IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mnh/spaper/2337.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The impact of supervisory board characteristics on form performance

Author

Listed:
  • Bremert, Michael
  • Schulten, Axel

Abstract

Corporate boards play an important role in shaping, steering, supervising and advising an organization. Thus it is likely that corporate boards have an impact on corporate performance. There is empirical literature which analyses the interrelation between board features and company performance. The results suggest that board characteristics have a measureable impact on the economic success of a firm. Although the two-tier system prevalent in “Continental European” countries significantly differs from the one-tier regime as it separates management and supervision of an organization, there is little research done by now to examine, whether results from one-tier regimes persist in this alternative setting. Our study explores the interrelations between supervisory board characteristics and accounting as well as market based corporate performance by using a sample of German listed companies. We find that the average remuneration of supervisory board members seems to have a positive association with firm performance. Additionally and in contrast to previous results in different governance settings we find that board size does not negatively buy positively affect firm performance in terms of accounting based figures.

Suggested Citation

  • Bremert, Michael & Schulten, Axel, 2008. "The impact of supervisory board characteristics on form performance," Papers 08-33, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    • Handle: RePEc:mnh:spaper:2337
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://madoc.bib.uni-mannheim.de/2337/1/dp08_33.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen P. Ferris & Murali Jagannathan & A. C. Pritchard, 2003. "Too Busy to Mind the Business? Monitoring by Directors with Multiple Board Appointments," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(3), pages 1087-1111, June.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Lawrence Brown & Marcus Caylor, 2009. "Corporate governance and firm operating performance," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 129-144, February.
    5. repec:bla:jfinan:v:58:y:2003:i:3:p:1087-1112 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Eliezer M. Fich & Anil Shivdasani, 2006. "Are Busy Boards Effective Monitors?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(2), pages 689-724, April.
    7. James Cordeiro & Rajaram Veliyath & Edward Eramus, 2000. "An Empirical Investigation of the Determinants of Outside Director Compensation," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 268-279, July.
    8. Mehran, Hamid, 1995. "Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 163-184, June.
    9. Shijun Cheng & John Evans & Nandu Nagarajan, 2008. "Board size and firm performance: the moderating effects of the market for corporate control," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 121-145, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 1988. "The Determinants of Board Composition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(4), pages 589-606, Winter.
    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. Cable, John R, 1985. "Capital Market Information and Industrial Performance: The Role of West German Banks," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(377), pages 118-132, March.
    14. 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.
    15. Kin Lee & Baruch Lev & Gillian Yeo, 2008. "Executive pay dispersion, corporate governance, and firm performance," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 315-338, April.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Ingolf Dittmann & Ernst Maug & Christoph Schneider, 2008. "How Preussag Became TUI: A Clinical Study of Institutional Blockholders and Restructuring in Europe," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 37(3), pages 571-598, September.
    20. repec:bla:jfinan:v:59:y:2004:i:5:p:2281-2308 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. 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.
    22. Agarwal, Rajshree & Ann Elston, Julie, 2001. "Bank-firm relationships, financing and firm performance in Germany," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 225-232, August.
    23. 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.
    24. Adams, Renée B. & Ferreira, Daniel, 2008. "Do directors perform for pay?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 154-171, September.
    25. Eliezer Fich & Steve Slezak, 2008. "Can corporate governance save distressed firms from bankruptcy? An empirical analysis," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 225-251, February.
    26. David F. Larcker & Tjomme O. Rusticus, 2007. "Endogeneity and Empirical Accounting Research," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 207-215.
    27. Tod Perry & Urs Peyer, 2005. "Board Seat Accumulation by Executives: A Shareholder's Perspective," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(4), pages 2083-2123, August.
    28. 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.
    29. Caspar Rose, 2005. "The Composition of Semi‐Two‐Tier Corporate Boards and Firm Performance," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(5), pages 691-701, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sheeba Kapil & Rakesh K Mishra, 2019. "Corporate Governance structure and firm performance in Indian context: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach," Working Papers 1937, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade.
    2. 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).
    3. Volonté, Christophe, 2015. "Boards: Independent and committed directors?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 25-37.
    4. 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.
    5. Chaur-Shiuh Young & Liu-Ching Tsai & Pei-Gin Hsieh, 2008. "Voluntary Appointment of Independent Directors in Taiwan: Motives and Consequences," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(9-10), pages 1103-1137.
    6. Pamela Brandes & Ravi Dharwadkar & Jonathan F. Ross & Linna Shi, 2022. "Time is of the Essence!: Retired Independent Directors’ Contributions to Board Effectiveness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 767-793, September.
    7. Nguyen, Bang Dang & Nielsen, Kasper Meisner, 2010. "The value of independent directors: Evidence from sudden deaths," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 550-567, December.
    8. Aiyesha Dey, 2008. "Corporate Governance and Agency Conflicts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(5), pages 1143-1181, December.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Reguera-Alvarado, Nuria & Bravo, Francisco, 2017. "The effect of independent directors’ characteristics on firm performance: Tenure and multiple directorships," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 590-599.
    12. ØYvind Bøhren & R. Øystein Strøm, 2010. "Governance and Politics: Regulating Independence and Diversity in the Board Room," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9‐10), pages 1281-1308, November.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. Benson, Bradley W. & Chen, Yu & James, Hui L. & Park, Jung Chul, 2020. "So far away from me: Firm location and the managerial ownership effect on firm value," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    18. Stefanescu Cristina Alexandra, 2011. "Do Corporate Governance “Actors”’ Features Affect Banks’ Value? – Evidence From Romania," Studies in Business and Economics, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 136-150, August.
    19. 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.
    20. Vagliasindi, Maria, 2008. "The effectiveness of boards of directors of state owned enterprises in developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4579, The World Bank.

    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:mnh:spaper:2337. 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: Katharina Rautenberg (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfmande.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.