Governance structures, size and corporate performance in UK firms

Management Decision

Volumn 37, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 457-464

  Laing, David ^a   Weir, Charles M ^a  

^a ROBERT GORDON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Codes of practice; Company performance; Corporate governance; United Kingdom

Indexed keywords

EID: 84986093743     PISSN: 00251747     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/00251749910274234     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Agrawal, A. and Knoeber, C.R. (1996), “Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 31, pp. 377-97.
2. Baysinger, B.D. and Hoskisson, R.R. (1990), “The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: effects on corporate strategy”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 15, pp. 72-87.
3. Berg, S.V. and Smith, S.K. (1978), “CEO board chairman: A quantitative study of dual versus unitary leadership”, Directors and Boards, Vol. 3, pp. 34-9.
4. Boyd, B.K. (1995), “CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, pp. 301-12.
5. Cadbury Committee (1992), Report on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance, GEC, London.
6. Conyon, M.J. and Mallin, C.A. (1997), “A review of compliance with Cadbury”, Journal of General Management, Vol. 22, pp. 24-37.
7. Daily, C.M. and Dalton, D.R. (1992), “The relationship between governance structure and corporate performance in entrepreneurial firms”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 7, pp. 375-86.
8. Dalton, D.R., Daily, C.M., Ellestrand, A.E. and Johnson, J.L. (1998), “Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 269-90.
9. Donaldson, L. and Davis, J.H. (1991), “Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns”, Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 16, pp. 49-64.
10. Ezzamel, M.A. and Watson, R. (1993), “Organisational form, ownership structure and corporate performance: A contextual empirical analysis of UK companies”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 4, pp. 161-76.
11. Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H. (1976), “Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 3, pp. 305-50.
12. Klein, A. (1998), “Firm performance and board committee structure”, Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 41, pp. 137-65.
13. O'Sullivan, N. and Wong, P. (1997), “Does failure really mean success? An analysis of governance changes in abandoned take-overs”, paper presented at the British Academy of Management Conference, Birmingham University.Birmingham University.
14. Pearce, J.A. and Zhara, S.A. (1992), “Board compensation from a strategic contingency perspective”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 29, pp. 411-38.
15. Rechner, P.L. and Dalton, D.R. (1989), “The impact of CEO as board chairperson on corporate performance: evidence versus rhetoric”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 3, pp. 141-3.
16. Rechner, P.L. and Dalton, D.R. (1991), “CEO duality and organizational performance: a longitudinal analysis”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 155-60.
17. Vance, S.C. (1964), Boards of Directors: Structures and Performance, University of Oregon Press, Eugene, OR.
18. Yermack, D. (1996), “Higher market value of companies with a small board of directors”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 40, pp. 185-212.