Board Expertise and Executive Incentives

References

• Adams R, Ferreira D (2007) A theory of friendly boards. J. Finance 62(1):217–250.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Tirole J (1997) Real and formal authority in organizations. J. Political Econom. 105(1):1–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almandoz J, Tilcsik A (2016) When experts become liabilities: Domain experts on boards and organizational failure. Acad. Management J. 59(4):1124–1149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Antle R, Eppen G (1985) Capital rationing and organizational slack in capital budgeting. Management Sci. 31(2):163–174.Link, Google Scholar
• Arya A, Glover J, Radhakrishnan S (2006) The controllability principle in responsibility accounting: Another look. Antle R, Gjesdal F, Liang PJ, eds. Essays in Accounting Theory in Honour of Joel S. Demski (Springer, New York), 183–198.Google Scholar
• Arya A, Glover J, Sivaramakrishnan K (1997) The interaction between decision and control problems and the value of information. Accounting Rev. 72(4):561–574.Google Scholar
• Arya A, Fellingham J, Glover J, Sivaramakrishnan K (2000) Capital budgeting, the hold-up problem, and information system design. Management Sci. 46:205–216.Link, Google Scholar
• Baiman S, Heinle MS, Saouma R (2013) Multistage capital budgeting with delayed consumption of slack. Management Sci. 59(4):869–881.Link, Google Scholar
• Balakrishnan R (1991) Information acquisition and resource allocation decisions. Accounting Rev. 66(1):120–139.Google Scholar
• Baldenius T, Melumad N, Meng X (2014) Board composition and CEO power. J. Financial Econom. 112(1):53–68.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldenius T, Meng X, Qiu L (2019) Biased boards. Accounting Rev. 94(2):1–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bebchuk L, Fried J (2004) Pay Without Performance: The Unfulfilled Promise of Executive Compensation (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Cremer J (1995) Arm's length relationships. Quart. J. Econom. 110(2):275–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dass N, Kini O, Nanda V, Onal B, Wang J (2014) Board expertise: Do directors from related industries help bridge the information gap? Rev. Financial Stud. 27(5):1533–1592.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Drymiotes G (2007) The monitoring role of insiders. J. Accounting Econom. 44(3):359–377.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Drymiotes G, Sivaramakrishnan K (2012) Board monitoring, consulting, and reward structures. Contemporary Accounting Res. 29(2):453–486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmans A, Gabaix X (2016) Executive compensation: A modern primer. J. Econom. Literature 54(4):1232–1287.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faleye O (2016) The downside to full board independence. MIT Sloan Management Rev. (November 29), https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-downside-to-full-board-independence/.Google Scholar
• Faleye O, Hoitash R, Hoitash U (2018) Industry expertise on corporate boards. Rev. Quant. Finance Accounting 50(2):441–479.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ferri F, Goex R (2017) Executive compensation, corporate governance, and say on pay. Foundations Trends Accounting 12(1):1–109.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friedman H (2014) Implications of power: When the CEO can pressure the CFO to bias reports. J. Accounting Econom. 58(1):117–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goex R (2016) Say on pay, governance quality, and shareholder pressure. Working paper, University of Zurich, Zurich.Google Scholar
• Guner B, Malmendier U, Tate G (2008) Financial expertise of directors. J. Financial Econom. 88(2):323–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kang S, Kim EH, Lu Y (2018) Does independent directors' CEO experience matter? Rev. Finance 22(3):905–949.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein A (1998) Firm performance and board committee structure. J. Law Econom. 41(1):275–304.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Korczak P, Nguyen T, Scapin M (2018) Banker-directors and CEO insider debt. Working paper, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
• Kumar P, Sivaramakrishnan K (2008) Who monitors the monitor? The effect of board independence on executive compensation and firm value. Rev. Financial Stud. 21(3):1371–1401.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lambert R (1986) Executive effort and selection of risky projects. RAND J. Econom. 17(1):77–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laux V (2006) The ignored performance measure. J. Econom. Management Strategy 15(3):707–733.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laux V (2008) Board independence and CEO turnover. J. Accounting Res. 46(1):137–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laux V, Mittendorf B (2011) Board independence, executive pay, and the adoption of pet projects. Contemporary Accounting Res. 28(5):1467–1483.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levit D (2012) Expertise, structure, and reputation of corporate boards. Working paper, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
• Masulis R, Ruzzier C, Xiao S, Zhao S (2012) Do independent expert directors matter? Working Paper No. 68200, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
• Minton B, Taillard JP, Williamson R (2014) Financial expertise of the board, risk taking, and performance: Evidence from bank holding companies. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 49(2):351–380.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nanda V, Onal B (2016) Incentive contracting when boards have related industry expertise. J. Corporate Finance 41:1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwartz-Ziv M, Weisbach M (2013) What do boards really do? Evidence from minutes of board meetings. J. Financial Econom. 108(2):349–366.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Şabac F, Tian JJ (2015) On the stewardship value of soft managerial reports. Accounting Rev. 90(4):1683–1706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tian J (2014) Board monitoring and endogenous information asymmetry. Contemporary Accounting Res. 31(1):136–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang C, Xie F, Zhu M (2015) Industry expertise of independent directors and board monitoring. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 50(5):929–962.Crossref, Google Scholar