Corporate governance and national institutions: A review and emerging research agenda

Abstract

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent

Home country institutions and the internationalization of state owned enterprises: A cross-country analysis

“…Our study extends this literature to study the influence of home country institutional context on firm internationalization in a comprehensive sample of 40 countries, spanning both developing and developed economies with a wide variety of institutional and political configurations. As such, our study also contributes to the comparative corporate governance literature (Aguilera & Jackson, 2003;Filatotchev, et al, 2013;Wiseman, et al, 2012) by providing new insights into the mechanisms by which national institutions and corporate ownership interact in shaping business strategies.…”

“…Institutions as rules of the game are shaping the extent of agency conflict and the efficiency of governance structures and thus the mechanisms by which owners can influence the activities of firms (Aguilera & Jackson, 2003;Estrin & Prevezer, 2011;Filatotchev, Jackson & Nakajima, 2013;Wiseman, Cuervas-Rodgriguez & Gomez-Mejia, 2012). Specifically, they shape the functioning of organizational hierarchies in both public and private sector organizations by creating the incentives faced by decision makers, which in turn vary between firms according to ownership structures.…”

Identity in Family Firms: A Theoretical Analysis of Incentives and Contracts

“…Thus, a complex set of institutional factors may influence the structure, size, and effectiveness of executive compensation schemes. Such factors include the dispersion of share ownership, the roles of stakeholders, the tolerance to income inequality, and reputational concerns that frame managerial behavior (Filatotchev, Jackson, & Nakajima, 2013). Therefore, measures such as in-firm experience may appear as an important factor determining executive compensation in collectivist countries, such as India and other emerging economies, an evidence already found in Ghosh (2006).…”

“…Thus, a complex set of institutional factors may influence the structure, size, and effectiveness of executive compensation schemes. Such factors include the dispersion of share ownership, the roles of stakeholders, the tolerance to income inequality, and reputational concerns that frame managerial behavior (Filatotchev et al, 2013).…”

Capacity building at the Asia Pacific Journal of Management

“…The journal has also sought to remain at the forefront of research in developing the institutional view strategy (Sauerwald & Peng, 2013;Young, Tsai, Wang, Liu, & Ahlstrom, 2014), emerging economy multinational enterprises (Meyer & Thaijongrak, 2013;Popli & Sinha, 2014), comparative corporate governance (Ding, Sun, & Au, 2014;Filatotchev, Jackson, & Nakajima, 2013) and the board (Liu, Wang, Zhao, & Ahlstrom, 2013;Van Essen, Van Oosterhout, & Carney, 2012). In addition, APJM continues to publish extensive indigenous research on management in Asia (Ahlstrom, Chen, & Yeh, 2010;Horak & Klein, 2015;Leung, Chen, Zhou, & Lim, 2014;Li, 2012), the strategies and behaviors of Asian family firms and business groups (Au, Chiang, Birtch, & Ding, 2013;Yabushita, & Suehiro, 2014), and the role of government-business relationships (Dou & Li, 2013;Li, Chen, Liu, & Peng, 2014) and state enterprises (Maheshwari & Ahlstrom, 2004;Stan, Peng, & Bruton, 2014).…”