The Role of Boards of Directors in Transparency and Integrity in State-Owned Enterprises

Cecchetti, Ilenia; Allegrini, Veronica; Monteduro, Fabio

doi:10.1108/s2051-663020180000007001

Cited by 7 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is also viewed as the corporate organization's ethical or behavioral predispositions relating to the norms of society (Huberts, 2014). Corporate integrity bothers on the organizations' commitment to transparency (Cecchetti et al, 2018;OECD, 2017). As such, Cecchetti et al (2018) look at transparency in this regard to concern the credibility of corporate reporting (whether financial or non-financial and mandatary or voluntary) which is necessitated by the firms' commitment to integrity.…”

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Corporate integrity bothers on the organizations' commitment to transparency (Cecchetti et al, 2018;OECD, 2017). As such, Cecchetti et al (2018) look at transparency in this regard to concern the credibility of corporate reporting (whether financial or non-financial and mandatary or voluntary) which is necessitated by the firms' commitment to integrity. This as an act of corporate good governance enhances accountability and legitimizes companies' operations (Cecchetti et al, 2018).…”

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As such, Cecchetti et al (2018) look at transparency in this regard to concern the credibility of corporate reporting (whether financial or non-financial and mandatary or voluntary) which is necessitated by the firms' commitment to integrity. This as an act of corporate good governance enhances accountability and legitimizes companies' operations (Cecchetti et al, 2018). Therefore, corporate integrity has caught scholarly attention mostly in the developed economies relating to the effectiveness and the success of firms via the monitoring role of corporate boards to ensure the credibility of information disclosures (e.g., Agyei-Mensah, 2017;Cecchetti et al, 2018;Coulson-Thomas, 2013;Gajewski & Li, 2015;Huberts, 2014).…”

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This as an act of corporate good governance enhances accountability and legitimizes companies' operations (Cecchetti et al, 2018). Therefore, corporate integrity has caught scholarly attention mostly in the developed economies relating to the effectiveness and the success of firms via the monitoring role of corporate boards to ensure the credibility of information disclosures (e.g., Agyei-Mensah, 2017;Cecchetti et al, 2018;Coulson-Thomas, 2013;Gajewski & Li, 2015;Huberts, 2014). Hence, several firms engage in the misrepresentation of information as a way of deceiving stakeholders (Coulson-Thomas, 2013;Goffman, 1959;Cho et al, 2015Cho et al, , 2018.…”

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, good corporate governance is duty-bound to alleviate or prevent integrity violations and protect the interest of stakeholders (Bank., 2014;Coulson-Thomas, 2013;Leipziger, 2015). As a result, firms' board of directors serves as a fundamental tool in addressing integrity issues relating to the quality of corporate reports through their monitoring influence on the companies' activity and disclosures (Cecchetti et al, 2018;Gajewski & Li, 2015). In other words, the board has to as a matter of obligation ensure, sustain, and enforce the culture of integrity for firms' credible disclosure of information by setting the ethical tone (Brenner & Molander, 1977;Cecchetti et al, 2018;Soutar et al, 1994).…”

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Board governance mechanisms and sustainability reporting quality: A theoretical framework

Moses

Ahmad

Abdulmalik

2020

Cogent Business & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The presumed poor performance in terms of sustainability commitments and Sustainability Reporting Quality (SRQ) of quoted companies have incentivized stakeholders' agitation relating to the Economic, Environmental, and Social (EES) impacts of companies' operations. Business activities have generated several threats in the form of climate change, pollution, GHG emission as well as natural disasters, and several other problems that have negatively affected the environment and stakeholders. Companies are expected to report their sustainability performance to stakeholders. However, the quality of such sustainability reports has been critically criticized as they are mostly assumed to fall below stakeholders' expectations. This study aims to conceptually examine the association between board governance mechanisms and SRQ in Malaysia. The method adopted by this study is the review of previous literature on sustainability reporting practices and

show abstract

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Board Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Board governance mechanisms and sustainability reporting quality: A theoretical framework

Moses

Ahmad

Abdulmalik

2020

Cogent Business & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Corporate integrity, external assurance and sustainability reporting quality: evidence from the Malaysian public listed companies

Moses

Abdulmalik²,

Talab³

2022

APJBA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the effect of corporate integrity and external assurance on Sustainability Reporting Quality (SRQ) of Malaysian public listed companies.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses a longitudinal sample of 2,463 firm-year observations of non-financial firms listed on the main board of Bursa Malaysia from 2015 to 2019. The study employed panel regression that is, Fixed Effect (FE) Robust Standard Error estimation technique to test its hypotheses.FindingsThe panel regression results reveal that corporate integrity and external assurance positively and significantly influence the quality of sustainability reporting. Though the positive association shows an improvement in the SRQ of the sampled firms, it needs an improvement as the disclosure is more general and qualitative than quantitative. The present improvement in SRQ might result from some regulatory changes like the Sustainability Practice Note 9 Updates of Bursa Malaysia 2017 and the Revised MCCG Principle A to C within the same period.Research limitations/implicationsThe study adopts a purely quantitative approach and call for a qualitative investigation in the area in the future.Practical implicationsThe study has policy implication for the government and regulators to strengthen compliance with the sustainability reporting guide and the Practice Note 9 Updates. It also has implication for corporate integrity and external assurance for companies, to enhance SRQ and achieve sustainable development.Originality/valueThe study bridged literature gaps by offering new insights and empirical evidence on the role of corporate integrity in SRQ, which has received no empirical attention in the Malaysian context.

show abstract

CSR disclosure and ownership structure: insights from a dynamic empirical framework using an emerging economy context

Ramdhony,

Gunessee,

Mooneeapen

et al. 2023

JAAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study examines the bi-directional relationship between corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD) and ownership structure through a dynamic empirical framework in an emerging economy context.Design/methodology/approachData over 10 years are used to investigate the response of disclosure to ownership structure variables and vice versa. Dynamic bi-directional relationships are hypothesised and empirically investigated using a panel vector autoregressive (PVAR) model. The ownership structure variables used are government ownership, block ownership and director ownership, while CSRD is constructed as a score through content analysis.FindingsA bi-directional negative relationship between CSRD and government ownership is found, revealing a preference for the state to invest in companies with opaque disclosure. CSRD is found to respond negatively to block ownership, albeit weakly. Results also show that directors prefer to own shares in the company they manage when there are low levels of CSRD.Research limitations/implicationsThe current empirical set-up of using a small emerging economy may not carry to the context of larger emerging economies where the institutional context may differ. Thus, future research could use this dynamic empirical approach to re-examine the questions raised in this paper using data from other emerging economies. The use of a longer time series makes it feasible to explore further analysis what was not possible in this study, such as an impulse response analysis examining the reaction of the variables of interest, CSRD and ownership variables for a specific time horizon to particular changes or shocks associated with one of the endogenous variables in the PVAR.Practical implicationsA major implication is that expecting disclosure practices to improve due to government and director initiatives would be less likely in emerging economies. State and director shareholders prefer to invest in opaque companies because they may purposely choose to keep the minimum disclosure levels. The paper calls for a transparent process and ethical guidelines to guide government investment in firms.Originality/valueThe study investigates the bi-directional relationship between ownership structure and CSRD in contrast to the existing literature's presupposed one-way relationship between these variables by demonstrating that bi-directionality does matter. This paper also contributes to the CSRD literature in the emerging economy context. The bi-directional negative relationship between CSRD and government ownership calls for a transparent selection process of board members as representatives of the state in those companies where the government has an ownership stake. It also calls for a transparent process and ethical guidelines to guide government investment in firms.

show abstract

The Role of Boards of Directors in Transparency and Integrity in State-Owned Enterprises

Cited by 7 publications

References 114 publications

Board governance mechanisms and sustainability reporting quality: A theoretical framework

Board governance mechanisms and sustainability reporting quality: A theoretical framework

Corporate integrity, external assurance and sustainability reporting quality: evidence from the Malaysian public listed companies

CSR disclosure and ownership structure: insights from a dynamic empirical framework using an emerging economy context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About