IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/globus/v12y2011i2p213-235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disinvestment, Lending Relationships and Executive Compensation

Author

Listed:
  • Saibal Ghosh

    (Saibal Ghosh is on lien from the Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai, India. E-mail: sai_ghosh@hotmail.com)

Abstract

The analysis employs data on federal government-owned public enterprises (PSEs) since 1980s that encompasses the partial privatization programme to examine the likelihood of privatization. The results indicate that employment-intensive, high-paying but less profitable firms are more likely to be privatized. In terms of lending relationships, the analysis indicates that private banks are the main bank for small firms, and foreign banks are the main bank for large, established firms. State-owned banks are more likely to be associated with leveraged PSEs as compared to other bank groups. In terms of compensation policies in PSEs, the evidence testifies that bigger, established and leveraged PSE firms pay higher salaries.

Suggested Citation

  • Saibal Ghosh, 2011. "Disinvestment, Lending Relationships and Executive Compensation," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 12(2), pages 213-235, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:globus:v:12:y:2011:i:2:p:213-235
    DOI: 10.1177/097215091101200203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/097215091101200203
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/097215091101200203?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ongena, Steven & Smith, David C., 2000. "What Determines the Number of Bank Relationships? Cross-Country Evidence," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 26-56, January.
    2. Sharpe, Steven A, 1990. "Asymmetric Information, Bank Lending, and Implicit Contracts: A Stylized Model of Customer Relationships," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(4), pages 1069-1087, September.
    3. Boardman, Anthony E & Vining, Aidan R, 1989. "Ownership and Performance in Competitive Environments: A Comparison of the Performance of Private, Mixed, and State-Owned Enterprises," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 1-33, April.
    4. Thakor, Anjan V, 1996. "Capital Requirements, Monetary Policy, and Aggregate Bank Lending: Theory and Empirical Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(1), pages 279-324, March.
    5. Gopalan, Radhakrishnan & Nanda, Vikram & Seru, Amit, 2007. "Affiliated firms and financial support: Evidence from Indian business groups," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 759-795, December.
    6. Berger, Allen N. & Klapper, Leora F. & Martinez Peria, Maria Soledad & Zaidi, Rida, 2008. "Bank ownership type and banking relationships," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 37-62, January.
    7. Ghosh, Saibal, 2009. "Productivity and Financial Structure: Evidence from Indian High-Tech Firms," MPRA Paper 19467, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Paul H. Malatesta & Kathryn L. DeWenter, 2001. "State-Owned and Privately Owned Firms: An Empirical Analysis of Profitability, Leverage, and Labor Intensity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 320-334, March.
    9. Megginson, William L & Nash, Robert C & van Randenborgh, Matthias, 1994. "The Financial and Operating Performance of Newly Privatized Firms: An International Empirical Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(2), pages 403-452, June.
    10. Kay, J A & Thompson, D J, 1986. "Privatisation: A Policy in Search of a Rationale," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(381), pages 18-32, 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. Nandini Gupta, 2005. "Partial Privatization and Firm Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(2), pages 987-1015, April.
    13. Lazarus Angbazo & Ranga Narayanan, 1997. "Top Management Compensation and the Structure of the Board of Directors in Commercial Banks," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 1(2), pages 239-259.
    14. Bishop, Matthew R. & Kay, John A., 1989. "Privatization in the United Kingdom: Lessons from experience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 643-657, May.
    15. Caves, Douglas W & Christensen, Laurits R, 1980. "The Relative Efficiency of Public and Private Firms in a Competitive Environment: The Case of Canadian Railroads," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(5), pages 958-976, October.
    16. Rajan, Raghuram G, 1992. "Insiders and Outsiders: The Choice between Informed and Arm's-Length Debt," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(4), pages 1367-1400, September.
    17. Saibal Ghosh, 2009. "Productivity and Financial Structure," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 10(2), pages 261-278, July.
    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. Rohit Bansal & Ashu Khanna, 2013. "Vector Auto-regressive Analysis of Determinants of IPO Underpricing: Empirical Evidence from Bombay Stock Exchange," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 14(4), pages 651-689, December.

    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. Chen, Gongmeng & Firth, Michael & Rui, Oliver, 2006. "Have China's enterprise reforms led to improved efficiency and profitability?," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 82-109, March.
    2. Ghosh, Saibal, 2008. "Does divestment matter for firm performance?: Evidence from the Indian experience," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 372-388, December.
    3. Saibal Ghosh, 2019. "Lending Relationships, Borrowing Costs and Crisis: Evidence from Indian Micro Data," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 20(4), pages 1026-1050, August.
    4. Juan Carlos Morales Piñero & Joaquim Vergés i Jaime, 2007. "Public Enterprise Reforms and Efficiency in Regulated Enviroments," Working Papers 0702, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Jan 2007.
    5. Ghosh, Saibal, 2010. "Disinvestment, lending relationships and executive compensation: Evidence from the Indian experience," MPRA Paper 32071, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Bozec, Richard, 2004. "L’analyse comparative de la performance entre les entreprises publiques et les entreprises privées : le problème de mesure et son impact sur les résultats," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 80(4), pages 619-654, Décembre.
    7. Wolf, Christian, 2009. "Does ownership matter? The performance and efficiency of State Oil vs. Private Oil (1987-2006)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2642-2652, July.
    8. Christian Wolf & Michael G. Pollitt, 2008. "Privatising national oil companies: Assessing the impact on firm performance," Working Papers EPRG 0805, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    9. Ghulam, Yaseen, 2017. "Long-run performance of an industry after broader reforms including privatization," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 745-768.
    10. Feng, Fang & Sun, Qian & Tong, Wilson H. S., 2004. "Do government-linked companies underperform?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(10), pages 2461-2492, October.
    11. Ombir Singh, 2019. "State ownership and performance of firm: evidence from India," Public Sector Economics, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 43(2), pages 195-217.
    12. Michael E. Bradbury & Jill Hooks, 2015. "Ownership and Performance in a Lightly Regulated Environment," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 25(1), pages 100-112, March.
    13. Patrick M. McGuire, 2003. "Bank ties and bond market access : evidence on investment-cash flow sensitivity in Japan," Proceedings 859, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    14. Carletti, Elena & Cerasi, Vittoria & Daltung, Sonja, 2007. "Multiple-bank lending: Diversification and free-riding in monitoring," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 425-451, July.
    15. Carine Catelin & Céline Chatelin, 2001. "Privatisation, gouvernement d'entreprise et processus décisionnel:une intégration de la dynamique organisationnelle à travers le cas de France Télécom," Working Papers CREGO 1010501, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    16. Doris Neuberger & Solvig Räthke, 2009. "Microenterprises and multiple bank relationships: The case of professionals," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 207-229, February.
    17. Shen, Chung-Hua & Wang, Chien-An, 2005. "Does bank relationship matter for a firm's investment and financial constraints? The case of Taiwan," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 163-184, March.
    18. Gong, Stephen X.H. & Cullinane, Kevin & Firth, Michael, 2012. "The impact of airport and seaport privatization on efficiency and performance: A review of the international evidence and implications for developing countries," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 37-47.
    19. Saibal Ghosh, 2010. "How Did State‐Owned Banks Respond To Privatization? Evidence From The Indian Experiment," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(3), pages 389-421, September.
    20. Tensie Steijvers & Mervi Niskanen, 2013. "The determinants of cash holdings in private family firms," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 53(2), pages 537-560, June.

    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:sae:globus:v:12:y:2011:i:2:p:213-235. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.imi.edu/ .

    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.