Importance Of Committees Research Articles

The Effect of Investment Committee on the Financial Sector Performance of Saudi Financial Market in View of Vision 2030: A Panel Data Approach

The investment committee is primarily a decision-making entity that aims to implement investment decisions taken by the company. In the framework of the powers conferred upon it by the board, the importance of this committee is highlighted and as such, in the present study, the primary aim is to examine the effect of investment on Saudi financial sector, an examination that is the first of its kind. The investment variable was measured by investment committee characteristic including, size, independence, meeting, commitment and allowance for session attendance. The study data was gathered from the annual reports of the financial firms spanning from 2014 to 2017. Panel data was used to conduct the hypotheses testing concerning the relationship among the variables of the investment commitment and the performance of the financial firms. Based on the findings, investment committee size and investment committee independence positively and significantly related with the performance of the firms. This study has several contributions to literature, particularly concerning information about the importance of investment committee. In addition, this study is clarified our understanding concerning best practices of corporate governance structure existing in Saudi financial listed companies.

Do committees ru(i)n the bio-political culture? On the democratic legitimacy of bioethics committees.

Bioethical and bio-political questions are increasingly tackled by committees, councils, and other advisory boards that work on different and often interrelated levels. Research ethics committees work on an institutional or clinical level; local advisory boards deal with biomedical topics on the level of particular political regions; national and international political advisory boards try to answer questions about morally problematic political decisions in medical research and practice. In accordance with the increasing number and importance of committees, the quality of their work and their functional status are being subjected to more and more scrutiny. Besides overall criticism regarding the quality of their work, particular committees giving political advice are often suspected of being incompatible with democratic values, such as respect for affected parties, representation of diverse values and transparency in the decision-making processes. Based on the example of the German National Ethics Council, whose inauguration caused a still ongoing debate on the aims and scopes of committees in general, this paper discusses: (1) the requirements of modern democratic societies in dealing with complex scientific-technical problems; (2) the composition and organisation of committees working as political advisory boards; and (3) the appointment procedures and roles of laymen and experts, and here in particular of ethicists, who may legitimately be taken on by a committee. I will argue that bioethics committees do not necessarily endanger democratic values, but can considerably improve their realisation in democratic decision-making procedures--if, and only if, they do not act as substitutes for parliamentarian processes, but help prepare parliamentarian processes to be organised as rationally as possible.

Sophisticated and Myopic Behavior in Legislative Committees: An Experimental Study

Legislative decision making is fundamentally sequential; subsets of members make decisions in committees prior to action by the full membership. But different theories of such two-stage decision making employ different assumptions about the degree of foresight committee members exercise. This paper summarizes the theories and reports on experiments that test whether committees acting in a larger legislature make decisions consistent with the hypotheses of sophisticated or myopic behavior. Under diverse conditionsincluding open and closed rules, and homogeneous and heterogeneous preferences-the predictions of committee-sophisticated behavior are superior to those of myopic behavior. The importance of committees in the legislative process is widely observed and rarely disputed, and formal theories have helped to clarify committee processes.' Traditionally, however, such theories pertain to committees that operate in isolation from the broader political system. Fiorina and Plott (1978) therefore qualified their study of what goes on within the 'black box' of committee decision-making by raising the question: [Ilf the committee decision is regarded by the members as only one stage in a sequence of games, might behavior in the committee reflect strategic considerations from the larger game? If so, a game might produce implications for the committee stage which differ substantially from those implied by models successful in explaining the processes of isolated committees (p. 593).

Membership Movement and Committee Attractiveness in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1963-1971

This is a study of one aspect of career patterns in the U.S. House of Representatives: the movement of congressmen from one committee to another subsequent to their initial committee assignments. The purposes are to determine the pattern of movement among committees, the relative attractiveness of various committees, and the conditions under which members make changes. Because of the importance of committees in congressional decision making, and because of the norm of specialization in the House, a member's assignment to a committee is of crucial importance to his political career.' Members frequently do not get assigned as freshmen to the committee that is their first choice, and very few freshmen are assigned to the most prestigious committees. Some members change their preferences after a little experience in the House. At the start of each new Congress, there are likely to be vacancies on many of the committees, and the greater seniority a congressman has acquired, the better his chances of being able to move to a more preferred committee. But there are costs as well as benefits in shifting committees, and these costs increase in direct proportion to the member's

The Institutionalization of State Legislatures: a Comparative Study

NELSON POLSBY has added a new and exciting dimension to our understanding of the concomitants of increasing legislative professionalization. In his recent article, The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives, Polsby demonstrates changes in the U.S. House throughout its history, in membership continuity and leadership recruitment, internal complexity and specification of roles, and in use of automatic as opposed to discretionary methods of conducting internal business.1 He concludes that the history of the U.S. House can be seen as a process of increasing institutionalization over time. This institutionalization is evident in several ways: (1) greatly increased membership continuity from session to session, and increased apprenticeship periods for leaders;2 (2) increased autonomy and importance of committees, growth of specialized party leadership, and increases in aids and salaries for members;3 (3) increased use of such automatic methods of handling affairs as use of seniority in determining committee positions.4 To what extent are Polsby's findings limited to the U.S. House of Representatives? Would other legislative bodies exhibit the same institutionalization of structures and patterns of decision-making over time? This paper will examine two state legislative bodies which differ greatly in structural institutionalization: in length and frequency of session, membership continuity, legislative salaries and staff aids and facilities. It will determine whether the two bodies exhibit the same direc-