer the potential for improved organisational performance and productivity. The study provides empirical support for broadening the stakeholders when considering board performance and suggests board-staff perspectives as a new avenue for research. The paper offers insights on potential policy and management of the board of directors.

Suggested Citation

  • Nina Nguyen & Denise M. Jepsen, 2015. "A multiple stakeholder approach to nonprofit board effectiveness: the employee perspective," International Journal of Corporate Governance, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 42-55.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijcgov:v:6:y:2015:i:1:p:42-55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=69761
    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. Robert E. Quinn & John Rohrbaugh, 1983. "A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 363-377, March.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    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. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi & Tehmina Fiaz Qazi & Abdul Basit, 2019. "Remedy for One Size Fit to All: A Flexible Corporate Governance Model to Accommodate Sectoral Technicalities," Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 8(4), pages 223-229, December.
    2. Hasan, Iftekhar & Lozano-Vivas, Ana, 2002. "Organizational Form and Expense Preference: Spanish Experience," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 135-150, April.
    3. Sang Cheol Lee & Mooweon Rhee & Jongchul Yoon, 2018. "Foreign Monitoring and Audit Quality: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    4. Shaikh, Ibrahim A. & O'Brien, Jonathan Paul & Peters, Lois, 2018. "Inside directors and the underinvestment of financial slack towards R&D-intensity in high-technology firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 192-201.
    5. Tarek Roshdy Gebba & Mohamed Gamal Aboelmaged, 2016. "Corporate Governance of UAE Financial Institutions: A Comparative Study between Conventional and Islamic Banks," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 6(5), pages 1-7.
    6. Asmund Rygh & Gabriel R. G. Benito, 2018. "Capital Structure of Foreign Direct Investments: A Transaction Cost Analysis," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 389-411, June.
    7. Ilya Ivaninskiy & Irina Ivashkovskaya & Joseph A. McCahery, 2023. "Does digitalization mitigate or intensify the principal-agent conflict in a firm?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(3), pages 695-725, September.
    8. Evans, Lewis & Meade, Richard, 2005. "The Role and Significance of Cooperatives in New Zealand Agriculture, A Comparative Institutional Analysis," Working Paper Series 3847, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    9. Adi Masli & Matthew G. Sherwood & Rajendra P. Srivastava, 2018. "Attributes and Structure of an Effective Board of Directors: A Theoretical Investigation," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(4), pages 485-523, December.
    10. Dendi Ramdani & Arjen Witteloostuijn, 2012. "The Shareholder–Manager Relationship and Its Impact on the Likelihood of Firm Bribery," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 495-507, July.
    11. Etienne Redor & Magnus Blomkvist, 2021. "Do all inside and affiliated directors hold the same value for shareholders?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 41(3), pages 882-895.
    12. J. David Cummins & Mary A. Weiss & Hongmin Zi, 1998. "Organizational Form and Efficiency: An Analysis of Stock and Mutual Property-Liability Insurers," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 97-02, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
    13. Sergio Destefanis & Vania Sena, 2007. "Patterns of corporate governance and technical efficiency in Italian manufacturing," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 27-40.
    14. David Hillier & Patrick McColgan, 2008. "An analysis of majority owner‐managed companies in the UK," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 48(4), pages 603-623, December.
    15. 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.
    16. Al-Najjar, Basil & Salama, Aly, 2022. "Mind the gap: Are female directors and executives more sensitive to the environment in high-tech us firms?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    17. Mohamed Ali Khaldi, 2016. "Mesure opérationnelle de la valeur partenariale et sa répartition," Post-Print hal-01900615, HAL.
    18. Brogi, Marina & Lagasio, Valentina, 2022. "Better safe than sorry. Bank corporate governance, risk-taking, and performance," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    19. Birgitte Grøgaard & Asmund Rygh & Gabriel R. G. Benito, 2019. "Bringing corporate governance into internalization theory: State ownership and foreign entry strategies," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(8), pages 1310-1337, October.
    20. Ferrell, Allen & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 585-606.

    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:ids:ijcgov:v:6:y:2015:i:1:p:42-55. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=260 .

    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.