IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ant/acedwp/2009003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Board independence, CEO duality and firm performance: A quantile regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • RAMDANI, Dendi
  • VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN, Arjen

Abstract

We study the effect of board independence and CEO duality on firm performance for a sample of stock-listed enterprises from Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand, applying Quantile Regression. Quantile Regression is more powerful than standard linear regression, as reflected in the Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression method, since Quantile Regression can produce estimates for all conditional quantiles of the distribution of a response variable, whereas OLS regression only estimates the conditional mean effects of a response variable. Moreover, Quantile Regression is better able to handle violations of the standard assumptions of normality, homoscedasticity and absence of outliers. Indeed, we find that the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance variables is different across the conditional quantiles of the distribution of firm performance, something OLS would leave unidentified. This finding suggests that estimating the quantile effect of a response variable can well be more insightful than estimating only the mean effect of this response variable, particularly so when the data violate assumptions required to perform OLS regression, as is often the case in corporate governance research.

Suggested Citation

  • RAMDANI, Dendi & VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN, Arjen, 2009. "Board independence, CEO duality and firm performance: A quantile regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand," ACED Working Papers 2009003, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ant:acedwp:2009003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://anet.uantwerpen.be/docman/irua/62cede/f52924f7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geoffrey C. Kiel & Gavin J. Nicholson, 2003. "Board Composition and Corporate Performance: how the Australian experience informs contrasting theories of corporate governance," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 189-205, July.
    2. Eide, Eric & Showalter, Mark H., 1998. "The effect of school quality on student performance: A quantile regression approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 345-350, March.
    3. Raul A. Barreto & Anthony W. Hughes, 2004. "Under Performers and Over Achievers: A Quantile Regression Analysis of Growth," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(248), pages 17-35, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Omar Arias & Walter Sosa-Escudero & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Individual heterogeneity in the returns to schooling: instrumental variables quantile regression using twins data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 7-40.
    6. Ruth V. Aguilera & Igor Filatotchev & Howard Gospel & Gregory Jackson, 2008. "An Organizational Approach to Comparative Corporate Governance: Costs, Contingencies, and Complementarities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 475-492, June.
    7. Khaled Elsayed, 2007. "Does CEO Duality Really Affect Corporate Performance?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1203-1214, November.
    8. Daily, Catherine M. & Dalton, Dan R., 1992. "The relationship between governance structure and corporate performance in entrepreneurial firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 375-386, September.
    9. Baysinger, Barry D & Butler, Henry N, 1985. "Corporate Governance and the Board of Directors: Performance Effects of Changes in Board Composition," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 101-124, Spring.
    10. Manning, Willard G. & Blumberg, Linda & Moulton, Lawrence H., 1995. "The demand for alcohol: The differential response to price," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 123-148, June.
    11. Rajeswararao S. Chaganti & Vijay Mahajan & Subhash Sharma, 1985. "Corporate Board Size, Composition And Corporate Failures In Retailing Industry[1]," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 400-417, July.
    12. Klein, April, 1998. "Firm Performance and Board Committee Structure," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 275-303, April.
    13. Gilbert W. Bassett Jr. & Hsiu-Lang Chen, 2001. "Portfolio style: Return-based attribution using quantile regression," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 293-305.
    14. Jason Abrevaya, 2001. "The effects of demographics and maternal behavior on the distribution of birth outcomes," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 247-257.
    15. Eduardo Pontual Ribeiro, 2001. "Asymmetric labor supply," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 183-197.
    16. Agrawal, Anup & Knoeber, Charles R., 1996. "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 377-397, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Koenker, Roger W & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1978. "Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 33-50, January.
    19. Koenker, Roger & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1982. "Robust Tests for Heteroscedasticity Based on Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 43-61, January.
    20. Roger Koenker & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Quantile Regression," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 143-156, Fall.
    21. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 08-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    22. Cornett, Marcia Millon & Marcus, Alan J. & Tehranian, Hassan, 2008. "Corporate governance and pay-for-performance: The impact of earnings management," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 357-373, February.
    23. Omar Al Farooque & Tony Van Zijl & Keitha Dunstan & AKM Waresul Karim, 2007. "Corporate Governance in Bangladesh: Link between Ownership and Financial Performance," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1453-1468, November.
    24. Demsetz, Harold, 1983. "The Structure of Ownership and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 375-390, June.
    25. 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.
    26. Pi, Lynn & Timme, Stephen G., 1993. "Corporate control and bank efficiency," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(2-3), pages 515-530, April.
    27. 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, vol. 9(Apr), pages 7-26.
    28. Lex Donaldson & James H. Davis, 1994. "Boards and Company Performance ‐ Research Challenges the Conventional Wisdom," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(3), pages 151-160, July.
    29. Coles, Jeffrey L. & Daniel, Naveen D. & Naveen, Lalitha, 2008. "Boards: Does one size fit all," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 329-356, February.
    30. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 8-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    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. Jehad S. Aldehayyat & Sliman S. Alsoboa & Mohammad H. Al-Kilani, 2017. "Investigating How Corporate Governance Affects Performance of Firm in Small Emerging Markets: An Empirical Analysis for Jordanian Manufacturing Firms," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(1), pages 77-95, January.
    2. Nirosha Hewa Wellalage & Stuart Locke, 2013. "Capital structure and its determinants in New Zealand firms," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 852-866, November.
    3. Habib Abdulkarim & Abubakar Yusuf & Usman Isah, 2020. "Board Composition, Board Size and Market Value of Listed Industrial Goods Companies in Nigeria," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 4(12), pages 14-19, 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. 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 Business and Economics.
    2. Afzalur Rashid, 2015. "Revisiting Agency Theory: Evidence of Board Independence and Agency Cost from Bangladesh," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 181-198, August.
    3. Hussein Abedi Shamsabadi & Byung-Seong Min & Richard Chung, 2016. "Corporate governance and dividend strategy: lessons from Australia," International Journal of Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(5), pages 583-610, October.
    4. Yuan George Shan, 2019. "Managerial ownership, board independence and firm performance," Accounting Research Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 32(2), pages 203-220, July.
    5. Aziz Jaafar & Lynn Hodgkinson & Mao-Feng Kao, 2019. "Ownership Structure, Board of Directors and Firm Performance: Evidence from Taiwan," Working Papers 19011, Bangor Business School, Prifysgol Bangor University (Cymru / Wales).
    6. Naeem Tabassum & Satwinder Singh, 2020. "Corporate Governance and Organisational Performance," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-48527-6, June.
    7. Phillip C. James, 2020. "Understanding the Impact of Board Structure on Firm Performance: AComprehensive Literature Review," International Journal of Business and Social Research, LAR Center Press, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, January.
    8. Phillip C. James, 2020. "Understanding the Impact of Board Structure on Firm Performance: AComprehensive Literature Review," International Journal of Business and Social Research, MIR Center for Socio-Economic Research, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, January.
    9. Volonté, Christophe, 2015. "Boards: Independent and committed directors?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 25-37.
    10. Bill Francis & Iftekhar Hasan & Qiang Wu, 2015. "Professors in the Boardroom and Their Impact on Corporate Governance and Firm Performance," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 44(3), pages 547-581, September.
    11. A. A. Drakos & F. V. Bekiris, 2010. "Endogeneity and the relationship between board structure and firm performance: a simultaneous equation analysis for the Athens Stock Exchange," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(6), pages 387-401.
    12. Le, Quyen & Vafaei, Alireza & Ahmed, Kamran & Kutubi, Shawgat, 2022. "Independent directors' reputation incentives and firm performance – an Australian perspective," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    13. Fidanoski, Filip & Mateska, Vesna & Simeonovski, Kiril, 2013. "Corporate Governance and Bank Performance: Evidence from Macedonia," MPRA Paper 46773, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Mar 2013.
    14. Chenglong Zheng & Roy Kouwenberg, 2019. "A Bibliometric Review of Global Research on Corporate Governance and Board Attributes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-25, June.
    15. Hsu, Hwa-Hsien & Wu, Chloe Yu-Hsuan, 2014. "Board composition, grey directors and corporate failure in the UK," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 215-227.
    16. Panagiotis Staikouras & Christos Staikouras & Maria-Eleni Agoraki, 2007. "The effect of board size and composition on European bank performance," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-27, February.
    17. Bill B. Francis & Iftekhar Hasan & Qiang Wu, 2012. "Do corporate boards matter during the current financial crisis?," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 39-52, April.
    18. Nicola Moscariello & Michele Pizzo & Dmytro Govorun & Alexander Kostyuk, 2019. "Independent minority directors and firm value in a principal–principal agency setting: evidence from Italy," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(1), pages 165-194, March.
    19. Tirthankar Nag & Chanchal Chatterjee, 2020. "Exploring Linkages Between Corporate Governance and Business Performance: Does Good Corporate Governance Lead to Enhanced Business Value?," South Asian Survey, , vol. 27(1), pages 37-61, March.
    20. Akshita Arora & Chandan Sharma, 2015. "Impact of Firm Performance on Board Characteristics: Empirical Evidence from India," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 4(1), pages 53-70, January.

    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:ant:acedwp:2009003. 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: Joeri Nys (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ftufsbe.html .

    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.