Does corporate governance beget firm performance in Fortune Global 500 companies?

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to determine the impact of corporate governance practices on the financial outcomes of Fortune Global 500 Companies, thus covering impact of geographical differences (USA and non-USA) as well.Design/methodology/approachThe study is a quantitative research based on a positivist paradigm using deductive reasoning and secondary data collection. Data collection has been done from secondary sources (annual reports, Edgar submissions and financial statistics from renowned financial databases such as yahoo.finance, Bloomberg, Ycharts statistics and Morningstar. Data were collected for 8 years (2005-2012).FindingsThe study found a strong positive relationship between corporate governance and firm performance. Smaller board sizes are found to generate better firm performance in Fortune Global 500 Companies. Frequency of board meetings have also been found to have inverse relationship with firm performance. The study supports board independence to improve transparency in board decision-making process. CEO compensation has been found to have inverse relationship with firm performance. The robustness of our results has been measured with the usage of three dependent variables, and we have found same results with varying significance level.Research limitations/implicationsDue to selection of globally broad sample set qualitative aspects of corporate governance could not be covered. Nevertheless, there is a need to go beyond the quantitative techniques (secondary data) of measuring corporate governance mechanisms.Practical implicationsThe population set is unique combination of big players and global diversification. Hence, the corporate governance practices of these firms as understood from the results of this study can be bench-marked for emerging corporates of varying global context.Originality/valueThe research is original and unique as it significant and globally diverse population of Fortune Global 500 Companies over a period of 8 years for 11 variables of interest. Results are helpful in bench marking for the rest of market players.