IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Corporate board composition, protocols, and voting behavior: experimental evidence


  • Ann B. Gillette
  • Thomas H. Noe
  • Michael J. Rebello


We model experimentally the governance of an institution. The optimal management of this institution depends on the information possessed by insiders. However, insiders, whose interests are not aligned with the interests of the institution, may choose to use their information to further personal rather than institutional ends. Researchers (e.g., Palfrey 1990) and the business press have both argued that multiagent mechanisms, which inject trustworthy but uninformed “watchdog” agents into the governance process and impose penalties for conflicting recommendations, can implement institutionally preferred outcomes. Our laboratory experiments strongly support this conclusion. In the experimental treatments in which watchdog agents were included, the intuitionally preferred allocation was implemented in the vast majority of cases. Surprisingly, implementation occurred even in the absence of penalties for conflicting recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ann B. Gillette & Thomas H. Noe & Michael J. Rebello, 2000. "Corporate board composition, protocols, and voting behavior: experimental evidence," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2000-10, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedawp:2000-10

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1989. "Management entrenchment : The case of manager-specific investments," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 123-139, November.
    2. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 43-58.
    3. Sefton, Martin & Yavas, Abdullah, 1996. "Abreu-Matsushima Mechanisms: Experimental Evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 280-302, October.
    4. Isaac, R Mark & Walker, James M, 1988. "Communication and Free-Riding Behavior: The Voluntary Contribution Mechanism," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(4), pages 585-608, October.
    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. Hermalin, Benjamin E & Weisbach, Michael S, 1998. "Endogenously Chosen Boards of Directors and Their Monitoring of the CEO," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 96-118, March.
    7. Brickley, James A. & Coles, Jeffrey L. & Terry, Rory L., 1994. "Outside directors and the adoption of poison pills," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 371-390, June.
    8. Weisbach, Michael S., 1988. "Outside directors and CEO turnover," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 431-460, January.
    9. Warther, Vincent A., 1998. "Board effectiveness and board dissent: A model of the board's relationship to management and shareholders," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 53-70, March.
    10. 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(03), pages 377-397, September.
    11. Joseph Farrell & Matthew Rabin, 1996. "Cheap Talk," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 103-118, Summer.
    12. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1996. "Coalition-Proofness and Correlation with Arbitrary Communication Possibilities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 113-128, November.
    13. Russell Cooper & Douglas V. DeJong & Robert Forsythe & Thomas W. Ross, 1989. "Communication in the Battle of the Sexes Game: Some Experimental Results," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(4), pages 568-587, Winter.
    14. Byrd, John W. & Hickman, Kent A., 1992. "Do outside directors monitor managers? *1: Evidence from tender offer bids," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 195-221, October.
    15. Eckel, Catherine & Holt, Charles A, 1989. "Strategic Voting in Agenda-Controlled Committee Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 763-773, September.
    16. Bernheim, B. Douglas & Peleg, Bezalel & Whinston, Michael D., 1987. "Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria I. Concepts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-12, June.
    17. 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 are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Renee B. Adams & Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 2010. "The Role of Boards of Directors in Corporate Governance: A Conceptual Framework and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(1), pages 58-107, March.
    2. Gillet, Joris & Schram, Arthur & Sonnemans, Joep, 2011. "Cartel formation and pricing: The effect of managerial decision-making rules," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 126-133, January.
    3. Ricardo Leal & André Carvalhal-da-Silva, 2005. "Corporate Governance and Value in Brazil (and in Chile)," Research Department Publications 3208, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    4. Uddin, Md Hamid, 2016. "Effect of government share ownership on corporate risk taking: Case of the United Arab Emirates," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 322-339.
    5. Ahmed, Anwer S. & Duellman, Scott, 2007. "Accounting conservatism and board of director characteristics: An empirical analysis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 411-437, July.
    6. Lucian A. Bebchuk & Michael S. Weisbach, 2010. "The State of Corporate Governance Research," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(3), pages 939-961, March.
    7. Johan Devriese & Mathias Dewatripont & Dirk Heremans & Grégory Nguyen, 2004. "Corporate governance, regulation and supervision of banks," Financial Stability Review, National Bank of Belgium, vol. 2(1), pages 95-120, June.
    8. Andrea Melis & Silvia Carta & Silvia Gaia, 2012. "Executive remuneration in blockholder-dominated firms. How do Italian firms use stock options?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(3), pages 511-541, August.
    9. Amegashie, J. Atsu & Cadsby, C. Bram & Song, Yang, 2007. "Competitive burnout: Theory and experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 213-239, May.
    10. repec:cuf:journl:y:2013:v:14:i:1:n:2:albuquerque is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Cheung, Yan-Leung & Chung, Cheong-Wing & Tan, Weiqiang & Wang, Wenming, 2013. "Connected board of directors: A blessing or a curse?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3227-3242.
    12. Crespí-Cladera, Rafel & Pascual-Fuster, Bartolomé, 2014. "Does the independence of independent directors matter?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 116-134.
    13. Ricardo Leal & André Carvalhal-da-Silva, 2005. "Conducción y valor empresarial en Brasil (y Chile)," Research Department Publications 3209, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    14. Rui Albuquerque & Jianjun Miao, 2013. "CEO Power, Compensation, and Governance," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 14(2), pages 443-479, November.
    15. Thomas J. Chemmanur & Viktar Fedaseyeu, 2012. "A Theory of Corporate Boards and Forced CEO Turnover," Working Papers 444, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    16. Audretsch, David B. & Hülsbeck, Marcel & Lehmann, Erik E., 2013. "Families as active monitors of firm performance," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 118-130.
    17. Fernando Lefort & Eduardo Walker, 2005. "El efecto de las prácticas de gobierno corporativo sobre la valuación de mercado y políticas de pago de compañías chilenas," Research Department Publications 3211, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    18. Fernando Lefort & Eduardo Walker, 2005. "The Effect of Corporate Governance Practices on Company Market Valuation and Payout Policy in Chile," Research Department Publications 3210, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.

    More about this item


    Corporations - Finance ; Game theory;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:fip:fedawp:2000-10. 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: (Elaine Clokey). General contact details of provider: .

    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.