Systematizing the Empirical Research on Corporate Distress. What Board Features Affect Survival?

Abstract

Over the years, understanding the possible antecedents of corporate distress has received considerable interest among the scholars and practitioners of management worldwide. Also, much of the evolving empirical research around this topic has been increasingly devoted to studying what board features can increase or decrease the survival of distressed firms.Although still fragmented, the advancements within this kind of research have demonstrated that particular board features count. Thus, this article aims at providing both the management scholars and practitioners with the systematization of these advancements. The findings from the present review show that board independence tends to prevent distress situations and increase the survival of those firms that initiate their restructuring. The board heterogeneity and low tenure can also count. Finally, it is evidenced that the heterogeneity of the statistical methods employed by the extant literature has increased proportionally with the time and journal ranking of the reviewed publications.

Does Board Composition Matter? The Relationship Between Board Characteristics and Financial Performance: Evidence From Chinese Listed Agricultural Companies

“…Boyd (1995), Yermack (1996), Mueller & Barker (1997) analyzed the US-listed companies, found that the CEO duality is positively related to performance indicators such as ROA and Tobin's Q. Abatecola et al (2011) analyzed 40 empirical research papers published from 1985 to 2008 and found that CEO duality was positively related to company performance. Bhatt & Bhatt (2017) analyzed the data of Malaysian listed companies from 2008 to 2013 and found that CEO duality is positively correlated with ROI and ROE.…”