[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v18y2007i6p973-988.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Governance Reform as Institutional Innovation: The Case of Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Toru Yoshikawa

    (DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4M4, Canada, and Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University, Singapore 178899)

  • Lai Si Tsui-Auch

    (Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798)

  • Jean McGuire

    (E. J. Ourso College of Business, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803)

Abstract
To address the convergence-divergence debate in corporate governance, we conduct a multiple-case, multiple-level study to analyze the diffusion of governance innovation in Japan. We argue that Japanese systems of corporate governance neither fully converge to, nor completely diverge from, the Anglo-American model. Rather, Sony---the pioneer of corporate governance reforms---and its followers selectively adopted features from this model, decoupled them from the original context, and tailored them to fit to their own situations to generate governance innovation. However, we find that the spread of innovation across firms and institutional levels is far from linear and straightforward, and that other well-regarded firms raised strong opposition to the institutionalization of corporate governance reforms. Eventually, the Ministry of Justice revised the Commercial Code to legitimize different systems, which led to the emergence of diverse corporate governance practices. Based on the results of our study, we construct an analytical framework to examine innovation diffusion in light of conflicting institutional pressures for change and continuity. Our analysis adds complexity to the convergence-divergence debate by identifying the creation of hybrid corporate governance systems and the nonlinear evolution of such systems as a result of interactions across multiple levels. We show the various degrees of decoupling from the Anglo-American model and identify the antecedents. We then extend the conventional focus of innovation research on diffusion across firms to examine diffusion across institutional levels. We also contribute to institutional theory by offering insights into organizational field formation and the conceptualization of the state in shaping institutional change and continuity.

Suggested Citation

  • Toru Yoshikawa & Lai Si Tsui-Auch & Jean McGuire, 2007. "Corporate Governance Reform as Institutional Innovation: The Case of Japan," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 973-988, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:18:y:2007:i:6:p:973-988
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1070.0290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0290
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1070.0290?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Toru Yoshikawa & Abdul A. Rasheed & Deepak K. Datta & Joseph Rosenstein, 2006. "Financial and product market integration: Responses of Japanese firms," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 529-555, September.
    2. Ishtiaq P. Mahmood & Will Mitchell, 2004. "Two Faces: Effects of Business Groups on Innovation in Emerging Economies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1348-1365, October.
    3. Dore, Ronald, 2000. "Stock Market Capitalism: Welfare Capitalism: Japan and Germany versus the Anglo-Saxons," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199240616.
    4. Trevor Buck & Azura Shahrim, 2005. "The translation of corporate governance changes across national cultures: the case of Germany," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 36(1), pages 42-61, January.
    5. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "Introduction," Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy, in: Bending the Arc of Innovation: Public Support of R&D in Small, Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 1, pages 1-5, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Pankaj Ghemawat & Tarun Khanna, 1998. "The Nature of Diversified Business Groups: A Research Design and Two Case Studies," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 35-61, March.
    7. Henry Hansmann & Reinier Kraakman, 2000. "The End Of History For Corporate Law," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm136, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Feb 2001.
    8. Rodolphe Durand & Jean Mcguire, 2005. "Legitimating Agencies in the Face of Selection: The Case of AACSB," Post-Print hal-00458090, HAL.
    9. D. Eleanor Westney, 1993. "Institutionalization Theory and the Multinational Corporation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Sumantra Ghoshal & D. Eleanor Westney (ed.), Organization Theory and the Multinational Corporation, chapter 3, pages 53-76, Palgrave Macmillan.
    10. Lai Si Tsui‐Auch, 2004. "The Professionally Managed Family‐ruled Enterprise: Ethnic Chinese Business in Singapore," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 693-723, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chizema, Amon, 2010. "Early and late adoption of American-style executive pay in Germany: Governance and institutions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 9-18, January.
    2. Chizema, Amon & Buck, Trevor, 2006. "Neo-institutional theory and institutional change: Towards empirical tests on the "Americanization" of German executive pay," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 488-504, October.
    3. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    4. Toru Yoshikawa & Abdul A. Rasheed, 2010. "Family Control and Ownership Monitoring in Family‐Controlled Firms in Japan," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 274-295, March.
    5. Wang, Chengqi & Yi, Jingtao & Kafouros, Mario & Yan, Yanni, 2015. "Under what institutional conditions do business groups enhance innovation performance?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 694-702.
    6. Chakrabarty, Subrata, 2009. "The influence of national culture and institutional voids on family ownership of large firms: A country level empirical study," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 32-45, March.
    7. Banerjee, Pradip & Dhole, Sandip & Mishra, Sagarika, 2023. "Operating performance during the COVID-19 pandemic: Is there a business group advantage?," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    8. Hideaki Sakawa & Naoki Watanabel, 2020. "Institutional Ownership and Firm Performance under Stakeholder-Oriented Corporate Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, January.
    9. Chung, Chi-Nien & Mahmood, Ishtiaq & Mitchell, Will, 2009. "Political Connections and Business Strategy: The Impact of Types and Destinations of Political Ties on Business Diversification in Closed and Open Political Economic," CEI Working Paper Series 2008-24, Center for Economic Institutions, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    10. Mario, Cuevas, 2007. "A Practical Guide to the Assessment of the Vulnerability of the Non-Financial Private Sector," MPRA Paper 1375, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. ATM Adnan & Nisar Ahmed, 2019. "The Transformation Of The Corporate Governance Model: A Literature Review," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 8(3), pages 7-47.
    12. Song, Ji-Won, 2021. "How MNE subsidiaries transfer HRM practices in distant environments: A tale of two IKEA subsidiaries," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(2).
    13. Luke Nottage, 2006. "Nothing New in the (North) East? Interpreting the Rhetoric and Reality of Japanese Corporate Governance," Governance Working Papers 21819, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    14. Amon Chizema, 2008. "Institutions and Voluntary Compliance: The Disclosure of Individual Executive Pay in Germany," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 359-374, July.
    15. John Buchanan & Dominic H. Chai & Simon Deakin, 2018. "Unexpected Corporate Outcomes from Hedge Find Activism in Japan," Working Papers wp494, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    16. Frederick Kibon Changwony & Anthony Kwabena Kyiu, 2024. "Business strategies and corruption in small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises: The impact of business group affiliation, external auditing, and international standards certification," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 95-121, January.
    17. Lee, Kyounghun & Oh, Frederick Dongchuhl & Shin, Donglim & Yoon, Heejin, 2023. "Internal labor markets and corporate innovation: Evidence from Korean chaebols," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 146-162.
    18. Carney, Michael & Estrin, Saul & Van Essen, Marc & Shapiro, Daniel, 2017. "Business groups reconsidered: beyond paragons and parasites," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87340, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Amon Chizema & Jootae Kim, 2010. "Outside Directors on Korean Boards: Governance and Institutions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 109-129, January.
    20. Lee, Kyounghun & Oh, Frederick Dongchuhl & Shin, Donglim & Yoon, Heejin, 2024. "Innovation spillovers within business groups: Evidence from Korean chaebols," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).

    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:inm:ororsc:v:18:y:2007:i:6:p:973-988. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.