Directors’ Perceptions of Board Effectiveness and Internal Operations

References

• Abbott LJ, Parker S, Presley TJ (2012) Female board presence and the likelihood of financial restatement. Accounting Horizons 26(4):607–629.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB (2009) Asking directors about their dual roles. Preprint, submitted March 18, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1362339.Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Ferreira D (2007) A theory of friendly boards. J. Finance 62(1):217–250.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Ferreira D (2008) Do directors perform for pay? J. Accounting Econom. 46(1):154–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Ferreira D (2009) Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. J. Financial Econom. 94(2):291–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Hermalin BE, Weisbach MS (2010) The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: A conceptual framework and survey. J. Econom. Literature 48(1):58–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aebi V, Sabato G, Schmid M (2012) Risk management, corporate governance, and bank performance in the financial crisis. J. Banking Finance 36(12):3213–3226.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aggarwal R, Erel I, Ferreira M, Matos P (2011) Does governance travel around the world? Evidence from institutional investors. J. Financial Econom. 100(1):154–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahern KR, Dittmar AK (2012) The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quart. J. Econom. 127(1):137–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alexander JC, Barnhart SW, Rosenstein S (2007) Do investor perceptions of corporate governance initiatives affect firm value: The case of TIAA-CREF. Quart. Rev. Econom. Finance 47(2):198–214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L, McEvily B, Reagans R (2003) Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management Sci. 49(4):571–582.Link, Google Scholar
• Bandiera O, Prat A, Hansen S, Sadun R (2020) CEO behavior and firm performance. J. Political Econom. 128(4):1325–1369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bandiera O, Lemos R, Prat A, Sadun R (2018) Managing the family firm: Evidence from CEOs at work. Rev. Financial Stud. 31(5):1605–1653.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bandura A (1997) Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control (W. H. Freeman, New York).Google Scholar
• Barton D, Wiseman M (2015) Where boards fall short. Harvard Bus. Rev. 93(1–2):98–104.Google Scholar
• Bell RG, Filatotchev I, Aguilera RV (2013) Corporate governance and investors’ perceptions of foreign IPO value: An institutional perspective. Acad. Management J. 57(1):301–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettis RA (2012) The search for asterisks: Compromised statistical tests and flawed theories. Strategic Management J. 33(1):108–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bhojraj S, Sengupta P (2003) Effect of corporate governance on bond ratings and yields: The role of institutional investors and outside directors. J. Bus. 76(3):455–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blair-Loy M (2001) It’s not just what you know, it’s who you know: Technical knowledge, rainmaking, and gender among finance executives. Vallas S, ed. The Transformation of Work (Emerald, Bingley, UK), 51–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boyd BK (1994) Board control and CEO compensation. Strategic Management J. 15(5):335–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brass DJ (1985) Men’s and women’s networks: A study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization. Acad. Management J. 28(2):327–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brav A, Jiang W, Partnoy F, Thomas R (2008) Hedge fund activism, corporate governance, and firm performance. J. Finance 63(4):1729–1775.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carreyrou J (2018) Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup (Knopf, New York).Google Scholar
• Carter CB, Lorsch JW (2003) Back to the Drawing Board: Designing Corporate Boards for a Complex World (Harvard Business Review Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Certo ST, Hodge F (2007) Top management team prestige and organizational legitimacy: An examination of investor perceptions. J. Managerial Issues 19(4):461–477.Google Scholar
• Chang SJ, van Witteloostuijn A, Eden L (2010) From the Editors: Common method variance in international business research. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 41(2):178–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chhaochharia V, Grinstein Y (2009) CEO compensation and board structure. J. Finance 64(1):231–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chhaochharia V, Grinstein Y, Grullon G, Michaely R (2017) Product market competition and internal governance: Evidence from the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Management Sci. 63(5):1405–1424.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen Z, Keefe MO (2020) Rookie directors and firm performance: Evidence from China. J. Corporate Finance 60: 101511.Google Scholar
• Cohen L, Frazzini A, Malloy C (2008) The small world of investing: Board connections and mutual fund returns. J. Political Econom. 116(5):951–979.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen L, Frazzini A, Malloy C (2010) Sell-side school ties. J. Finance 65(4):1409–1437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen L, Frazzini A, Malloy CJ (2012) Hiring cheerleaders: Board appointments of “independent” directors. Management Sci. 58(6):1039–1058.Link, Google Scholar
• Cooil B, Aksoy L, Keiningham TL, Maryott KM (2009) The relationship of employee perceptions of organizational climate to business-unit outcomes: An MPLS approach. J. Service Res. 11(3):277–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Core JE, Holthausen RW, Larcker DF (1999) Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation, and firm performance. J. Financial Econom. 51(3):371–406.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Daily CM, Certo ST, Dalton DR (1999) A decade of corporate women: Some progress in the boardroom, none in the executive suite. Strategic Management J. 20(1):93–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Defond ML, Hann RN, Hu X (2005) Does the market value financial expertise on audit committees of boards of directors? J. Accounting Res. 43(2):153–193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dichev ID, Graham JR, Harvey CR, Rajgopal S (2013) Earnings quality: Evidence from the field. J. Accounting. Econom. 56(2):1–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC, McManus SE (2007) Methodological fit in management field research. Acad. Management Rev. 32(4):1155–1179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC, Roberto MA, Watkins MD (2003) A dynamic model of top management team effectiveness: Managing unstructured task streams. Leadership Quart. 14(3):297–325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erkens DH, Hung M, Matos P (2012) Corporate governance in the 2007–2008 financial crisis: Evidence from financial institutions worldwide. J. Corporate Finance 18(2):389–411.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983) Separation of ownership and control. J. Law Econom. 26(2):301–325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Federal Reserve System (2017) Proposed guidance on supervisory expectation for boards of directors. Federal Register 82(152):37219–37227.Google Scholar
• Fracassi C (2016) Corporate finance policies and social networks. Management Sci. 63(8):2420–2438.Link, Google Scholar
• G20/OECD (2015) G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris).Google Scholar
• Gillan SL, Starks LT (2007) The evolution of shareholder activism in the United States. J. Appl. Corporate Finance 19(1):55–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goldfarb B, King AA (2016) Scientific apophenia in strategic management research: Significance tests and mistaken inference. Strategic Management J. 37(1):167–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodman PS, Ravlin E, Schminke M (1987) Understanding groups in organizations. Staw BM, Cummings LL, eds. Research Organizational Behavior (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 121–173.Google Scholar
• Goodstein J, Gautam K, Boeker W (1994) The effects of board size and diversity on strategic change. Strategic Management J. 15(3):241–250.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goyal VK, Park CW (2002) Board leadership structure and CEO turnover. J. Corporate Finance 8(1):49–66.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graham JR, Harvey CR (2001) The theory and practice of corporate finance: Evidence from the field. J. Financial Econom. 60(2–3):187–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graham JR, Harvey CR, Rajgopal S (2005) The economic implications of corporate financial reporting. J. Accounting Econom. 40(1–3):3–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B, Polzer JT, Elfenbein HA (2011) Too many cooks spoil the broth: How high-status individuals decrease group effectiveness. Organ. Sci. 22(3):722–737.Link, Google Scholar
• Gryta T, Mann T (2018) GE powered the American century—then it burned out. Wall Street J. (December 14), https://www.wsj.com/articles/ge-powered-the-american-centurythen-it-burned-out-11544796010.Google Scholar
• Guiso L, Sapienza P, Zingales L (2015) The value of corporate culture. J. Financial Econom. 117(1):60–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Güner AB, Malmendier U, Tate G (2008) Financial expertise of directors. J. Financial Econom. 88(2):323–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hackman JR (1976) Group influences on individuals. Dunnette MD, ed. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Rand McNally, Chicago), 1455–1525.Google Scholar
• Hackman JR (1987) The design of work teams. Lorsch JW, ed. Handbook of Organizational Behavior (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), 315–342.Google Scholar
• Hackman JR (2002) Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances (Harvard Business Review Press, Boston).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hackman JR, Morris CG (1975) Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. Adv. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 8:45–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harter JK, Schmidt FL, Hayes TL (2002) Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psych. 87(2):268–279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haynes KT, Hillman A (2010) The effect of board capital and CEO power on strategic change. Strategic Management J. 31(11):1145–1163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hermalin BE, Weisbach MS (1998) Endogenously chosen boards of directors and their monitoring of the CEO. Amer. Econom. Rev. 88(1):96–118.Google Scholar
• Hermalin BE, Weisbach MS (2003) Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature. Federal Reserve Bank New York Econom. Policy Rev. 9(1):7–26.Google Scholar
• Hillman AJ, Shropshire C, Cannella AA (2007) Organizational predictors of women on corporate boards. Acad. Management J. 50(4):941–952.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen MC (1993) The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. J. Finance 48(3):831–880.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen MC, Meckling WH (1976) Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J. Financial Econom. 3(4):305–360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang W, Wan H, Zhao S (2016) Reputation concerns of independent directors: Evidence from individual director voting. Rev. Financial Stud. 29(3):655–696.Google Scholar
• Kanter RM (1977) Some effects of proportions on group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. Amer. J. Sociol. 82(5):965–990.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan SN, Minton BA (2012) How has CEO turnover changed? Internat. Rev. Finance 12(1):57–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karpoff JM, Malatesta PH, Walkling RA (1996) Corporate governance and shareholder initiatives: Empirical evidence. J. Financial Econom. 42(3):365–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirkpatrick G (2009) The Corporate Governance Lessons from the Financial Crisis (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kor YY, Misangyi VF (2008) Outside directors’ industry-specific experience and firms’ liability of newness. Strategic Management J. 29(12):1345–1355.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kosoff M (2017) A secret behind Theranos’s downfall is revealed. Vanity Fair (May 30), https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/05/theranos-board-response-deposition-court-documents.Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SWJ, Bell BS (2003) Work groups and teams in organizations. Borman WC, Ilgen DR, Klimoski RJ, eds. Handbook of Psychology: Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ), 333–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SWJ, Ilgen DR (2006) Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psych. Sci. Public Interest 7(3):77–124.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krishnan GV, Visvanathan G (2008) Does the SOX definition of an accounting expert matter? The association between audit committee directors’ accounting expertise and accounting conservatism. Contemporary Accounting Res. 25(3):827–858.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kroll M, Walters BA, Wright P (2008) Board vigilance, director experience, and corporate outcomes. Strategic Management J. 29(4):363–382.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larcker D, Tayan B (2016) Corporate Governance Matters: A Closer Look at Organizational Choices and Their Consequences, 2nd ed. (Pearson FT Press, Old Tappan, NJ).Google Scholar
• Larcker DF, Miles S, Griffin T, Tayan B (2016) 2016 survey: Board of director evaluation and effectiveness. Corporate Governance Research Initiative, Stanford Rock Center for Corporate Governance, Stanford University, Stanford, CT, and The Miles Group, New York.Google Scholar
• Lindell MK, Brandt CJ (2000) Climate quality and climate consensus as mediators of the relationship between organizational antecedents and outcomes. J. Appl. Psych. 85(3):331–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lindell MK, Whitney DJ (2001) Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. J. Appl. Psych. 86(1):114–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lipton M, Lorsch JW (1992) A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Bus. Lawyer 48(1):59–77.Google Scholar
• Lorsch JW (2017) Understanding boards of directors: A systems perspective. Ann. Corporate Governance 2(1):1–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lorsch JW, MacIver E (1989) Pawns or Potentates: The Reality of America’s Corporate Boards (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Matsa DA, Miller AR (2013) A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. Amer. Econom. J.: Appl. Econom. 5(3):136–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McCahery JA, Sautner Z, Starks LT (2016) Behind the scenes: The corporate governance preferences of institutional investors. J. Finance 71(6):2905–2932.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonald ML, Westphal JD (2013) Access denied: Low mentoring of women and minority first-time directors and its negative effects on appointments to additional boards. Acad. Management J. 56(4):1169–1198.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller T, Del Carmen Triana M (2009) Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity–firm performance relationship. J. Management Stud. 46(5):755–786.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy KJ, Sandino T (2019) Compensation consultants and the level, composition, and complexity of CEO pay. Accounting Rev. 95(1):311–341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy SA, McIntyre ML (2007) Board of director performance: A group dynamics perspective. Corporate Governance 7(2):209–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadler DA (2004) Building better boards. Harvard Bus. Rev. 82(5):102–111.Google Scholar
• Nguyen BD (2012) Does the rolodex matter? Corporate elite’s small world and the effectiveness of boards of directors. Management Sci. 58(2):236–252.Link, Google Scholar
• Nicholson G, Newton C (2010) The role of the board of directors: Perceptions of managerial elites. J. Management Organ. 16(2):204–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paine LS, Srinivasan S (2019) A guide to the big ideas and debates in corporate governance. Harvard Bus. Rev. Online (October 14), https://hbr.org/2019/10/a-guide-to-the-big-ideas-and-debates-in-corporate-governance.Google Scholar
• Paruchuri S, Misangyi VF (2015) Investor perceptions of financial misconduct: The heterogeneous contamination of bystander firms. Acad. Management J. 58(1):169–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psych. 88(5):879–903.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter ME, Nohria N (2018) How CEOs manage time. Harvard Bus. Rev. 96(4):41–51.Google Scholar
• Sharma VD, Iselin ER (2012) The association between audit committee multiple-directorships, tenure, and financial misstatements. Auditing 31(3):149–175.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shleifer A, Vishny RW (1997) A survey of corporate governance. J. Finance 52(2):737–783.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sonnenfeld J (2002) What makes great boards great. Harvard Bus. Rev. 80(9):106–113.Google Scholar
• Sonnenfeld J (2004) Good governance and the misleading myths of bad metrics. Acad. Management Perspect. 18(1):108–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sonnenfeld J, Kusin M, Walton E (2013) What CEOs really think of their boards. Harvard Bus. Rev. 91(4):98–106.Google Scholar
• Srinidhi B, Gul FA, Tsui J (2011) Female directors and earnings quality. Contemporary Accounting Res. 28(5):1610–1644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stern I, Westphal JD (2010) Stealthy footsteps to the boardroom: Executives’ backgrounds, sophisticated interpersonal influence behavior, and board appointments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(2):278–319.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spencer Stuart (2011) Corporate boards: Now and then. Harvard Bus. Rev. 89(11):38–39.Google Scholar
• Useem M (2006) How well-run boards make decisions. Harvard Bus. Rev. 84(11):130–136, 138, 158.Google Scholar
• Vafeas N (1999) Board meeting frequency and firm performance. J. Financial Econom. 53(1):113–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vafeas N (2003) Length of board tenure and outside director independence. J. Bus. Finance Accounting 30(7–8):1043–1064.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vancil RF (1987) Passing the Baton: Managing the Process of CEO Succession (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Wageman R, Hackman JR, Lehman E (2005) Team diagnostic survey: Development of an instrument. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 41(4):373–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walker A, Machold S, Ahmed PK (2015) Diversity and conflict in boards of directors. Internat. Stud. Management Organ. 45(1):25–42.Google Scholar
• Watson W, Stewart WH, BarNir A (2003) The effects of human capital, organizational demography, and interpersonal processes on venture partner perceptions of firm profit and growth. J. Bus. Venturing 18(2):145–164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weaver C (2017) Court documents shed light on Theranos board’s response to crisis. Wall Street J. (May 30), https://www.wsj.com/articles/court-documents-shed-light-on-theranos-boards-response-to-crisis-1496136600.Google Scholar
• Westphal JD (1999) Collaboration in the boardroom: Behavioral and performance consequences of CEO-board social ties. Acad. Management J. 42(1):7–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Fredrickson JW (2001) Who directs strategic change? Director experience, the selection of new CEOs, and change in corporate strategy. Strategic Management J. 22(12):1113–1137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Stern I (2006) The other pathway to the boardroom: Interpersonal influence behavior as a substitute for elite credentials and majority status in obtaining board appointments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(2):169–204.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Stern I (2007) Flattery will get you everywhere (especially if you are a male Caucasian): How ingratiation, boardroom behavior, and demographic minority status affect additional board appointments at U.S. companies. Acad. Management J. 50(2):267–288.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiersema MF, Bantel KA (1992) Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Acad. Management J. 35(1):91–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xie B, Davidson WN, DaDalt PJ (2003) Earnings management and corporate governance: The role of the board and the audit committee. J. Corp. Finance 9(3):295–316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhu DH, Chen G (2015a) CEO narcissism and the impact of prior board experience on corporate strategy. Admin. Sci. Quart. 60(1):31–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhu DH, Chen G (2015b) Narcissism, director selection, and risk-taking spending. Strategic Management J. 36(13):2075–2098.Crossref, Google Scholar