The basic purpose of this article is to ferret out whether there exists any association amongst board characteristics, insider ownership and firm-specific characteristics (firm size and age) in relation to Indian corporates listed on Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). A total of 15 measures including several proxies and modulations has been contrived, which reflect the composition, independence, diligence as well as functioning period of corporate boards. Empirical investigation has been performed using one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Welch ANOVA under Robust Tests of Equality of Means (including post-hoc tests) on the sample of top Indian firms ranked on the basis of market capitalisation. The present research findings involve the use of several modulations and formulations in the spectrum of board characteristics regarding the testing of board governance in India. Findings of the study have contributed to the extant corporate governance literature by deprehending significant relationships between board, insider ownership structures and firm-specific characteristics that would guide the policymakers to devise suitable policies for Indian corporate boards in future.
AdamsR.B.FerreiraD. (2007). A theory of friendly boards. The Journal of Finance, 62(1), 217–250.
2.
AgarwalA.KnoeberC.R. (1996). Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3), 377–397.
3.
Al-NajjarB. (2012). The determinants of board meetings: Evidence from categorical analysis. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 13(2), 178–190.
4.
BathalaC.T.RaoR.P. (1995). The determinants of board composition: An agency theory perspective. Managerial and Decision Economics, 16(1), 59–69.
5.
BerkmanH.ColeR.A.LeeA.VeeraraghavanM. (2005). The effect of board composition and ownership structure on firm performance: Evidence from India. Retrieved 13June2013, from http://condor.depaul.edu/rcole/Research/Board_Composition_India_2005.pdf
6.
BooneA.L.FieldL.C.KarpoffJ.M.RahejaC.G. (2007). The determinants of corporate board size and composition: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 85(1), 66–101.
7.
BrickI.E.ChidambaranN.K. (2010). Board meetings, committee structure and firm value. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(4), 533–553.
8.
ChakrabartiR.SubramanianK.V.TungF. (2010). Independent directors and firm value: Evidence from an emerging market. Retrieved 04June2013, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1631710
9.
ChenC.H.Al-NajjarB. (2012). The determinants of board size and board independence: Evidence from China. International Business Review, 21(5), 831–846.
10.
ChoiJ.J.ParkS.W.YooS.S. (2007). The value of outside directors: Evidence from corporate governance reform in Korea. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 42(4), 941–962.
11.
ChoucheneI. (2010). The determinants of the presence of independent directors in French board companies. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(5), 144–153.
12.
ColesJ.L.DanielN.D.NaveenL. (2008). Boards: Does one size fit all?Journal of Financial Economics, 87(2), 329–356.
13.
ConnellV.O.CramerN. (2010). The relationship between firm performance and board characteristics in Ireland. European Management Journal, 28(5), 387–399.
14.
DaltonC.M.DaltonD.R. (2005). Boards of directors: Utilizing empirical evidence in developing practical prescriptions. British Journal of Management, 16(1), 91–97.
15.
DonaldsonL.DavisJ.H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–64.
16.
FernandezC.ArrondoR. (2005). Alternative internal controls as substitutes of the board of directors. Corporate Governance, 13(6), 856–866.
17.
GhoshS. (2007). Board diligence, director busyness and corporate governance: An empirical analysis for India. Review of Applied Economics, 3(1–2), 91–104.
18.
GuestP.M. (2008). The determinants of board size and composition: Evidence from the UK. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14(1), 51–72.
19.
JacklingB.JohlS. (2009). Board structure and firm performance: Evidence from India’s top companies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(4), 492–509.
20.
JensenM.C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831–880.
21.
JirapornP.DavidsonW.N.DaDaltP.NingY. (2009). Too busy to show up? An analysis of directors’ absences. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 49(3), 1159–1171.
22.
JohnK.SenbetL.W. (1998). Corporate governance and board effectiveness. Journal of Banking & Finance, 22(4), 371–403.
23.
JohnsonJ.L.DailyC.M.EllstrandA.E. (1996). Board of directors: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 22(3), 409–438.
24.
KathuriaV.DashS. (1999). Board size and corporate financial performance: An investigation. Vikalpa, 24(3), 11–17.
25.
KlapperL.F.LoveI. (2004). Corporate governance, investor protection, and performance in emerging markets. Journal of Corporate Finance, 10(5), 703–728.
26.
KumarN.SinghJ.P. (2012). Outside directors, corporate governance and firm performance: Empirical evidence from India. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting, 4(2), 39–55.
27.
KumarN.SinghJ.P. (2013). Effect of board size and promoter ownership on firm value: Some empirical findings from India. Corporate Governance, 13(1), 88–98.
28.
LangeH.SahuC. (2008). Board structure and size: The impact of changes to Clause 49 in India (U21 Global Working Paper Series No. 004/2008). Retrieved 20June2013, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1601045
29.
LehnK.M.PatroS.ZhaoM. (2009). Determinants of the size and composition of US corporate boards: 1935–2000. Financial Management, 38(4), 747–780.
30.
LinY.YehY.M.C.YangF. (2013). Supervisory quality of board and firm performance: A perspective of board meeting attendance. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 1–16. Retreived from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2012.756751
31.
LinckJ.S.NetterJ.M.YangT. (2008). The determinants of board structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 87(2), 308–328.
32.
MakY.T.LiY. (2001). Determinants of corporate ownership and board structure: Evidence from Singapore. Journal of Corporate Finance, 7(3), 235–256.
33.
MonemR.M. (2013). Determinants of board structure: Evidence from Australia. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 9(1), 33–49.
34.
O’SullivanN.WongP. (1999). Board composition, ownership structure and hostile take-overs: Some UK Evidence. Accounting and Business Research, 29(2), 139–155.
35.
PhaniB.V.ReddyV.N.RamachandaranN.BhattacharyaA.K. (2005). Insider ownership, corporate governance and corporate performance. Retrieved 20June2013, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=696462
36.
PrevostA.K.RaoR.P.HossainM. (2002). Board composition in New Zealand: An agency perspective. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 29(5–6), 731–760.
37.
VafeasN. (1999). Board meeting frequency and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 53(1), 113–142.
38.
VarottilU. (2010). Evolution and effectiveness of independent directors in Indian corporate governance. Hastings Business Law Journal, 6(2), 1–91.
39.
WeirC.LaingD.McKnightP.J. (2002). Internal and external governance mechanisms: Their impact on the performance of large UK public companies. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 29(5 & 6), 579–611.
