ALBERT

Notes: There are good reasons for national differences in corporate governance, differences in the distributional outcomes desired and differences in motivational resources; material sticks and carrots are not the only ways of keeping top managers efficient, honest and dynamic. Yet, too often discussions of corporate governance assume the Anglo-Saxon model to be normal and others “deviant”– a notion to be challenged, but nevertheless the dominant assumption among the “reformers” of corporate governance in Japan and Germany. Most of the reforms in those two countries over the past decade have purported to be about making top managers more honest and efficient. In fact their purport has more often been to change distributional outcomes, favouring shareholders at the expense of employees.

Notes: We analyse the relationship between firm value, as measured by Tobin's q, and newly released indices of effective corporate governance for a sample of 263 Canadian firms. The results indicate that corporate governance does matter in Canada. However, not all elements of measured governance are important, and the effects of governance do differ by ownership category. For the entire sample of firms we find no evidence that a total governance index affects firm performance. This is mainly because we find no evidence that board independence, the most heavily-weighted sub-index, has any positive effect on firm performance. Indeed, for family-owned firms we find that the effect is negative. In general, sub-indices measuring effective compensation, disclosure and shareholder rights practices enhance performance and this is true for most ownership types. We also find no evidence that governance practices are endogenous.

Notes: Agency theorists have put forth a number of internal control mechanisms that can reduce agency problems. These different mechanisms are substitutive and thus it is thought that both the board of directors and large external shareholders can influence CEO compensation. Stewardship theory challenges the presumption of self-interest of agency theory, holding that managers view themselves as stewards of their organisation. The first objective of this paper is to study the influence of the control of the board of directors and large external shareholders on CEO compensation. The second objective is to utilise both stewardship and agency theory to analyse the relationship between control mechanisms and compensation, and to see which theory is more applicable. This paper uses the LISREL model to study the influence that the control of the board of directors and external large shareholders has upon CEO compensation, with data drawn from samples of listed manufacturing companies between the years 1997 and 1999 in Taiwan. The following conclusions are reached: (1) the paper supports the viewpoint of stewardship theory whereby the CEO acts as a steward of his/her company when he/she also holds the position of chairman of the company. (2) The findings show that CEO compensation will be high when the board's control is relatively ineffective. (3) The shareholdings of the board of directors can reinforce the degree of control from the board.

Notes: Books reviewed: Ferdinand A. Gul and Judy S. L. Tsui, eds, The Governance of East Asian Corporations: Post Asian Financial Crisis, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004, ISBN 1403944105 
Reviewed by Professor Christina L. Ahmadjian 
Hitotsubashi University

Notes: This paper presents a new, holistic approach to corporate governance, adding simultaneous value to shareholders, customers, employees and society. This new approach to directing and controlling companies integrates components of corporate governance that have historically been treated in isolation of each other in research, teaching and practice.

Notes: Based on British legislation, the duties of directors are stated in the New Zealand Companies Act 1993. However, “good” governance is not defined within the Act. Considering the relative importance attached by boards to a variety of governance tasks, this paper evaluates directors’ perceptions of the current contribution of fellow board members to different aspects of governance practice. This evaluation is discussed in relation to the influence of board tasks and functions on actions that may be regarded as being in the interests of the company as defined by the Act. The evaluation illustrates the strategic orientation of the board, highlighting the extent to which individual directors and the board as a whole can actually influence key outcomes and, thereby, their governance contribution. The paper reports responses to findings based on a study involving 3000 directors and presents suggestions for enhancing board processes as well as possible changes in expectations that could be encapsulated in legislation.

Notes: After the emergence of the Cadbury Report in 1992, several countries in the EU, including Denmark, issued their own guidelines of corporate governance. However, whether such recommendations benefit shareholders is a controversial question. This article presents an empirical analysis of financial performance and the composition of semi-two-tier boards using a unique sample of Danish listed firms. It is shown that board size, proportion of insiders and positions held by board members in other firms do not significantly impact performance. Only the average age of the board has a significantly negative impact on performance. Thus, it is argued that board structure only plays crucial role when a firm is in financial trouble or faces a major threat – not under normal circumstances.

Notes: In recent years there has been some debate and uncertainty about the legality of private briefings of some market participants with the management of listed companies in the UK. The Myners (2001) and Higgs (2003) Reports have suggested an increasingly active role for institutional shareholders. However, the message from the Financial Services Authority in its role as the United Kingdom Listing Authority has been that private briefings may be unlawful. This article explores the meaning and scope of the legal rules on insider dealing and market abuse under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, the Criminal Justice Act 1993 and those parts of the Listing Rules that govern such briefings. The extent to which such rules apply to various types of meeting between corporate managers and other market participants, such as institutional investors, and the information provided in those meetings, will also be examined. The paper concludes that the mismatch between the apparent legal position and the policy objective of the Government of increasing institutional shareholders’ activism requires a resolution.

Notes: We analyse the corporate governance of professional football clubs operating in England's Premier and Football Leagues. Good corporate governance is essential if clubs are to be managed effectively and to survive in the difficult economic circumstances surrounding the football industry. The past couple of years have been especially testing, as Football League clubs have had to deal with the aftermath of the collapse of the ITV digital contract. Our analysis reveals that while there are some noticeable improvements in governance standards, many clubs would benefit from following best practice guidelines on information disclosure, the appointment of directors, board composition, induction and training of directors, risk management and consultation with stakeholders. Despite improvement in some areas over the past three years, standards of corporate governance in football clubs are significantly below those of listed companies as a whole and there is thus considerable need for improvement.Corporate governance in the UK is regulated by Company Law and by codes of corporate governance such as The Combined Code (CC) and The OECD Principles. Whereas compliance with company law is obligatory, compliance with best practice codes of corporate governance, such as the CC, is voluntary in the sense that companies listed on the London Stock Exchange must either comply with the code or else explain any instance of non-compliance in their Annual Report. The rationale for this self-regulatory process is that good corporate governance brings benefits to companies in terms of engendering the trust of investors and improving corporate performance. Firms will therefore find it in their own best interests to comply with the code unless there is a good reason not to do so which can be explained to shareholders in the company's statement of compliance. Since the CC was first introduced, the degree of compliance, as measured by the proportion of companies adopting best practice, has increased considerably, representing a welcome improvement in governance standards.In this paper we present results from our annual survey of FA Premier and Football League clubs, and our analysis of corporate governance statements published by listed clubs, to provide an assessment of the state of corporate governance of professional football clubs. On the basis of this analysis we make a number of recommendations for how the corporate governance of professional football clubs might be improved in the future.