Directorship interlocks in Singapore: A social network analysis

Corporate Ownership and Control

Volumn 4, Issue 1 A, 2006, Pages 65-76

  Tan, Margaret ^a   Keong, Lee Chu ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Corporate governance; Directorship interlocks; Singapore; Social network

Indexed keywords

EID: 81055134892     PISSN: 17279232     EISSN: 18103057     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.22495/cocv4i1p5     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alexander, M. 2003. Boardroom networks among Australian company directors, 1976 and 1996. Journal of Sociology 39, 3, 231-251.
2. Berle, A. and Means, G. 1932. The Modern Corporation and Private Property. NY: Harcourt
3. Brass, D. J. 1984. Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly.
4. Carroll, R. and Thanos, M. 1994. Director Interlocks and Part IV of the Trade Practices Act 1. Australian Business Law Review 22, 6.
5. Conner, K.R., and Prahalad, C.K. 1996. A resource-based theory of the firm: Knowledge versus opportunism. Organization Science 7.
6. Dalton, D. R. & Daily, C. M. 1999. What's wrong with having friends on the board? Across the Board 36, 3, 28-32.
7. Davis, G. Agents without Principles? 1991. The Spread of the Poison Pill through the Intercorporate Network. Administration Science Quarterly 36, 583-613.
8. Dooley, P. 1969. The Interlocking Directorate. The American Economic Review 59, 314-323.
9. Fich, E.M. and White, L. J. 2004. CEO Compensation and Turnover: The Effects of Mutually Interlocked Board. Wake Forest Law Review 38, 3, 935-959.
10. Galsberg, D. 1987. The Ties that Bind? Case Studies in the Significance of Corporate Board Interlocks with Financial Institutions. Sociological Perspectives 30, 1, 19-48.
11. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic Action and Social Structure: the Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91, 481-510.
12. Gulati, R. and Westphal, J. 1999. Cooperative or Controlling? The Effects of CEO-Board Relations and the Content of Interlocks on the Formation of Joint Ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly 44, 473-506.
13. Gulati, Ranjay. 1995. Familarity breeds trust? The implications of repeated ties on contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38:85112.
14. Singapore Stock Exchange
15. http://info.sgx.com/SGXWeb_CORPCOM.nsf/N EWDOCNAME/Background_On_SGX.
16. http://info.sgx.com/webmktstatistics.nsf/0b0324 dae84b770948256dad0009440a/5d60e9518bcc2 8c748256ec2002b3b0c?OpenDocument.
17. Jensen, M. C. 1993. The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit and the Failure of Internal Control Systems. The Journal of Finance 48, 3.
18. Johnson, J.L., Daily, C. M & Ellstrand, A.E. 1996. Boards of directors: a review and research agenda. Journal of Management 22, 3, 409-438.
19. Koeing, & Gogel, 1981. Interlocking Corporate Directorships as a social network. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 40.
20. Levine, J. 1972. The Sphere of Influence. American Sociological Review 37, 14-27.
21. Lorsch, J. W. 1995. Empowering the Board. Harvard Business Review 73, 1, 107-117.
22. Mace, M. Directors: 1971. Myth and Reality. Boston: Graduate School of Business Administration. Harvard University.
23. Mintz, B. and Schwartz, M. 1981. Interlocking Directorates and Interest Group Formation. American Sociological Review 46, 851-869.
24. Mintz, B. and Schwartz, M. 1983. Bank Hegemony, Corporate Networks and Intercorporate Power: A Study of Interlocking Directorates in American Business. University Chicago Press, CH, USA.
25. Mizruchi, M. 1996. What Do Interlocks Do? An analysis, Critique and Assessment of Research on Interlocking Directorates. Annual Review of Sociology 22, 271-302.
26. Mizruchi, M. and Stearns, L. A 1994. A Longitudinal Study of Borrowing by Large American Corporations. Administrative Science Quarterly 39, 118-140.
27. Murray, G. 2001. Interlocking Directorates: What do they tell about Corporate Power in Australia. Journal of Australian Political Economy, 47.
28. Social Network Analysis http://www.orgnet.com
29. Pei, S. F. 2004. Review of Literature & Empirical Research: Is Board Diversity Important for Corporate Governance and Firm Value? MAS Staff Paper No. 35.
30. Pennings, J. 1980. Interlocking Directorates: Origins and Consequences of Connections among Organizations' Boards of Directors. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
31. Pettigrew, A. 1992. On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal 3, 163-182.
32. Pfeffer, J. 1972. Size and Composition of Corporate Boards of Directors. Administrative Science Quarterly 17, 218-228.
33. Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. 1978. The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row, New York.
34. Scott, J & Griff C. 1985. Directors of Industry: The British Corporate Network, 1904-1976. Cambridge, Polity Press.
35. Scott, J. 1985. Theoretical Frameworks and Research Design, (in) Scott et al Networks of Corporate Power. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1-19.
36. Scott, J. 2000. Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. Sage Publications Ltd, CA.
37. Useem, M. 1982. Classwide Rationality in the Politics of Managers and Directors of Large Corporations in the United States and Great Britain. Administrative Science Quarterly 27.
38. Useem, M. 1984. The Inner Circle. Oxford Press.
39. Westphal, J.D. 1999. Collaboration in the Boardroom: Behavioural and Performance Consequences of CEO-Board Social Ties. Academy of Management Journal 42, 1, 7-24.
40. Zahra, S. A. & Pearce, J. A. 1989. Boards of Directors and Corporate Financial Performance: A Review and Integrated Model. Journal of Management 15, 2, 291-334.