IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jmgtgv/v22y2018i2d10.1007_s10997-017-9390-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The value of board monitoring in promoting R&D: a test of agency-theory in the US context

Author

Listed:
  • I. A. Shaikh

    (University of New Brunswick-Fredericton)

  • L. Peters

    (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute)

Abstract

Prior agency-theory research has presented conflicting findings regarding the importance of board monitoring in motivating R&D. We reinvestigate this literature by examining the value monitoring exerts in abating both the agency costs of underinvestment and overinvestment in R&D. We argue that monitoring that relies on board independence has both benefits and costs associated with promoting R&D. While we assert that intense monitoring by the board heightens underinvestment in the US context, it can also provide discipline over a firms free cash flows. We test our theory using a longitudinal panel data set consisting of a cross-section of S&P 1500 US-firms between 1997 and 2007. On average our study finds inside directors increase overinvestment in R&D, but facilitate better resource allocation when a firm has rich growth opportunities. Also, while too much emphasis on outside directors heightens underinvestment in R&D, a more independent board encourages better resource allocation when firms have high free cash flows that need to be paid back to owners. Thus, our results suggest a more inclusive perspective of agency-theory can help managers make better R&D investment decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • I. A. Shaikh & L. Peters, 2018. "The value of board monitoring in promoting R&D: a test of agency-theory in the US context," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 22(2), pages 339-363, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jmgtgv:v:22:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s10997-017-9390-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10997-017-9390-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10997-017-9390-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10997-017-9390-8?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
    ---><---

    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. Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Motivating Innovation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(5), pages 1823-1860, October.
    2. Thomas H. Brush & Philip Bromiley & Margaretha Hendrickx, 2000. "The free cash flow hypothesis for sales growth and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 455-472, April.
    3. Morten Huse & Robert Hoskisson & Alessandro Zattoni & Riccardo Viganò, 2011. "New perspectives on board research: changing the research agenda," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 15(1), pages 5-28, February.
    4. Elizabeth N. K. Lim, 2015. "The role of reference point in CEO restricted stock and its impact on R&D intensity in high-technology firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 872-889, June.
    5. William Lazonick, 2007. "The US stock market and the governance of innovative enterprise ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 983-1035, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Jonathan P. O'Brien & Timothy B. Folta, 2009. "A transaction cost perspective on why, how, and when cash impacts firm performance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(7), pages 465-479.
    8. Bronwyn Hall, 2004. "The financing of research and development," Chapters, in: Anthony Bartzokas & Sunil Mani (ed.), Financial Systems, Corporate Investment in Innovation, and Venture Capital, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. David Roodman, 2009. "How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(1), pages 86-136, March.
    10. 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, January.
    11. Edward Levitas & M. Ann McFadyen, 2009. "Managing liquidity in research‐intensive firms: signaling and cash flow effects of patents and alliance activities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 659-678, June.
    12. John E. Ettlie, 1998. "R&D and Global Manufacturing Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 1-11, January.
    13. Changhyun Kim & Richard A. Bettis, 2014. "Cash is surprisingly valuable as a strategic asset," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 2053-2063, December.
    14. Mobbs, Shawn, 2013. "CEOs Under Fire: The Effects of Competition from Inside Directors on Forced CEO Turnover and CEO Compensation," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 669-698, June.
    15. Vincent L. Barker , III & George C. Mueller, 2002. "CEO Characteristics and Firm R&D Spending," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(6), pages 782-801, June.
    16. Wu, Hsueh-Liang, 2008. "When does internal governance make firms innovative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 141-153, February.
    17. Alessandro Zattoni & Francesca Cuomo, 2008. "Why Adopt Codes of Good Governance? A Comparison of Institutional and Efficiency Perspectives," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, January.
    18. Zona, Fabio, 2016. "Agency models in different stages of CEO tenure: The effects of stock options and board independence on R&D investment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 560-575.
    19. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    20. Kenneth J. Rediker & Anju Seth, 1995. "Boards of directors and substitution effects of alternative governance mechanisms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 85-99.
    21. Guldiken, Orhun & Darendeli, Izzet Sidki, 2016. "Too much of a good thing: Board monitoring and R&D investments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2931-2938.
    22. Jensen, Michael C, 1986. "Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 323-329, May.
    23. 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.
    24. Hicheon Kim & Heechun Kim & Peggy M. Lee, 2008. "Ownership Structure and the Relationship Between Financial Slack and R&D Investments: Evidence from Korean Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 404-418, June.
    25. Kee H. Chung & Stephen W. Pruitt, 1994. "A Simple Approximation of Tobin's q," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 23(3), Fall.
    26. 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.
    27. Faleye, Olubunmi & Hoitash, Rani & Hoitash, Udi, 2011. "The costs of intense board monitoring," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 160-181, July.
    28. Christopher S. Tuggle & David G. Sirmon & Christopher R. Reutzel & Leonard Bierman, 2010. "Commanding board of director attention: investigating how organizational performance and CEO duality affect board members' attention to monitoring," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(9), pages 946-968, September.
    29. Constance E. Helfat, 1997. "Know‐how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: the case of r&d," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 339-360, May.
    30. Thomas Dalziel & Richard J. Gentry & Michael Bowerman, 2011. "An Integrated Agency–Resource Dependence View of the Influence of Directors' Human and Relational Capital on Firms' R&D Spending," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48, pages 1217-1242, September.
    31. David Finegold & George S. Benson & David Hecht, 2007. "Corporate Boards and Company Performance: review of research in light of recent reforms," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 865-878, September.
    32. Frank T. Rothaermel & Andrew M. Hess, 2007. "Building Dynamic Capabilities: Innovation Driven by Individual-, Firm-, and Network-Level Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 898-921, December.
    33. Charles W. L. Hill & Scott A. Snell, 1988. "External control, corporate strategy, and firm performance in research‐intensive industries," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(6), pages 577-590, November.
    34. Myers, Stewart C., 1977. "Determinants of corporate borrowing," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 147-175, November.
    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. Carmen Barroso-Castro & Marta Domínguez de la Concha Castañeda & Mª de los Ángeles Rodríguez Serrano, 2022. "Listed SMEs and innovation: the role of founding board members," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 901-934, June.
    2. Gang Chen & James J. Zhang & N. David Pifer, 2019. "Corporate Governance Structure, Financial Capability, and the R&D Intensity in Chinese Sports Sector: Evidence from Listed Sports Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Nikita A. Tolstov & Andrey A. Knyazev, 2024. "Influence of Top Management Characteristics on the Innovative Development of the World’s Top Companies in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 23(3), pages 855-875.

    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. Shaikh, Ibrahim A. & O'Brien, Jonathan Paul & Peters, Lois, 2018. "Inside directors and the underinvestment of financial slack towards R&D-intensity in high-technology firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 192-201.
    2. Guldiken, Orhun & Darendeli, Izzet Sidki, 2016. "Too much of a good thing: Board monitoring and R&D investments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2931-2938.
    3. Peter Wright & Mark Kroll, 2002. "Executive Discretion and Corporate Performance as Determinants of CEO Compensation, Contingent on External Monitoring Activities," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 6(3), pages 189-214, September.
    4. Mark Humphery‐Jenner & Emdad Islam & Lubna Rahman & Jo‐Ann Suchard, 2022. "Powerful CEOs and Corporate Governance," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 135-188, March.
    5. Eugene Kang & Mark Kroll, 2014. "Deciding Who Will Rule: Examining the Influence of Outside Noncore Directors on Executive Entrenchment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1662-1683, December.
    6. Gu, Yuqi & Zhang, Ling, 2017. "The impact of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on corporate innovation," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 17-30.
    7. 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).
    8. Azzam, Ala'a & Alhababsah, Salem, 2023. "Does age similarity between board chair and CEO matter for R&D investments? Evidence from China," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(PD).
    9. Asad, Muhammad & Akbar, Saeed & Li, Jing & Shah, Syed Zulfiqar Ali, 2023. "Board diversity and corporate propensity to R&D spending," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    10. Damian Ward & Igor Filatotchev, 2010. "Principal-principal-agency relationships and the role of external governance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(4), pages 249-261.
    11. Chari, Murali D.R. & David, Parthiban & Duru, Augustine & Zhao, Yijiang, 2019. "Bowman's risk-return paradox: An agency theory perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 357-375.
    12. Tim Heubeck & Reinhard Meckl, 2024. "Does board composition matter for innovation? A longitudinal study of the organizational slack–innovation relationship in Nasdaq-100 companies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(2), pages 597-624, June.
    13. Honoré, Florence & Munari, Federico & van Pottelsberghe de La Potterie, Bruno, 2015. "Corporate governance practices and companies’ R&D intensity: Evidence from European countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 533-543.
    14. Datta, Deepak K. & Basuil, Dynah A. & Agarwal, Ankita, 2020. "Effects of board characteristics on post-acquisition performance: A study of cross-border acquisitions by firms in the manufacturing sector," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(3).
    15. Wu, Chloe Yu-Hsuan & Hsu, Hwa-Hsien, 2018. "Founders and board structure: Evidence from UK IPO firms," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 19-31.
    16. Marco Allegrini & Giulio Greco, 2013. "Corporate boards, audit committees and voluntary disclosure: evidence from Italian Listed Companies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 17(1), pages 187-216, February.
    17. Wiwattanakantang, Yupana, 1999. "An empirical study on the determinants of the capital structure of Thai firms," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 7(3-4), pages 371-403, August.
    18. Olubunmi Faleye & Rani Hoitash & Udi Hoitash, 2018. "Industry expertise on corporate boards," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 441-479, February.
    19. Balsmeier, Benjamin & Fleming, Lee & Manso, Gustavo, 2017. "Independent boards and innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 536-557.
    20. McKnight, Phillip J. & Weir, Charlie, 2009. "Agency costs, corporate governance mechanisms and ownership structure in large UK publicly quoted companies: A panel data analysis," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 139-158, May.

    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:kap:jmgtgv:v:22:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s10997-017-9390-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.