Abstract

This paper provides a critical review of the corporate governance quantification process at academic and professional levels to scrutinize the main troubles in the black box of CG assessment models and spot some lights on how to develop a valid Corporate Governance Index (CGI) at the firm and industry levels regarding evenly the entire stakeholders' perceptions. Prior literature has been reviewed and a Corporate Governance index was constructed merging the power of multi-methodologies: Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Delphi Technique and Stability analysis. The findings show that the validity of the results necessitates enforcing End to End processes and taking into account the country's individualization to increase the reliability and comparability of the results. As well, the governance ratings are sensitive to the applied methodology, particularly, a well-known approach in quantifying CG, i.e., dichotomous approach, is underestimated the index findings then it will directly affect all aspects of governance endogeneity with firm’s performance/value. This research has important practical implications for governance guidelines setters, companies, stakeholders and other researchers. For the G setters, it underlines the necessity to make harmonization between industries' regulations and governance code, and revise the priority of the "comply or explain" approach in practice; which could serve as a roadmap for future improvements and researches. For companies, this paper highlights which effective G mechanisms and urges the role of the boardroom in monitoring and explanations for non-compliance. For CGI users, the research highlights that ratings' users should be more precautions and concerned about the base of the assessing models.

Highlights

  • Sound good governance concept has given, recently, higher priority in the country's development plans for boosting investors' confidence, business integrity and improving access to capital markets (Agyemang et al, 2019, p. 1134)

  • This paper provides a critical review of the corporate governance quantification process at academic and professional levels to scrutinize the main troubles in the black box of CG assessment models and spot some lights on how to develop a valid Corporate Governance Index (CGI) at the firm and industry levels regarding evenly the entire stakeholders' perceptions

  • Large100 listed firms in London stock exchange. Such questions are the reference point of the proposed typology on building a valid corporate governance index, this study differs from the previous, as it takes into account the countries individualization and the proper measurement theory to offer a valid index from the perspective of both academics and practitioners

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Sound good governance concept has given, recently, higher priority in the country's development plans for boosting investors' confidence, business integrity and improving access to capital markets (Agyemang et al, 2019, p. 1134). The majority of governance quantification studies do not consider the criterion of validity & reliability It necessitates rethinking of the evaluating methodologies of companies' governance practices; the wider the scope of governance of achieving accountability, transparency, and business integrity, the greater the tangible benefits will be for all related parties. In this sense, the current study aims at shedding some light on how to construct a valid CG index, considering how the scholars and practitioners approached their prioritization process and enrich the knowledge about the role of experts' views and country individualization at different stages of the assessment model.

Literature Review
Practical Methodology
G Score Index
G Model JCGR
Theoretical Framework for CGI Construction
Analyzing the results for users
Database Design
Output Design
Frequency
Exploratory Factor Analysis and Content Validity
Modified Delphi Technique and Stability Analysis
Processing Design - Scheming Platform and Calculation Process
Application of PCA
Board committees comprise of at least three non- executive board members
& Disclosure
29. Auditors rotating after 5 years and do not reappoint before 3 years
Application of Delphi Technique
Firm Policy
Board Committees 10
Application of Stability Analysis
The Applicability of the Proposed Index
Conclusion
Disclosure & Transparency
Board committees comprise of at least three non-executive board members
Evaluation scores
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call