Determinants of board composition in Australia and the impact of corporate governance regulation

Matolcsy, ZP; Tyler, JV; Wells, PA

Determinants of board composition in Australia and the impact of corporate governance regulation

Matolcsy, ZP

Tyler, JV Wells, PA

Permalink

Publisher:: British Accounting Association (BAA)
Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: BAA Annual Conference 2009 Website, 2009, pp. 1 - 36
Issue Date:: 2009-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download full textAdobe PDF (151.19 kB)

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Matolcsy, ZP https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6566-5079	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Tyler, JV	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Wells, PA https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6822-4826	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Marriott, N	en_US
dc.date	2009-04-21	en_US
dc.date.issued	2009-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	BAA Annual Conference 2009 Website, 2009, pp. 1 - 36	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/11396
dc.description.abstract	This study investigates the relation between firm characteristics and board composition in Australia for a sample of the same 432 listed firms in 2001 and 2007 and the impact of the Principles of Good Corporate Governance and Best Practice issued by the Australian Stock Exchange in 2003. Two feature of this regulation were (a) it recommended independent boards for all firms, without regard to firm characteristics (an approach commonly described as `one size fits all) and (b) it allowed non-compliance through `if not why not reporting. Using various designations of independence and firm size subsamples we find for `Top 100 firms in 2001 up to 49% (Adjusted R2 48.8) of variation in board independence may be explained by firm characteristics, but generally the explanatory power was much lower. Evidence is provided that although more firms had majority independent boards the relation between board composition and firm characteristics may have weakened over the period. This highlights a potential concern that the regulation has imposed unnecessary costs or inappropriate governance mechanisms on Australian firms.	en_US
dc.publisher	British Accounting Association (BAA)	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	BAA Annual Conference 2009 Website	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	British Accounting Association Annual Conference	en_US
dc.title	Determinants of board composition in Australia and the impact of corporate governance regulation	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.location	United Kingdom	en_US
utslib.location.activity	Dundee, Scotland	en_US
utslib.for	150303 Corporate Governance and Stakeholder Engagement	en_US
dc.location.activity	Dundee, Scotland	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business/Accounting Discipline
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.place-of-publication	United Kingdom	en_US
pubs.start-date	2009-04-21	en_US

Abstract:

This study investigates the relation between firm characteristics and board composition in Australia for a sample of the same 432 listed firms in 2001 and 2007 and the impact of the Principles of Good Corporate Governance and Best Practice issued by the Australian Stock Exchange in 2003. Two feature of this regulation were (a) it recommended independent boards for all firms, without regard to firm characteristics (an approach commonly described as `one size fits all) and (b) it allowed non-compliance through `if not why not reporting. Using various designations of independence and firm size subsamples we find for `Top 100 firms in 2001 up to 49% (Adjusted R2 48.8) of variation in board independence may be explained by firm characteristics, but generally the explanatory power was much lower. Evidence is provided that although more firms had majority independent boards the relation between board composition and firm characteristics may have weakened over the period. This highlights a potential concern that the regulation has imposed unnecessary costs or inappropriate governance mechanisms on Australian firms.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/11396