Independent boards and the institutional investors that prefer them: Drivers of institutional investor heterogeneity in governance preferences

Strategic Management Journal

Volumn 35, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 1552-1563

  Schnatterly, Karen ^a   Johnson, Scott G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

agency theory; institutional investor heterogeneity; institutional investors; institutional theory; socialization of agency theory

Indexed keywords

SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

AGENCY COSTS; AGENCY THEORY; FIRM PERFORMANCE; INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS; INSTITUTIONAL PRESSURES; INSTITUTIONAL THEORY; TRADING STRATEGIES; WHETHER DIFFERENCES;

INVESTMENTS;

EID: 84906779112     PISSN: 01432095     EISSN: 10970266     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/smj.2166     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Aguilera RV, Filatotchev I, Gospel H, Jackson G,. 2008. An organizational approach to comparative corporate governance: costs, contingencies, and complementarities. Organization Science 19 (3): 475-492.
2. Ai C, Norton E,. 2003. Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Economics Letters 80 (1): 123-129.
3. Bennett R, Sias JAW, Starks LT,. 2003. Greener pastures and the impact of dynamic institutional preferences. Review of Financial Studies 16 (4): 1203-1238.
4. Bhagat S, Black B, Blair M,. 2004. Relational investing and firm performance. Journal of Financial Research 27 (1): 1-30.
5. Boyd BK,. 1994. Board control and CEO compensation. Strategic Management Journal 15 (5): 335-344.
6. Bushee BJ,. 1998. The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. The Accounting Review 73 (3): 305-333.
7. Bushee BJ,. 2001. Do institutional investors prefer near-term earnings overlong run value? Contemporary Accounting Research 18 (2): 207-246.
8. Chan LKC, Chen HL, Lakonishok J,. 2002. On mutual fund investing styles. Review of Financial Studies 15 (5): 1407-1438.
9. Coombes P, Watson M,. 2000. Three surveys on corporate governance. McKinsey Quarterly 4: 74-77.
10. Cox P, Brammer SB, Millington A,. 2004. An empirical examination of institutional investor preferences for corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 52 (1): 27-43.
11. Dalton DR, Daily CM, Ellstrand AE, Johnson JL. 1998. Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal 19 (3): 269-290.
12. Dharwadkar R, Goranova M, Brandes P, Khan R,. 2008. Institutional ownership and monitoring effectiveness: it's not just how much but what else you own. Organizational Science 19 (3): 419-440.
13. DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW,. 1983. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147-160.
14. Eakins SG, Stansell SR, Buck JF,. 1998. Analyzing the nature of institutional demand for common stocks. Quarterly Journal of Business Economics 37 (2): 33-48.
15. Falkenstein EG,. 1996. Preferences for stock characteristics as revealed by mutual fund portfolio holdings. Journal of Finance 51 (1): 111-135.
16. Gompers PA, Metrick A,. 2001. Institutional investors and equity prices. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 (1): 229-259.
17. Guler I,. 2007. Throwing good money after bad? Political and institutional influences on sequential decision making in the venture capital industry. Administrative Science Quarterly 52 (2): 248-285.
18. Hambrick DC, Werder AV, Zajac EJ,. 2008. New directions in corporate governance research. Organization Science 19 (3): 381-385.
19. Heflin F, Shaw KW,. 2000. Blockholder ownership and market liquidity. Journal of Financial Quantitative Analysis 35 (4): 621-633.
20. Hoskisson RE, Hitt MA, Johnson RA, Grossman W,. 2002. Conflicting voices: the effects of institutional ownership heterogeneity and internal governance on corporate innovation strategies. Academy of Management Journal 45 (4): 697-716.
21. Jensen MC, Meckling WH,. 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305-360.
22. Johnson RA, Hoskisson RE, Hitt MA,. 1993. Board of director involvement in restructuring: the effects of board versus managerial controls and characteristics. Strategic Management Journal 14: 33-50.
23. Lutje T,. 2009. To be good or to be better: asset managers' attitudes toward herding. Applied Financial Economics 19 (10): 825-839.
24. McFadden P,. 1974. The measurement of urban travel demand. Journal of Public Economics 3: 303-328.
25. Meyer J, Rowan B,. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology 83 (2): 340-363.
26. Pozen RC,. 1994. Institutional investors: the reluctant activists. Harvard Business Review 72 (1): 140-149.
27. Prahalad CK,. 1994. Corporate governance or corporate value added? Rethinking the primacy of shareholder value. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 6 (4): 40-50.
28. Ryan LV, Schneider M,. 2003. Institutional investor power and heterogeneity: implications for agency and stakeholder theories. Business & Society 42 (4): 398-429.
29. Schnatterly K, Shaw KW, Jennings WW,. 2008. Information advantages of large institutional owners. Strategic Management Journal 29 (2): 219-227.
30. Shleifer A, Vishny RW,. 1986. Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of Political Economy 94 (3): 461-489.
31. Tihanyi L, Johnson RA, Hoskisson RE, Hitt MA,. 2003. Institutional ownership differences and international diversification: the effects of boards of directors and technological opportunity. Academy of Management Journal 48 (2): 195-211.
32. Westphal JD, Zajac EJ,. 1998. The symbolic management of stockholders: corporate governance reforms and shareholder reactions. Administrative Science Quarterly 43 (1): 127-153.
33. Zajac EJ, Westphal JD,. 2004. The social construction of market value: institutionalization and learning perspectives on stock market reactions. American Sociological Review 69 (3): 433-457.
34. Zhang Y,. 2008. Information asymmetry and the dismissal of newly appointed CEOs: an empirical investigation. Strategic Management Journal 29: 859-872.