Masa Jabatan CEO, Keragaman Dewan Direktur, dan Pengungkapan CSR: Eksplorasi Studi Kepustakaan

Abstract

Purpose: This study reviews various literatures and obtains an overview of the relationship between a CEO's Tenure and Boards Diversity and the quality of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) disclosures.Method: The research method used in this study is a qualitative method, namely library research, by utilizing information sources derived from reputable online journals such as Scopus and Google Scholar as well as additional information obtained from articles, books, laws, and other documents relevant to the topic study.Results: The results of studies from various sources show that the quality of CSR disclosure is strongly influenced by the tenure of the CEO and also the diversity of the board of directors. Short CEO tenure tends to increase the quality of CSR disclosure. This is because the tenure is short, the CEO will try to optimize his tenure in order to increase the credibility and ability of the CEO to lead a company. On the other hand, a working tenure that is too long can reduce the quality of CSR report disclosure. The diversity of management also has strong implications for improving the quality of CSR report disclosure. The diversity of administrators can motivate the emergence of creative and innovative ideas to disclose better CSR reports.Implications: This research can be used as material for consideration for companies in making decisions in determining the tenure of the CEO and the diversity of the board.Novelty: This study is the first study attempt by doing research qualitative with considering many previous studies to make some conclusions and contribute to extant literature related to the corporate mechanism by doing library research.

The impacts of tenure diversity on boardroom and corporate carbon emission performance: Exploring from the moderating role of corporate innovation

“…Moreover, another good reason is the executive board has more knowledge than management, not to mention diversity that promotes experience, education, and work quality, as well as increasing the potential of executive board resources in decision‐making processes through internal company resources. Second, the executive board is the main initiator and actor of any strategic steps of the board in the company, especially the issue of reducing carbon emissions, because the board of directors has a mandate and power to pursue a good deal by promoting low carbon emission in the firm (Cahyono et al, 2023; Gulzar et al, 2019; Hahn et al, 2015; Ibrahim & Hanefah, 2016). Therefore, board with high diversity may responsible to campaign more green activities in the firm as best practice to low carbon performance.…”

“…Therefore, companies need to address their exposure to these risks by restructuring institutional systems in boardrooms, which are deemed effective in shaping climate change and environmental policies (Bhattacharya et al, 2017; Bui et al, 2020; Cheng et al, 2019; DeFond et al, 2017). In particular, tenure diversity is a strong argument for generating progressive and visionary policies towards environmental damage in companies (Cahyono et al, 2023; Hafsi & Turgut, 2013; Rao & Tilt, 2016). Consistent with stakeholder theory explaining the influence of tenure diversity on resource effectiveness leading to a decrease in carbon emission performance.…”

“…Beyond diversity features, the tenure of the board of directors as a representative of the level of experience and knowledge is subject to ethical behavior enforcement and effective monitoring processes to avoid the risks of poor investment returns or unstable company performance (Katmon et al, 2019). A board of directors with a certain tenure can suppress unethical management behavior when deciding on policies related to external performance, such as disclosing carbon emissions or pursuing low‐carbon technology use (Cahyono et al, 2023; Glass et al, 2016; Kılıç & Kuzey, 2019; Nuber & Velte, 2021). Given the differences and limitations of previous studies in explaining why diverse tenure in the boardroom can improve outcomes in companies, our study seeks to fill that gap and expand the more complex literature, as well as provide empirical evidence supporting the limitations of previous studies.…”

Does auditor ethnicity matter in determining audit fees? Some empirical evidence from Indonesia

“…With the presence of predominant ethnic populations such as the Javanese, Balinese, Sumatranese and East Nusa Tenggaranese, who constitute nearly 65% of the country’s population, Indonesia offers a distinct setting for examining historical research on tribe segregation (Pitoyo and Triwahyudi, 2017). Third, limited research has been conducted in the context of audit fees that explores the legal relationships within tribes and captures the specific characteristics associated with the presence of audit partners from the largest ethnic group (Pitoyo and Triwahyudi, 2017; Suroso, 2014; Cahyono et al , 2023). Finally, Indonesia is renowned for its multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual nature, boasting an array of approximately 650 languages, diverse cultures and local wisdom values (asean.org).…”

“…Finally, Indonesia is renowned for its multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual nature, boasting an array of approximately 650 languages, diverse cultures and local wisdom values (asean.org). Notably, a survey on ethnic diversity has revealed that approximately 70% of auditors in Indonesia belong to the main ethnic group (Pitoyo and Triwahyudi, 2017; Suroso, 2014; Cahyono et al , 2023).…”