This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge concerning corporate governance practices by examining the corporate board and governance structures of American and Indian listed companies in a comparative study. Two hundred companies have been considered out of which 100 companies are listed on NYSE (New York Stock Exchange) and 100 companies are listed on BSE (Bombay Stock Exchange). T-test has been used for comparison between sample means from the two data sets (United States and India). To measure the year-wise variation in the mean values of variables, one-way ANOVA (analysis of variance) has been applied.
Results of the study demonstrates that boards of US listed companies are relatively larger with majority of independent directors on board, prominence of combined board leadership structure and relatively more gender diverse as compared to Indian boards. The paper can be quite useful to academics and policy makers in terms of understanding developed and developing country corporate governance structures.
AdamsR.B.FerreiraD. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94(2), 291–309.
2.
BonnI. (2004). Board structure and firm performance: Evidence from Australia. Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, 10(1), 14–24.
3.
BooneA.FieldL.C.KarpoffJ.RahejaC. (2007). The determinants of corporate board size and composition: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 85(1), 66–101.
CheffinsBrian. (2012). The history of modern U.S. corporate governance: Introduction. Legal Studies Research Paper Series, Paper No. 29/2012, University of Cambridge. Retrieved 15 December 2014, from http//www.ssrn.org//
6.
ColesJ.W.McWilliamsV.B.SenN. (2001). An examination of the relationship of governance mechanisms to performance. Journal of Management, 27(1), 23–50.
7.
DailyC.M.DaltonD.R.CannellaA.C. (2003). Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 371–382.
8.
DaltonD.R.DailyC.M.EllstrandA.E.JohnsonJ.L. (1998). Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 269–290.
9.
DonaldsonL.DavisJ.H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–64.
10.
El-FaitouriRamadan. (2014). Board of directors and Tobin’s Q: Evidence from U.K. firms. Journal of Finance and Accounting, 2(4), 82–99.
11.
FamaE.F. (1980). Agency problem and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288–307.
12.
FamaE.F.JensenM.C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325.
13.
FichE. (2005). Are some outside directors better than others? Evidence from director appointments by Fortune 1000 firms. Journal of Business, 78(5), 1943–1971.
14.
FinkelsteinS.MooneyA. (2003). Not the usual suspects: How to use board process to make better boards. Academy of Management Executive, 17(2), 101–113.
15.
ForbesD.P.MillikenF.J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 489–505.
GalbreathJ. (2011). Are there gender-related influences on corporate sustainability? A study of women on boards of directors. Journal of Management & Organization, 17(1), 17–38.
18.
GulF.A. & LeungS. (2004). Board leadership, outside directors’ expertise and voluntary corporate disclosures. Journal of Accounting & Public Policy, 23(5),
0;351–379.
19.
HermalinB.E.WeisbachM.S. (1988). The determinants of board composition. RAND Journal of Economics, 19(4), 589–606.
20.
JacklingB.JohlS. (2009). Board structure and firm performance: Evidence from India’s top companies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(4), 492–509.
21.
JensenM.C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of the internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831–880.
22.
KlapperLorea F.LoveInessa. (2002). Corporate governance, investor protection and performance in emerging markets. Retrieved 21 March 2014, from http://wbln0018.wordbank.org
23.
KshamaK.V.DuttaK. (2012). India means business: How the elephant earned its stripes (p. 324). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24.
LiptonM.LorschJ. (1992). A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Business Lawyer, 48(1), 59–77.
25.
LoA.W.Y.WongR.M.K.FirthM. (2010). Can corporate governance deter management from manipulating earnings? Evidence from related-parties sales transactions in China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(2), 225–235.
26.
McGregorJ. (2007). Widening the debate about quality flexible work: Men, age and language. In M. Waring & C. Fouche (Eds), Managing mayhem: Work-life balance in New Zealand. (pp.35–49). Wellington: Dunmore Publishing.
27.
PandeyS.KaushikK.V. (2012). Study on the state of corporate governance in India: Evolution, issues and challenges for the future. Discussion paper written in association with Indian Institute of corporate Affairs, Indian Institute of Management, Kolkata, Thought Arbitrage Research Institute, Delhi. Retrieved 27 January 2015, from http://www.iica.in/images/Evolution_of_Corporate_Governance_in_India.pdf/
28.
RahejaC.G. (2005). Determinants of board size and composition: A theory of corporate boards. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 40(2), 283–306.
29.
RajagopalanN.ZhangY. (2008). Recurring failures in corporate governance: A global disease? Business Horizons, 52(6), 545–552.
30.
RamdaniD.WitteloostuijnA.V. (2010). The impact of board independence and CEO duality on firm performance: A quartile regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand. British Journal of Management, 21(3), 607–626.
31.
RechnerP.L.DaltonD.R. (1991). CEO duality and organizational performance: A longitudinal analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 12(2), 155–160.
32.
RoseC. (2007). Does female board representation influence firm performance? The Danish evidence. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(2), 404–413.
33.
SarkarJ.SarkarS. (2000). Large shareholder activism in corporate governance in developing countries: Evidence from India. International Review of Finance, 1(3), 161–194.
34.
SarkarJ.SarkarS. (2009). Multiple board appointments and firm performance in emerging economies: Evidence from India. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 17(2), 271–293.
35.
SchippersM.HartogD.KoopmanP.WienkJ. (2003). Diversity and team outcomes: The moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 24(6), 779–802.
36.
SheridanT.KendallN. (1992). Corporate governance, an action plan for profitability and business success. Financial Times. London: Pitman Publishing.
37.
SikandP.DhamiJ.BatraG.S. (2013). Gender diversity on corporate boards: A case of India. International Journal of Management, 4(2), 292–305.
WatsonW.KumarK.MichaelsenL. (1993). Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction processes and performance: Comparing homogenous and diverse task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 590–602.
