Parikalpana: KIIT Journal of Management

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Impact of Corporate Governance on Firm Performance: Evidence from Indian Leading Companies


Affiliations
1 Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU), Ethiopia
2 School of management, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
 

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of corporate governance variables on the company performance of Indian leading companies. The data were gathered from the f inancial reports of India leading companies for the period of f ive years (2012 - 2016). The effect of corporate governance variables (Chief Executive Off icer(CEO) duality, the board size, and the board independence) on company performance were plumbed by Return on Asset (ROA). The panel data of the study were analyzed by descriptive statistics(mean, standard deviation, maximum and minimum values), correlation, and regression analyses. The coeff icientsof correlationindicated that there is no multicollinearity problem of independent variables. The regression analysis is statistically not signif icant. The f indings showed that there is no epochal impact of corporate governance variables on the company performance of India leading companies in the sample.

Keywords

Corporate Governance, Company Performance, ROA, CSR.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Abdullah, S.N. (2004). Board composition, CEO duality and performance among Malaysian Listed companies, Corporate Governance: The International Journal of business in Society, (p47-61).

  • Afolabi, A. and Dare, A.M. (2015).Corporate governance in the Nigerian banking sector: Issues and challenges, European Journal of Accounting Auditing and Finance Research, 3(5): 64-89.

  • Ahmadu, Sandu. , Aminu, S. Mikailu., & Garba, Tukur. (2005). Corporate governance Mechanisms and firm financial performance in Nigeria. African Economic research Consortium, (p.1-41).

  • Akshita, Arora. (2010). Relationship between corporate governance and performance: An empirical study from India. International Centre for Financial Regulation.

  • Australia Corporate Governance Council. (2014). Corporate governance principles and recommendations. Third edition, Sydney, Australian Security Exchange.

  • Baltagi, B. 2008. Econometric analysis of panel data. West Sussex : Wiley.

  • Berle, a., &Means, G. (1932).The modern corporation and private property. Macmillan, New York.

  • Bhagat, S. & Black, B. (1999). The uncertain relationship between board composition and Firm performance, business lawyer, [e-journal] vol.54, no.3,( pp.921-964).

  • Black,BS., Jang, H & Kim, W. (2006). Does corporate governance predict firms’ market values? Evidence From Korea. The Journal of Law, Economics & Organizations, Vol.22, no. 2, (pp.366413).

  • Boyd BK. (1995). CEO duality and firm performance: a contingency model. strategic management journal, (p.301-312).

  • Brickley, J. A., Coles, J. L. & Jarrell, G. (1997). Leadership structure: separating the CEO and chairman of the board. journal of corporate finance, 3: 189-220.

  • Cheng, wu., chiang, lin., cheng feng, lai.(2005). The effects of corporate governance on firm Performance.

  • Crowther, D. and Seifi, S. (2011). Corporate Governance and International Business

  • Dalwai, T. A. R., Basiruddin , R., & Rasod, S. Z. A. (2015). A critical review of relationship between corporate governance and firm performance: GCC banking sector perspective. Corporate Governance, 15, 18-30.doi:10.1108/cg-042013- 0048

  • Danoshana, S, & Ravivathani, T. (2014). The impact of the corporate governance on firm performance: A study on f inancial institutions in Sri Lanka. Merit research journal of accounting, auditing, economics and finance, vol. 1(6), (p.118-121).

  • Empirical Study of India, World Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1): 51-66.

  • Fama, E.F. and Jensen, M.(1983). Separation of ownership and control , journal of law and economics, 26 (2): 301-325.

  • Fauzi, f. And locke, s. (2012). “Board structure, ownership structure and firm performance a Study of new zealand listed firms,” Asian academy of management journal of Accounting and finance, 8(2): 43–67.

  • Garg, a.k. (2007).Influence of board size and independence on firm performance: a study of Indian Companies. The journal of decision makers, 32(3): 39-60.

  • Grove, H., & Clouse, M. (2015). Developing guidelines for independent and competent directors using what we have learned from research and company examples [Special issue]. Corporate Ownership & Control, 12(4), 826-837.

  • Gupta,S, K. (2015). Corporate governance practices in developing nations.

  • Ibrahim, Rehman, Raoof, (2010). “Role of corporate governance in firm performance: a comparative study between chemical and pharmaceutical sectors of pakistan”. Internationalresearch journal of finance and economics

  • Iqbal, Javid. (2008) Does Corporate Governance Affect a Firm’s Performance? A case study on Pakistani Market, NUST Journal of Business and Economics.

  • Jensen, M. C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal Control systems, Journal of Financial, 48(3): 831– 880.

  • Kesner, IF. (1987) Directors stock Ownership and Organizational Performance: An investigation of Fortune 500 Companies. Journal of Management, vol. 13, pp. 499-508.

  • Laing, D. & Weir, CM. (1999). Governance Structures, Size and Corporate Performance in UK Firms. Management Decision, vol. 37, no. 5, (p. 457-464).

  • Lal, C., Chugh, Joseph, W., Meador, & Ashwini Shanth Kumar. (2011). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: Evidence from India. Journal of Finance & Accountancy, 7(1), 1-10.

  • Lipton, M., & Lorsch, J. (1992). A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. the business lawyer, [ejournal] vol.48, no.1, (p.59-77).

  • Maher, Maria. & Andersson, Thomas. (2000). Corporate governance: effects on firm performance and economic growth.

  • Mak, Y. & Kusnadi, Y. (2005). Size really matters: Further evidence on the negative relationship between board size and firm value. pacific-basin finance journal, [e-journal] vol.13, no.3, (p.301-318).

  • Mallin, A. C. (2010). Corporate Governance. 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press

  • Mallin, C., Mulleneux, A. & Wihlborg, C. (2005) The financial sector and corporate governance: the UK case. Corporate governance: An International Review, 13(4): 532-547.

  • Minichilli, A., Zattoni, A. & Zona, F. (2009). Making Boards Effective: An Empirical Examination of Board Task Performance, British Journal of Management, 20: 55-74.

  • Muth, M.M. & Donaldson, L. (1998). Stewardship Theory and Board Structure: A contingency approach, corporate governance: an international review, [e-journal] vol.6, no.1, (p.5-28).

  • Nguyen, V. & Nguyen,A. (2016). Corporate governance structures and performance of firms in asian markets: a comparative analysis between singapore and vietnam available through: lusem library website http://www.lusem.lu.se/library [accessed 12 may 2017]

  • OECD, (2004). Principles of Corporate governance. FRANCE: OECD Publications Service

  • Okeahalam, C. and Akinboade, O. (2003). A review of corporate governance in Africa: Literature, Issues and Challenges. Paper prepared for the Global Corporate Governance Forum.

  • Saibaba, M.D. (2013). Do Board Independence and CEO Duality Matter in Firm Valuation? An empirical study of Indian companies, IUP journal of corporate governance, [e-journal] vol.12, no.1, (p.50-67).

  • Said, J., Jaafar, N.H. & Atan, R. (2015). Assessing accountability in government linked companies: An Empirical Evidence. International Business Management, 9(4): 460-469.

  • Siddiqui, S. S. (2014).The association between corporate governance and firm performance - A Meta-Analysis. Queensland: School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology.

  • Singhchawla, W., Evans, R.T. & Evans, J.P. (2011). Board independence, subcommittee independence and f irm performance: evidence from australia, Asia Pacific journal of economics and business, [e-journal] vol.15, no.2, (p.1-15).

  • Smith, A. (1776). An enquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. London : W. Strahan and T. Cadell.

  • Suryanarayana, A. (ed.) (2005). Corporate governance: The current crisis and The way out, ICFAI University Press, Hyderabad.

  • Tricker, B. (2015). Corporate Governance, Principles, Policies and Practices, Oxford: University press

  • Velnampy, T., & Pratheepkanth, P. (2013). Corporate governance and firm performance: A study of selected listed companies in Sri Lanka. European Journal of Commerce and Management Research, 2(6), 123-127.

  • Vo, H.D. & Nguyen, M.T. (2014). The Impact of Corporate Governance on Firm Performance: Empirical Study in Vietnam, International Journal of Economics and Finance, [e-journal] vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 1-13,

  • Yasser. (2011). Corporate governance and performance: An analysis of Pakistani listed firms. International Research Journal of Library, Information and Archival Studies.

  • Yermack, D. (1996). Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors , Journal of Financial Economics, 40: 185-211.

  • Zahra, SA. & Pearce, JA. (1989). Board of Directors and Financial Performance:A Review and Integrative Model. Journal of Management, vol. 15, pp. 291-334.

  • Zeitun, R. (2009). Ownership structure, corporate performance andfailure: Evidence from panel of emerging market: The case of Jordan, Journal of Corporate Ownership & Control, 6 (4):96 – 114.

  • Zeitun, Rand Tian, G.G. ( 2007). Does ownership affect a firm’s performance and default risk in Jordan? Corporate Governance, 7(1):66 – 82.


Abstract Views: 589

PDF Views: 0




  • Impact of Corporate Governance on Firm Performance: Evidence from Indian Leading Companies

Abstract Views: 589  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Meseret Diriba
Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU), Ethiopia
Dharitri Basumatary
School of management, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

Abstract


The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of corporate governance variables on the company performance of Indian leading companies. The data were gathered from the f inancial reports of India leading companies for the period of f ive years (2012 - 2016). The effect of corporate governance variables (Chief Executive Off icer(CEO) duality, the board size, and the board independence) on company performance were plumbed by Return on Asset (ROA). The panel data of the study were analyzed by descriptive statistics(mean, standard deviation, maximum and minimum values), correlation, and regression analyses. The coeff icientsof correlationindicated that there is no multicollinearity problem of independent variables. The regression analysis is statistically not signif icant. The f indings showed that there is no epochal impact of corporate governance variables on the company performance of India leading companies in the sample.

Keywords


Corporate Governance, Company Performance, ROA, CSR.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.23862/kiit-parikalpana%2F2019%2Fv15%2Fi1-2%2F190178