We use the 2002 NYSE and NASDAQ listing requirements mandating firms have a majority of independent directors on the board as an exogenous shock to examine the interaction between internal and external governance. Relative to compliant firms, noncompliant firms significantly reduced exposure to three external governance mechanisms: the market for corporate control, shareholder activism, and credit markets, by adding antitakeover provisions, adopting officer and director protection provisions, and reducing debt levels, respectively. The results are stronger in firms with greater exposure to the relevant external governance mechanism. The evidence suggests that firms treat internal and external governance as substitutes."> We use the 2002 NYSE and NASDAQ listing requirements mandating firms have a majority of independent directors on the board as an exogenous shock to examine the interaction between internal and external governance. Relative to compliant firms, noncompliant firms significantly reduced exposure to three external governance mechanisms: the market for corporate control, shareholder activism, and credit markets, by adding antitakeover provisions, adopting officer and director protection provisions, and reducing debt levels, respectively. The results are stronger in firms with greater exposure to the relevant external governance mechanism. The evidence suggests that firms treat internal and external governance as substitutes."> We use the 2002 NYSE and NASDAQ listing requirements mandating firms have a majority of independent directors on the board as an exogenous shock to examine the interaction betw">
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/finmgt/v44y2015i1p81-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tradeoffs between Internal and External Governance: Evidence from Exogenous Regulatory Shocks

Author

Listed:
  • Lixiong Guo
  • Patrick Lach
  • Shawn Mobbs
Abstract
type="main"> We use the 2002 NYSE and NASDAQ listing requirements mandating firms have a majority of independent directors on the board as an exogenous shock to examine the interaction between internal and external governance. Relative to compliant firms, noncompliant firms significantly reduced exposure to three external governance mechanisms: the market for corporate control, shareholder activism, and credit markets, by adding antitakeover provisions, adopting officer and director protection provisions, and reducing debt levels, respectively. The results are stronger in firms with greater exposure to the relevant external governance mechanism. The evidence suggests that firms treat internal and external governance as substitutes.

Suggested Citation

  • Lixiong Guo & Patrick Lach & Shawn Mobbs, 2015. "Tradeoffs between Internal and External Governance: Evidence from Exogenous Regulatory Shocks," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 44(1), pages 81-114, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:finmgt:v:44:y:2015:i:1:p:81-114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/fima.12066
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vidhi Chhaochharia & Yaniv Grinstein, 2009. "CEO Compensation and Board Structure," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(1), pages 231-261, February.
    2. Renee B. Adams & Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 2010. "The Role of Boards of Directors in Corporate Governance: A Conceptual Framework and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(1), pages 58-107, March.
    3. Martijn Cremers & Allen Ferrell, 2014. "Thirty Years of Shareholder Rights and Firm Value," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(3), pages 1167-1196, June.
    4. Cesare Fracassi & Geoffrey Tate, 2012. "External Networking and Internal Firm Governance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 67(1), pages 153-194, February.
    5. Stulz, ReneM., 1988. "Managerial control of voting rights : Financing policies and the market for corporate control," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 25-54, January.
    6. John Pound, 1992. "Raiders, Targets, And Politics: The History And Future Of American Corporate Control," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 5(3), pages 6-18, September.
    7. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    8. Paul Gompers & Joy Ishii & Andrew Metrick, 2003. "Corporate Governance and Equity Prices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 107-156.
    9. Boone, Audra L. & Casares Field, Laura & Karpoff, Jonathan M. & Raheja, Charu G., 2007. "The determinants of corporate board size and composition: An empirical analysis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 66-101, July.
    10. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1997. "Industry costs of equity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, February.
    11. Linck, James S. & Netter, Jeffry M. & Yang, Tina, 2008. "The determinants of board structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 308-328, February.
    12. Stuart L. Gillan & Jay C. Hartzell & Laura T. Starks, 2011. "Tradeoffs in Corporate Governance: Evidence From Board Structures and Charter Provisions," Quarterly Journal of Finance (QJF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(04), pages 667-705.
    13. Mark R. Huson & Robert Parrino & Laura T. Starks, 2001. "Internal Monitoring Mechanisms and CEO Turnover: A Long‐Term Perspective," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(6), pages 2265-2297, December.
    14. Jensen, Michael C, 1986. "Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 323-329, May.
    15. Walter Novaes, 2003. "Capital Structure Choice When Managers Are in Control: Entrenchment versus Efficiency," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(1), pages 49-82, January.
    16. Thomas J. Chemmanur & Imants Paeglis & Karen Simonyan, 2011. "Management Quality and Antitakeover Provisions," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(3), pages 651-692.
    17. Matthew T. Billett & Hui Xue, 2007. "The Takeover Deterrent Effect of Open Market Share Repurchases," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(4), pages 1827-1850, August.
    18. Joseph D. Piotroski & Suraj Srinivasan, 2008. "Regulation and Bonding: The Sarbanes‐Oxley Act and the Flow of International Listings," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 383-425, May.
    19. Demsetz, Harold & Lehn, Kenneth, 1985. "The Structure of Corporate Ownership: Causes and Consequences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(6), pages 1155-1177, December.
    20. Zwiebel, Jeffrey, 1996. "Dynamic Capital Structure under Managerial Entrenchment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1197-1215, December.
    21. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    22. Agrawal, Anup & Knoeber, Charles R., 1996. "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 377-397, September.
    23. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    24. Lucian Bebchuk & Alma Cohen & Allen Ferrell, 2009. "What Matters in Corporate Governance?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 783-827, February.
    25. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 08-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    26. Lifeng Gu & Dirk Hackbarth, 2013. "Governance and Equity Prices: Does Transparency Matter?," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 17(6), pages 1989-2033.
    27. Fama, Eugene F, 1980. "Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(2), pages 288-307, April.
    28. Leuz, Christian & Triantis, Alexander & Yue Wang, Tracy, 2008. "Why do firms go dark? Causes and economic consequences of voluntary SEC deregistrations," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2-3), pages 181-208, August.
    29. Coles, Jeffrey L. & Daniel, Naveen D. & Naveen, Lalitha, 2008. "Boards: Does one size fit all," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 329-356, February.
    30. Boubakri, Narjess & Cosset, Jean-Claude & Guedhami, Omrane, 2005. "Postprivatization corporate governance: The role of ownership structure and investor protection," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 369-399, May.
    31. Ambrose, Brent W. & Megginson, William L., 1992. "The Role of Asset Structure, Ownership Structure, and Takeover Defenses in Determining Acquisition Likelihood," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 575-589, December.
    32. James S. Linck & Jeffry M. Netter & Tina Yang, 2009. "The Effects and Unintended Consequences of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on the Supply and Demand for Directors," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(8), pages 3287-3328, August.
    33. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 8-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    34. Harris, Milton & Raviv, Artur, 1988. "Corporate control contests and capital structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 55-86, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Hillier & Patrick McColgan & Athanasios Tsekeris, 2022. "How did the Sarbanes–Oxley Act affect managerial incentives? Evidence from corporate acquisitions," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 1395-1450, May.
    2. Tim Hensel & Jens Robert Schöndube, 2022. "Big bath accounting and CEO turnover: the interplay between optimal contracts and career concerns," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(8), pages 1249-1281, October.
    3. Huang, Kershen & Shang, Chenguang, 2019. "Leverage, debt maturity, and social capital," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 26-46.
    4. Fu, Yishu, 2019. "The value of corporate governance: Evidence from the Chinese anti-corruption campaign," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 461-476.
    5. Chatjuthamard, Pattanaporn & Jiraporn, Pornsit & Treepongkaruna, Sirimon, 2021. "How do independent directors view generalist vs. specialist CEOs? Evidence from an exogenous regulatory shock," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Fu, Tong & Leng, Jingsi & Lin, Ming-Tsung & Goodell, John W., 2022. "External investor protection and internal corporate governance: Substitutes or complements for motivating foreign portfolio investment?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    7. Jain, Pawan & Jiang, Christine & Mekhaimer, Mohamed, 2016. "Executives' horizon, internal governance and stock market liquidity," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1-23.
    8. Jiraporn, Pornsit & Jumreornvong, Seksak & Jiraporn, Napatsorn & Singh, Simran, 2016. "How do independent directors view powerful CEOs? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 268-274.
    9. Gulen, Huseyin & O'Brien, William J., 2017. "Option repricing, corporate governance, and the effect of shareholder empowerment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 389-415.
    10. Robin Chen & Chia‐Wei Huang & Chih‐Yung Lin, 2022. "Board corruption and loan contracts," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(9-10), pages 1929-1956, October.
    11. Pandej Chintrakarn & Pornsit Jiraporn & Shenghui Tong & Napatsorn Jiraporn & Richard Proctor, 2020. "How do independent directors view corporate social responsibility (CSR)? Evidence from a quasi‐natural experiment," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 697-716, November.
    12. Randy Beavers & Shawn Mobbs, 2020. "Director overconfidence," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 49(2), pages 389-422, June.
    13. Chatjuthamard, Pattanaporn & Kijkasiwat, Ploypailin & Jiraporn, Pornsit & Lee, Sang Mook, 2023. "Customer concentration, managerial risk aversion, and independent directors: A quasi-natural experiment," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 358-368.
    14. Shashank Bansal & M. Thenmozhi, 2019. "Does Board Composition Matter to Institutional Investors?," Journal of Emerging Market Finance, Institute for Financial Management and Research, vol. 18(2_suppl), pages 238-266, August.
    15. Islam, Emdad & Rahman, Lubna, 2023. "Shades of grey: Risk-related agency conflicts and corporate innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    16. Ongsakul, Viput & Jiraporn, Pornsit, 2019. "How do independent directors view powerful executive risk-taking incentives? A quasi-natural experiment," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 31(C).
    17. Do, Trung K., 2021. "Financial statement comparability and corporate debt maturity," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    18. Mark Humphery‐Jenner & Emdad Islam & Lubna Rahman & Jo‐Ann Suchard, 2022. "Powerful CEOs and Corporate Governance," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 135-188, March.
    19. Humphery-Jenner, Mark & Lisic, Ling Lei & Nanda, Vikram & Silveri, Sabatino Dino, 2016. "Executive overconfidence and compensation structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(3), pages 533-558.
    20. Shen, Zhe & Sowahfio Sowah, Joseph & Li, Shan, 2022. "Societal trust and corporate risk-taking: International evidence," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    21. Onur Kemal Tosun & Lemma W. Senbet, 2020. "Does internal board monitoring affect debt maturity?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 205-245, January.
    22. Chintrakarn, Pandej & Jiraporn, Pornsit & Treepongkaruna, Sirimon & Mook Lee, Sang, 2022. "The effect of board independence on dividend payouts: A quasi-natural experiment," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wintoki, M. Babajide & Xi, Yaoyi, 2019. "Friendly directors and the cost of regulatory compliance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 112-141.
    2. Chi, Jianxin Daniel & Scott Lee, D., 2010. "The conditional nature of the value of corporate governance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 350-361, February.
    3. Georgeta Vintila & Stefan Cristian Gherghina, 2013. "Board of Directors Independence and Firm Value: Empirical Evidence Based on the Bucharest Stock Exchange Listed Companies," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 3(4), pages 885-900.
    4. Benjamin S. Kay & Cindy M. Vojtech, 2015. "Corporate Governance Responses to Director Rule Changes," Staff Discussion Papers 15-02, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury.
    5. Volonté, Christophe, 2015. "Boards: Independent and committed directors?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 25-37.
    6. James, Hui Liang & Borah, Nilakshi & Lirely, Roger, 2022. "The effectiveness of board independence in high-discretion firms," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 103-117.
    7. Hussein Abedi Shamsabadi & Byung-Seong Min & Richard Chung, 2016. "Corporate governance and dividend strategy: lessons from Australia," International Journal of Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(5), pages 583-610, October.
    8. Crespí-Cladera, Rafel & Pascual-Fuster, Bartolomé, 2014. "Does the independence of independent directors matter?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 116-134.
    9. Naeem Tabassum & Satwinder Singh, 2020. "Corporate Governance and Organisational Performance," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-48527-6, June.
    10. Aziz Jaafar & Lynn Hodgkinson & Mao-Feng Kao, 2019. "Ownership Structure, Board of Directors and Firm Performance: Evidence from Taiwan," Working Papers 19011, Bangor Business School, Prifysgol Bangor University (Cymru / Wales).
    11. Armstrong, Christopher S. & Guay, Wayne R. & Weber, Joseph P., 2010. "The role of information and financial reporting in corporate governance and debt contracting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 179-234, December.
    12. Jandik, Tomas & Lallemand, Justin & McCumber, William, 2017. "The value implications of target debt issuance in withdrawn takeovers: What role do country-specific M&A regulations play?," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 14-32.
    13. Hong Li & Yuan Wang, 2016. "How do Corporate Governance Decisions Affect Bondholders?," Quarterly Journal of Finance (QJF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(03), pages 1-23, September.
    14. Anup Agrawal & Tareque Nasser, 2019. "Blockholders on Boards and CEO Compensation, Turnover and Firm Valuation," Quarterly Journal of Finance (QJF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-67, September.
    15. Fidanoski, Filip & Mateska, Vesna & Simeonovski, Kiril, 2013. "Corporate Governance and Bank Performance: Evidence from Macedonia," MPRA Paper 46773, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Mar 2013.
    16. Belanès, Amel & Saihi, Malek, 2016. "Evidence on complementarity and substitution contingency in monitoring and bonding mechanisms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 161-171.
    17. Coles, Jeffrey L. & Daniel, Naveen D. & Naveen, Lalitha, 2008. "Boards: Does one size fit all," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 329-356, February.
    18. Jandik, Tomas & Lallemand, Justin, 2014. "Value impact of debt issuances by targets of withdrawn takeovers," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 475-494.
    19. Vafeas, Nikos & Vlittis, Adamos, 2019. "Board executive committees, board decisions, and firm value," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 43-63.
    20. Henrik Cronqvist & Fredrik Heyman & Mattias Nilsson & Helena Svaleryd & Jonas Vlachos, 2009. "Do Entrenched Managers Pay Their Workers More?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(1), pages 309-339, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:finmgt:v:44:y:2015:i:1:p:81-114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.