IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apeclt/v13y2006i7p435-443.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do board characteristics affect corporate performance? Firm-level evidence for India

Author

Listed:
  • Saibal Ghosh

Abstract

The study examines the association between financial performance and boards of non-financial firms. Using data on 127 listed manufacturing firms in India for 2003 the findings indicate that, after controlling for various firm-specific factors, larger boards tend to have a dampening influence on firm performance, judged in terms of either accounting or market-based measures of performance. In terms of policy implications, the analysis suggests that compensation of the CEO has a significant effect on the performance of the firm.

Suggested Citation

  • Saibal Ghosh, 2006. "Do board characteristics affect corporate performance? Firm-level evidence for India," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(7), pages 435-443.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:13:y:2006:i:7:p:435-443
    DOI: 10.1080/13504850500398617
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&doi=10.1080/13504850500398617&magic=repec&7C&7C8674ECAB8BB840C6AD35DC6213A474B5
    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. International Monetary Fund, 2005. "Monetary Policy and Corporate Behavior in India," IMF Working Papers 05/25, International Monetary Fund.
    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. Tarun Khanna & Krishna Palepu, 2000. "Is Group Affiliation Profitable in Emerging Markets? An Analysis of Diversified Indian Business Groups," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(2), pages 867-891, April.
    4. Mehran, Hamid, 1995. "Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 163-184, June.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Brian J. Hall & Jeffrey B. Liebman, 1997. "Are CEOs Paid Like Bureaucrats?," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1789, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    8. Weisbach, Michael S., 1988. "Outside directors and CEO turnover," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 431-460, January.
    9. Jensen, Michael C & Murphy, Kevin J, 1990. "Performance Pay and Top-Management Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(2), pages 225-264, April.
    10. Brian J. Hall & Jeffrey B. Liebman, 1998. "Are CEOs Really Paid Like Bureaucrats?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(3), pages 653-691.
    11. Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 1991. "The Effects of Board Composition and Direct Incentives on Firm Performance," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 20(4), Winter.
    12. Ghosh, Saibal & Sensarma, Rudra, 2004. "Does monetary policy matter for corporate governance? Firm-level evidence for India," MPRA Paper 19756, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. 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.
    14. Brunello, Giorgio & Graziano, Clara & Parigi, Bruno, 2001. "Executive compensation and firm performance in Italy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 133-161, January.
    15. Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 2003. "Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: a survey of the economic literature," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, issue Apr, pages 7-26.
    16. Eisenberg, Theodore & Sundgren, Stefan & Wells, Martin T., 1998. "Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 35-54, April.
    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. Saibal Ghosh, 2007. "Bank monitoring, managerial ownership and Tobin's Q: an empirical analysis for India," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 129-143.
    2. RAMDANI, Dendi & VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN, Arjen, 2009. "Board independence, CEO duality and firm performance: A quantile regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand," Working Papers 2009004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Applied Economics.
    3. Isabel-María García-Sánchez, 2010. "The effectiveness of corporate governance: board structure and business technical efficiency in Spain," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 18(3), pages 311-339, September.
    4. Ghosh, Saibal, 2007. "External Auditing, Managerial Monitoring and Firm Valuation: An Empirical Analysis for India," MPRA Paper 17142, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. repec:jes:wpaper:y:2012:v:4:p:648-656 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Cristina Boþa-Avram, 2012. "Managerial Ownership, Board Structure And Firm’S Performance: A Review Of Main Findings," CES Working Papers, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 4(4), pages 648-656, December.

    More about this item

    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:taf:apeclt:v:13:y:2006:i:7:p:435-443. 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: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEL20 .

    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.