La valutazione del CdA in contesti ad elevata concentrazione proprietaria: mero conformismo o reale strumento di valutazione?

Titolo Rivista MANAGEMENT CONTROL
Autori/Curatori Romilda Mazzotta, Giovanni Bronzetti, Graziella Sicoli, Paolo Tenuta
Anno di pubblicazione 2018 Fascicolo 2018/2
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 22 P. 107-128 Dimensione file 228 KB
DOI 10.3280/MACO2018-002006
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Board evaluation is a best practice required on voluntary bases by Code of conduct. Despite its voluntary nature, companies very likely adopted this recommendation because the failure to adopt could have a negatively impact on company legitimation and reputation. Moreover, the implementation modalities of BE, however, could be negatively influenced by the specific companies’ ownership structure. The ownership concentration and the search for corporate legitimacy can lead at two possible situations: the BE have only formally adoption or BE have adoption in form and substance. What prevails in the context of ownership concentrated firms? Companies adopt the recommendation to comply with other companies (mere conformism) or it is a real assessment tool? We analyse the Italian non-financial listed companies, a market typically characterized by the presence of firms with high concentration of ownership, over the year 2011-2013. Our results reveal that, generally, BE is adopted but, in our sample, when ownership structure in concentrated, BE is more likely it is a result of mere conformism. The contribution is, as far as we know, the first to analyze the BE with reference to the context characterized by high concentration of ownership that can influence the quality of recommended best practice.

Parole chiave:Board evaluation, codici di condotta, Italia

  1. Akkermans D., van Ees H., Hermes N., Hooghiemstra R., Van der Laan, G. Postma, T. (2007), Corporate governance in the Netherlands: An overview of the application of the Tabaksblat code in 2004, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, pp. 1106-1118.
  2. ASX2014, ASX Corporate Governance Council (2014), Corporate governance principles and recommendations, Australia.
  3. Atkinson A., Salterio S. (2002), Function vs. form, CMA Management, 76, pp. 23-27.
  4. Belcourt M., Kluge H. (1999), Measuring board performance, Ivey Business Journal, 63, pp. 26-32.
  5. Bhatala C.T., Rao R.P. (1995), The determinants of board composition: An agency theory perspective, Managerial and Decision Economics, 16, 1, pp. 59-69.
  6. Bonson E., Escobar T. (2006), Digital Reporting in Eastern European: an Empirical Study, International Journal of Accounting Information System, 7, pp. 299-318.
  7. Bozec Y., Bozec R. (2007), Ownership Concentration and Corporate Governance Practices: Substitution or Expropriation Effects?, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue canadienne des sciences de l’administration, 24, 3, pp. 182-195.
  8. Bozzolan S., Favotto F., Ricceri F. (2003), Italian annual intellectual capital disclosure: an empirical analysis, Journal of Intellectual capital, 4, 4, pp. 543-558.
  9. CA2015, Comitato per la Corporate Governance (2015), Codice di Autodisciplina, 2015.
  10. Cascio W. (2004), Board governance: a social systems perspective, Academic of Management Executive, 18, pp. 97-100.
  11. CGC2013, MEDEF-AFEP (2013), Corporate Governance code of listed corporations, Francia.
  12. Charan R. (2009), Owing up: the 14 question every board member need to ask, San Francisco Jossey-Bass.
  13. Chau G., Gray S. (2002), Ownership structure and corporate voluntary disclosure in Hong Kong and Singapore, The International Journal of Accounting, 37, pp. 247-265.
  14. Conger J.A., Lawler E.E., Finegold D.L. (2001), Corporate boards: New strategies for adding value at the top, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
  15. Conger J.A., Finegold D., Lawler E.E. (1998), Appraising boardroom performance, Harvard Business Review, pp. 136-148.
  16. Conyon M.J., Mallin C.A. (1997), A review of compliance with Cadbury, Journal of General Management, 22, pp. 24-37.
  17. Cooke, S. (1989), Disclosure in the corporate annual reports of Swedish companies, Accounting and Business Research, 19, pp. 113-122.
  18. Curral S.C., Hammer T.H., Baggett L. S., Doniger G. M. (1999), Combining qualitative and quantitative methodologies to study group process: an illustrative study of a corporate board direction, Organizational Research Methods, 2, 1, January pp. 5-39.
  19. Di Maggio P.J., Powell W.W. (1983), The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organisational Fields, American Sociological Review, 48, pp. 147-160. DOI: 10.2307/2095101
  20. Eng L., Mak Y. (2003), “Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure”, in Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22, pp. 325-345.
  21. Fernandez-Rodriguez E., Gomez-Anson S., Cuervo-Garcia A. (2004), The Stock Market reaction to the introduction of best practices codes by Spanish firms, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12, pp. 29-46.
  22. Fombrun C., Shanley M. (1990), What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy, Academy of Management Journal, 42, pp. 87-99. DOI: 10.2307/256324
  23. Forker J.J. (1992), Corporate Governance and Disclosure Quality, Accounting & Business Research, 22, 111-124.
  24. Fung B. (2014), The demand and need for transparency and disclosure in corporate governance, Universal Journal of Management, 2, 2, pp. 72-80.
  25. GCGC2015, Deutscher Corporate Governance Kodex (2015), German Corporate Governance Code, Germania.
  26. GGC2015, Commission Nacional del Mercado de Valores (2015), Good Governance Code of listed companies, Spagna.
  27. Granovetter M. (1985), Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness, American Journal of Sociology, 91, pp. 481-510.
  28. Gregory H.J., Simmelkjaer II R.T. (2002), Comparative study of corporate governance codes relevant to the European Union and its member states, Weil, Gotshal & Manges.
  29. Haniffa R., Hudaib M. (2006), Corporate Governance Structure and Performance of Malaysian Listed Companies, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 33, 7/8, pp. 1034-1062.
  30. Haxhi I. e van Ees H. (2010), Explaining diversity in the worldwide diffusion of Codes of Good governance, Journal of International Business Studies, 41, pp. 710-726.
  31. Hooghiemstra R., van Ees H. (2011), Uniformity as response to soft law: evidence from compliance and non-compliance with the Dutch corporate governance code, Regulation & Governance, 5, pp. 480-498.
  32. Ingley C.B., van der Walt N.T. (2002), Board dymanics and the politics of appraisal, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 10, pp. 163-174.
  33. Jo H., Harjoto M.A. (2011), Corporate Governance and Firm Value: The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Business Ethics, 103, 3, pp. 351-383.
  34. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen S.I., Vihma A. (2009), Comparing the legitimacy and effectiveness of global hard and soft law: an analytical framework, Regulation & Governance, 3, pp. 400-420.
  35. Kazanijian J. (2000), Assessing board and individual director, Ivey Business Journal, 64, pp. 45-50.
  36. Kiel G.C., Nicholson G.J., Barclam M.A. (2005), Board, Director and CEO, Evaluation, NSW.
  37. Kiel G., Beck J. (2006), Seven steps to effective board and director evaluations, Company secretary, pp. 588-592.
  38. Kiel G., Nicholson G.J. (2005), Evaluating board and directors, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13, pp. 613-631.
  39. KINGIII2009, Institute of directors (2009), King code of governance for South Africa, Southern Africa.
  40. Kirk J, Miller M.L. (1986), Reability and validity in qualitative research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  41. Lamboglia R., D’Onza G. (2013), Un modello di gestione del rischio reputazionale. Dall’identificazione al fronteggiamento, Management Control, 3, pp. 7-34. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2013-003002
  42. Lawler E.E., Finegold D., Benson G., Conger J.A. (2002), Adding value in the boardroom, MIT Sloan Management Review, pp. 92-93.
  43. Long T. (2006), This year’s model: influences on board and director evaluation, Corporate governance: An International Review, 14, 6, pp. 547-557.
  44. Lopes P.T., Rodrigues L.L. (2007), Accounting for financial instruments: an analysis of the determinants of disclosure in the Portuguese stock exchange, The International Journal of Accounting, 42, pp. 25-56.
  45. Lucianetti L., Battista V. (2015), La manipolazione dei valori di bilancio: pressione del management e tratti personali nell’attività del controller, Management Control, 1, pp. 101-132. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2015-001005
  46. Macagnan C.B. (2009), Voluntary disclosure of intangible resources and stock profitability, Intangible capital disclosure practices and effects on the cost of equity capital: UK evidence, The institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland, Intangible capital, 5, 1, pp. 1-32.
  47. MacNeil I., Li X. (2006), Comply or explain, market discipline and non-compliance with the Combined Code, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 14, pp. 486-496.
  48. Mafrolla E, Matozza F. (2014), Risk Management and firma size: a survey of Italian private companies, Management Control, 3, pp. 87-108. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2014-003005
  49. Manetti G., Toccafondi S. (2013), Il coinvolgimento degli stakeholder nella governance e nel reporting delle fondazioni bancarie, Management Control, 3, pp. 51-76. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2013-003004
  50. Mangena M., Pike R. (2010), The effect of audit committee shareholding, financial expertise and size on interim financial disclosures, Accounting and Business Research, 35, 4, pp. 327-349.
  51. Mazzotta R. (2007), La corporate governance e le performance aziendali, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  52. Meyer J.W., Rowan B. (1977), Institutionalized Organisations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony, American Journal of Sociology, 83, pp. 40-363.
  53. Minichilli A., Gabrielsson J., Huse M. (2007), Board evaluations: making a fit between the purpose and the system, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 4, pp. 609-622.
  54. Mitchell J., Chia C., Loh A. (1995), Voluntary disclosure of segment information, further evidence in Australia, Accounting and Finance, pp. 1-16.
  55. NACD (1994), Blue Ribbon Commission on Performance Evaluation of Chief Executive Officers, Boards and Directors, National Association of Corporate Directors, Washington, D.C.
  56. Nadler D.A. (2004), What’s the board’s role in strategy development?: Engaging the board in corporate strategy, Strategy & Leadership, 32, 5, pp. 25-33.
  57. Nadler D.A., Behan B.A., Nadler M.B. (2006), Building Better Boards: A Blueprint for Effective Governance, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
  58. Nicholson G., Kiel G., Tunny J.A. (2012), Board Evaluations: contemporary thinking and practice, in Bransons D., Clarke T. (a cura di), THE SAGE Handbook of Corporate Governance, London, pp. 285-324.
  59. PCG2012, Business Roundtable (2012), Principles of Corporate Governance, USA.
  60. Perrini F., Rossi G., Rovetta B. (2008), Does ownership structure affect performance?. Evidence from the Italian market, Corporate Governance, 16, 4, pp. 312-325.
  61. Prevost A. K., Rao R.P., Hossain M. (2002), Board Composition in New Zealand: An Agency Perspective, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 29, pp. 731-760.
  62. Rechner P.L., Dalton D.R. (1989), The impact of CEO as board chairperson on corporate performance: evidence vs. rhetoric, The Academy of Management Executive, 3, 141-143.
  63. Rediker K., Seth A. (1995), Boards of Directors and Substitution Effects of Alternative Governance Mechanisms, Strategic Management Journal, 16, 2, pp. 85-99.
  64. Russ M., Catasùs B. (2014), Editorial. Intelectual Capital and Management Control: Human Capital Valutation and other challenges, Management Control, Special Issue 2, pp. 5-21. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2014-002001
  65. Schmidt S.L., Brauer M. (2006), Strategic governance: how to assess board effectiveness in guiding strategy execution, Corporate Governance, 14, 1, pp. 13-22.
  66. Sonnenfeld J. A. (2002), What Makes Great Boards Great, Harvard Business Review, 80, 9, pp. 106-113.
  67. Talaulicar T., von Werder A. (2008), Patterns of compliance with the German Corporate Governance Code, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16, pp. 255-273.
  68. Thomsen S. (2006), The hidden meaning of Codes: corporate governance and investor rent seeking, European Business Organization Law Review, 7, pp. 845-861.
  69. TNCH2014, The Norwegian Corporate Governance Board (2014), The Norwegian code of Practice for Corporate governance, Norway.
  70. Toronto Report (2003), Toronto Stock Exchange, Corporate governance: a guide to good disclose, Toronto Stock Exchange.
  71. UKCGC2014, Financial Reporting Council (2014), The UK Corporate Governance Code, United Kingdom.
  72. van der Walt N., Ingley C. (2001), Evaluating board effectiveness: The changing context of strategic governance, Journal of Change Management, 1, pp. 313-331.
  73. Vander Bauwhede H., Willekens M. (2008), Disclosure on corporate governance in the European Union, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16, pp. 101-115.
  74. Von Werder A., Talaulicar T., Kolat G.L. (2005), Compliance with the German Corporate Governance Code: an empirical analysis of the compliance statements by German Listed companies, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13, pp. 178-187.
  75. Wang K., Sewon C., Claibone M.C. (2008), Determinants and consequences of voluntary disclosure in an emerging market: Evidence from China, International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 17, 1, pp. 14-30.
  76. Weir C., Laing D. (2000), The performance-governance relationship: the effects of Cadbury compliance on UK quoted companies, Journal of Management and Governance, 4, pp. 265-281.
  77. Wright C., Rwabizambuga A. (2006), Institutional Pressures, Corporate Reputation, and Voluntary Codes of Conduct: An Examination of the Equator Principles, Business and Society Review, 111, 1, pp. 89-117.
  78. Zattoni A., Cuomo F. (2008), Why adopt codes of good governance? A comparison of institutional and efficiency perspectives, Corporate Governance, 16, 1, pp. 1-15.

Romilda Mazzotta, Giovanni Bronzetti, Graziella Sicoli, Paolo Tenuta, La valutazione del CdA in contesti ad elevata concentrazione proprietaria: mero conformismo o reale strumento di valutazione? in "MANAGEMENT CONTROL" 2/2018, pp 107-128, DOI: 10.3280/MACO2018-002006