Publication | Closed Access
Substitutes or Complements? A Configurational Examination of Corporate Governance Mechanisms
706
Citations
70
References
2014
Year
Firm PerformanceOrganizational EconomicsLawGovernance BundleCorporate InnovationSecurities LawCorporate Governance MechanismsManagementManagerial Control SystemsCeo Incentive AlignmentOwnership StructureGovernance FrameworkCorporate GovernanceStrategic ManagementCorporate LawBusiness OperationsP 1500Accounting PolicyBusinessBusiness StrategyCorporate Finance
The study aims to elaborate theory on how corporate governance mechanisms jointly mitigate agency problems in publicly traded firms. Using fuzzy‑set qualitative comparative analysis on S&P 1500 firms, the authors examine combinations of governance mechanisms that lead to high versus low profitability. High profits arise when CEO incentive alignment and monitoring mechanisms complement each other, and when both internal and external monitoring are present, indicating that board independence and CEO non‑duality effectiveness depends on their interaction with other mechanisms.
We conduct an exploratory qualitative comparative case analysis of the S&P 1500 firms with the aim of elaborating theory on how corporate governance mechanisms work together effectively. To do so, we integrate extant theory and research to specify the bundle of mechanisms that operate to mitigate the agency problem among publicly traded corporations and review what previous research has said about how these mechanisms combine. We then use the fuzzy-set approach to qualitative comparitive analysis (QCA) to explore the combinations of governance mechanisms that exist among the S&P 1500 firms that achieve high (and not-high) profitability. Our findings suggest that high profits result when CEO incentive alignment and monitoring mechanisms work together as complements rather than as substitutes. Furthermore, they show that high profits are obtained when both internal and external monitoring mechanisms are present. At the same time, however, monitoring mechanisms evidently combine in complex ways such that there may be simultaneity of substitution and complementarity among and across the various monitoring and control mechanisms. Our findings clearly suggest that the effectiveness of board independence and CEO non-duality—governance mechanisms widely believed to singularly resolve the agency problem—depends on how each combine with the other mechanisms in the governance bundle.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1