IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wzbkpw/spiii2008302.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Perspektivenverschiebungen in der Corporate Governance: Neuere Ansätze und Studien der Corporate-Governance-Forschung

Author

Listed:
  • Lippert, Inge

Abstract

Die Corporate-Governance-Forschung hat sich lange Zeit vor allem auf die Veränderungen in den kontinentaleuropäischen „Insidersystemen“ konzentriert. Nach den dramatischen Unternehmensskandalen in den USA und im Zuge der steigenden Anforderungen an ein „nachhaltiges Wirtschaften“ werden in den letzten Jahren jedoch auch die Veränderungen in den angelsächsischen „Ousidersystemen“ stärker thematisiert. Damit wird die Prinzipal- Agenten-Theorie als die bislang dominierende Theorie der Corporate Governance einer grundlegenden Kritik unterzogen. Es verstärkt sich der Ruf nach neuen theoretischen Modellen, die der komplexen Realität dynamischer Corporate-Governance-Systeme besser entsprechen, als das klassische Paradigma. Die kritische Reflexion der Principal-Agent- Annahmen hat in den angelsächsischen Ländern in den letzten Jahren zu einem Aufschwung von Ansätzen und Studien geführt, die gegenüber der traditionellen Forschung breitere Sichtweisen auf die Corporate Governance einnehmen und neue Fragen im Hinblick auf die Gestaltung der Systeme aufwerfen. Die Ergebnisse dieser Forschung werden in Deutschland noch wenig diskutiert. Sie können aber wichtige Impulse für die Diskussion zur Reform der Unternehmensmitbestimmung und Weiterentwicklung der Aufsichtsratsarbeit bieten. Ziel des Literaturberichts ist es, die neueren Ansätze und Studien in Abgrenzung zur Principal-Agent- Theorie darzustellen und damit Ansatzpunkte für eine ressourcen- und prozessbezogene Veränderungsperspektive des deutschen Corporate-Governance-Systems zu entwickeln.

Suggested Citation

  • Lippert, Inge, 2008. "Perspektivenverschiebungen in der Corporate Governance: Neuere Ansätze und Studien der Corporate-Governance-Forschung," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Knowledge, Production Systems and Work SP III 2008-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbkpw:spiii2008302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/49645/1/586008543.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Deakin & D. Hugh Whittaker, 2007. "Re‐embedding the Corporation? Comparative perspectives on corporate governance, employment relations and corporate social responsibility," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 1-4, January.
    2. 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.
    3. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Agency Problems and Residual Claims," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 327-349, June.
    4. Shih‐Fang Lo & Her‐Jiun Sheu, 2007. "Is Corporate Sustainability a Value‐Increasing Strategy for Business?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 345-358, March.
    5. Mark Macus, 2005. "Interactions on boards and board capability: two empirical studies of the performance effects of boards," International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(4), pages 389-411.
    6. 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.
    7. Bernard Taylor, 2005. "Leading the Boardroom Revolution," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(5), pages 567-568, September.
    8. Luigi Zingales, 1997. "Corporate Governance," NBER Working Papers 6309, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Andreas Hackethal & Reinhard H. Schmidt & Marcel Tyrell, 2005. "Banks and German Corporate Governance: on the way to a capital market‐based system?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 397-407, May.
    10. C. Ingley & N. Van Der Walt, 2005. "Do Board Processes Influence Director and Board Performance? Statutory and performance implications," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(5), pages 632-653, September.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Martin Conyon & Richard B. Freeman, 2004. "Shared Modes of Compensation and Firm Performance U.K. Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: Seeking a Premier Economy: The Economic Effects of British Economic Reforms, 1980–2000, pages 109-146, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Jonas Gabrielsson & Henrik Winlund, 2000. "Boards of directors in small and medium-sized industrial firms: examining the effects of the board's working style on board task performance," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 311-330, October.
    15. Shaker A. Zahra & Igor Filatotchev, 2004. "Governance of the Entrepreneurial Threshold Firm: A Knowledge‐based Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 885-897, July.
    16. Craig Mackenzie, 2007. "Boards, Incentives and Corporate Social Responsibility: the case for a change of emphasis," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 935-943, September.
    17. Fabio Zona & Alessandro Zattoni, 2007. "Beyond the Black Box of Demography: board processes and task effectiveness within Italian firms," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 852-864, September.
    18. Lex Donaldson & James H. Davis, 1991. "Stewardship Theory or Agency Theory: CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 16(1), pages 49-64, June.
    19. John Armour & Simon Deakin & Suzanne J. Konzelmann, 2003. "Shareholder Primacy and the Trajectory of UK Corporate Governance," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 41(3), pages 531-555, September.
    20. John Armour & Simon Deakin & Suzanne J. Konzelmann, 2003. "Shareholder Primacy and the Trajectory of UK Corporate Governance," Working Papers wp266, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    21. Simon Deakin, 2005. "The Coming Transformation of Shareholder Value," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 11-18, January.
    22. Richard Makadok, 2003. "Doing the right thing and knowing the right thing to do: why the whole is greater than the sum of the parts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 1043-1055, October.
    23. David Wan & C. H. Ong, 2005. "Board Structure, Process and Performance: evidence from public‐listed companies in Singapore," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 277-290, March.
    24. Michael C. Jensen & William H. Meckling, 1994. "The Nature Of Man," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 7(2), pages 4-19, June.
    25. Raghuram G. Rajan & Luigi Zingales, 1998. "Power in a Theory of the Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(2), pages 387-432.
    26. Andrew Gamble & Gavin Kelly, 2001. "Shareholder Value and the Stakeholder Debate in the UK," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 110-117, April.
    27. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1504-1511, December.
    28. Simon Learmount, 2002. "Theorizing Corporate Governance: New Organizational Alternatives," Working Papers wp237, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    29. Mary O’Sullivan & William Lazonick, "undated". "Corporate Governance and the Innovative Economy: Policy Implications," STEP Report series 199803, The STEP Group, Studies in technology, innovation and economic policy.
    30. Jay B. Barney, 1986. "Strategic Factor Markets: Expectations, Luck, and Business Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(10), pages 1231-1241, October.
    31. Anoop Madhok, 1996. "Crossroads---The Organization of Economic Activity: Transaction Costs, Firm Capabilities, and the Nature of Governance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 577-590, October.
    32. Margit Osterloh & Bruno Frey, 2006. "Shareholders Should Welcome Knowledge Workers as Directors," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 10(3), pages 325-345, September.
    33. L. A. A. Van den Berghe & Abigail Levrau, 2004. "Evaluating Boards of Directors: what constitutes a good corporate board?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(4), pages 461-478, October.
    34. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    35. Barry Mitnick, 1975. "The theory of agency," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 27-42, December.
    36. Hall, Peter A. & Soskice, David (ed.), 2001. "Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199247752.
    37. Levrau, A. & Van den Berghe, L.A.A., 2006. "Corporate governance and board effectiveness : beyond formalism," Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Working Paper Series 2007-3, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.
    38. Thomas Clarke, 2005. "Accounting for Enron: shareholder value and stakeholder interests," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(5), pages 598-612, September.
    39. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    40. Pettigrew, Andrew M., 1997. "What is a processual analysis?," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 337-348, December.
    41. David W. Anderson & Stewart J. Melanson & Jiri Maly, 2007. "The Evolution of Corporate Governance: power redistribution brings boards to life," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 780-797, September.
    42. Ira C. Harris & Katsuhiko Shimizu, 2004. "Too Busy To Serve? An Examination of the Influence of Overboarded Directors," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 775-798, July.
    43. C. B. Ingley & N. T. Van der Walt, 2001. "The Strategic Board: the changing role of directors in developing and maintaining corporate capability," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 174-185, July.
    44. Rosenstein, Stuart & Wyatt, Jeffrey G., 1990. "Outside directors, board independence, and shareholder wealth," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 175-191, August.
    45. Nicolai J. Foss, 2006. "The Emerging Knowledge Governance Approach Challenges and Characteristics," DRUID Working Papers 06-10, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    46. Vitols, Sigurt, 2003. "Negotiated shareholder value: The German version of an Anglo-American practice," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions, States, Markets SP II 2003-25, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    47. Christos N. Pitelis, 2004. "(Corporate) Governance, (Shareholder) Value and (Sustainable) Economic Performance," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 210-223, April.
    48. Morten Huse, 2000. "Boards of directors in SMEs: a review and research agenda," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 271-290, October.
    49. Simon Deakin & Suzanne J. Konzelmann, 2004. "Learning from Enron," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 134-142, April.
    50. Paula L. Rechner & Dan R. Dalton, 1991. "CEO duality and organizational performance: A longitudinal analysis," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 155-160, February.
    51. Jürgens, Ulrich & Rupp, Joachim & Vitols, Katrin & Jäschke-Werthmann, Bärbel, 2000. "Corporate Governance and Shareholder Value in Deutschland," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Regulation of Work FS II 00-202, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    52. 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.
    53. Martin Conyon & Simon Peck, 1998. "Board size and corporate performance: evidence from European countries," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 291-304.
    54. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and the Sustainability of Competitive Advantage: Reply," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1514-1514, December.
    55. Veysel Kula, 2005. "The Impact of the Roles, Structure and Process of Boards on Firm Performance: evidence from Turkey," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 265-276, March.
    56. Jürgens, Ulrich & Krzywdzinski, Martin & Teipen, Christina, 2006. "Changing work and employment relations in German industries: Breaking away from the German model?," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Knowledge, Production Systems and Work SP III 2006-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    57. Nippa, Michael & Grigoleit, Jens, 2006. "Corporate Governance ohne Vertrauen? Ökonomische Konsequenzen der Agency-Theorie," Freiberg Working Papers 2006/01, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    58. Loizos Heracleous, 2001. "What is the Impact of Corporate Governance on Organisational Performance?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 165-173, July.
    59. Sidney G. Winter, 2003. "Understanding dynamic capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 991-995, October.
    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. Yu, Nan, 2012. "All in transition - Human resource management and labour relations in the Chinese industrial sector," Discussion Papers, Research Group Globalization, Work, and Production SP III 2012-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. Shulzhenko, Elena, 2012. "Human resource management and labour relations in post-transitional Russia," Discussion Papers, Research Group Globalization, Work, and Production SP III 2012-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    3. Krzywdzinski, Martin, 2014. "Leistungsanreize, Leistungsverhalten und die Bedeutung des soziokulturellen Kontextes aus ökonomischer, psychologischer und soziologischer Perspektive," Discussion Papers, Research Group Globalization, Work, and Production SP III 2014-301, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Rai, Soumi, 2012. "Human resource management and labour relations in the Indian industrial sector," Discussion Papers, Research Group Globalization, Work, and Production SP III 2012-301, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    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. Naeem Tabassum & Satwinder Singh, 2020. "Corporate Governance and Organisational Performance," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-48527-6, June.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    5. Stoelhorst, J. W. & van Raaij, Erik M., 2004. "On explaining performance differentials: Marketing and the managerial theory of the firm," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 462-477, May.
    6. César Camisón-Zornoza & Beatriz Forés-Julián & Alba Puig-Denia & Sergio Camisón-Haba, 0. "Effects of ownership structure and corporate and family governance on dynamic capabilities in family firms," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-34.
    7. César Camisón-Zornoza & Beatriz Forés-Julián & Alba Puig-Denia & Sergio Camisón-Haba, 2020. "Effects of ownership structure and corporate and family governance on dynamic capabilities in family firms," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1393-1426, December.
    8. He, Jinyu & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2006. "Firm Capability, Corporate Governance, and Firm Competitive Behavior: A Multi-theoretic Framework," Working Papers 06-0103, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    9. Kraaijenbrink, Jeroen & Spender, JC & Groen, Aard, 2009. "The resource-based view: A review and assessment of its critiques," MPRA Paper 21442, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Mertzanis, Charilaos & Basuony, Mohamed A.K. & Mohamed, Ehab K.A., 2019. "Social institutions, corporate governance and firm-performance in the MENA region," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 75-96.
    11. Gottschalg, Oliver & Zollo, Mauricio, 2006. "Interest alignment and competitive advantage," HEC Research Papers Series 823, HEC Paris.
    12. Nickerson, Jack A. & Yen, C. James & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2011. "Exploring the Problem-Finding and Problem-Solving Approach for Designing Organizations," Working Papers 11-0107, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    13. 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.
    14. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    15. 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.
    16. Mouna Mrad & Slaheddine Hallara, 2014. "The Relationship Between the Board of Directors and the Performance/Value Creation in a Context of Privatization: The Case of French Companies," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 83-108, March.
    17. Gérard Charreaux, 2002. "Variation sur le thème:"À la recherche de nouvelles fondations pour la finance et la gouvernance d'entreprise"," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 5(3), pages 5-68, September.
    18. Marc Essen & J. Oosterhout & Michael Carney, 2012. "Corporate boards and the performance of Asian firms: A meta-analysis," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 873-905, December.
    19. Oliver Lukason & María-del-Mar Camacho-Miñano, 2020. "Corporate Governance Characteristics of Private SMEs’ Annual Report Submission Violations," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-19, September.
    20. 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.

    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:zbw:wzbkpw:spiii2008302. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wzbbbde.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.