Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
K. Rao, C. Tilt (2016)
Board diversity and CSR reporting: an Australian studyMeditari Accountancy Research, 24
O. Richard, Tim Barnett, S. Dwyer, Ken Chadwick (2004)
CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN MANAGEMENT, FIRM PERFORMANCE, AND THE MODERATING ROLE OF ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION DIMENSIONSAcademy of Management Journal, 47
M. Muttakin, N. Subramaniam (2015)
Firm ownership and board characteristics: Do they matter for corporate social responsibility disclosure of Indian companies?Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6
A. Barnea, Amir Rubin (2006)
Corporate Social Responsibility as a Conflict Between ShareholdersJournal of Business Ethics, 97
Mohammad Qa’dan, M. Suwaidan (2019)
Board composition, ownership structure and corporate social responsibility disclosure: the case of JordanSocial Responsibility Journal
Afzalur Rashid (2018)
The influence of corporate governance practices on corporate social responsibility reportingSocial Responsibility Journal, 14
A. Ujunwa (2012)
Board characteristics and the financial performance of Nigerian quoted firmsCorporate Governance, 12
Mingming Feng, X. Wang, Jerry Kreuze (2017)
Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance: Comparison analyses across industries and CSR categoriesAmerican Journal of Business, 32
M. Arellano, O. Bover (1995)
Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components modelsJournal of Econometrics, 68
Michael Jensen, W. Meckling (1976)
Harvard Business School; SSRN; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Harvard University - Accounting & Control UnitLSN: Law & Finance: Empirical (Topic)
Corinne Post, N. Rahman, Emily Rubow (2011)
Green Governance: Boards of Directors’ Composition and Environmental Corporate Social ResponsibilityBusiness & Society, 50
Pankaj Madhani (2009)
Resource Based View (RBV) of Competitive Advantages: Importance, Issues and ImplicationsNew Institutional Economics eJournal
Corporate Governance: An International Review
Khurram Ashfaq, Zhang Rui (2019)
Revisiting the relationship between corporate governance and corporate social and environmental disclosure practices in PakistanSocial Responsibility Journal
J. Coles, Chun Hoi (2003)
New Evidence on the Market for Directors: Board Membership and Pennsylvania Senate Bill 1310Journal of Finance, 58
(2013)
Environmentally friendly business strategies: BP – a case of rhetoric or reality?
Eliezer Fich (2005)
Are Some Outside Directors Better than Others? Evidence from Director Appointments by Fortune 1000 FirmsCorporate Finance and Organizations eJournal
D. Carter, B. Simkins, W. Simpson (2003)
Corporate Governance, Board Diversity, and Firm ValueThe Financial Review, 38
D. Dalton, C. Daily, Jonathan Johnson, Alan Ellstrand (1999)
Number of Directors and Financial Performance: A Meta-AnalysisAcademy of Management Journal, 42
R. Mishra, S. Kapil (2017)
Effect of ownership structure and board structure on firm value: evidence from IndiaCorporate Governance, 17
Yiming Zhuang, Xinyue Chang, Younggeun Lee (2018)
Board Composition and Corporate Social Responsibility Performance: Evidence from Chinese Public FirmsSustainability
H. Yaseen, M. Isk, Rani, A. Ajina, A. Hamad (2019)
Investigating the Relationship between Board Diversity & Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Performance: Evidence from FranceAcademy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, 23
Mingming Feng, X. Wang, J. Saini (2015)
Monetary compensation, workforce-oriented corporate social responsibility, and firm performanceAmerican Journal of Business, 30
Ana Cabrera-Fernández, Rocío Martínez-Jiménez, M. Hernández-Ortiz (2016)
Women’s participation on boards of directors: a review of the literatureInternational Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 8
N. Wellalage, S. Locke, Sanjeev Acharya (2018)
Does the composition of boards of directors impact on CSR scores?Social Responsibility Journal
M. Solakoğlu, N. Demir (2016)
The role of firm characteristics on the relationship between gender diversity and firm performanceManagement Decision, 54
Łukasz Matuszak, Ewa Różańska, M. Macuda (2019)
The impact of corporate governance characteristics on banks’ corporate social responsibility disclosureJournal of Accounting in Emerging Economies
Journal of Econometrics, 87
Jie Wu, Zefu Wu (2014)
Integrated risk management and product innovation in China: The moderating role of board of directorsTechnovation, 34
O. Faleye, Rani Hoitash, Udi Hoitash (2010)
The Costs of Intense Board MonitoringCorporate Finance: Governance
Nor Rahman, M. Zain, Norashfah Al-Haj (2011)
CSR disclosures and its determinants: evidence from Malaysian government link companiesSocial Responsibility Journal, 7
T. Donaldson, L. Preston (1995)
The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and ImplicationsAcademy of Management Review, 20
Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 13
R. Blundell, Stephen Bond (1998)
Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models
Qaiser Yasser, A. Mamun, Marcus Rodrigs (2017)
Impact of board structure on firm performance: Evidence from an emerging economyJournal of Asia Business Studies, 11
Kris Byron, Corinne Post (2016)
Women on Boards of Directors and Corporate Social Performance: A Meta‐AnalysisCGN: Equity & Diversity (Topic)
Stephen Bond (2002)
Dynamic panel data models: a guide to micro data methods and practicePortuguese Economic Journal, 1
R. Fisman, G. Heal, V. Nair (2006)
A model of corporate philanthropy
(2006)
Global rules and private actors, toward a new role of the TNC in global governance
Indian Management Research Journal, 1
(2003)
Board of directors as an endogeneity determined institution
M. Jensen (2001)
Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function*Business Ethics Quarterly, 12
Pejvak Oghazi, R. Mostaghel (2018)
Circular business model challenges and lessons learned - An industrial perspectiveSustainability, 10
Ayda Farhan, Siti Obaid, Hairul Azlan (2017)
Corporate governance effect on firms’ performance – evidence from the UAEJournal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 33
A. Haji, S. Mubaraq (2015)
The implications of the revised code of corporate governance on firm performance: A longitudinal examination of Malaysian listed companies, 5
Claude Francoeur, R. Labelle, Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné (2008)
Gender Diversity in Corporate Governance and Top ManagementJournal of Business Ethics, 81
J. Calton, S. Payne (2003)
Coping With ParadoxBusiness & Society, 42
Journal of Financial Economics, 87
(2015)
Effects of internal governance indicators on performance of commercial banks in Pakistan
James Harter, F. Schmidt, Theodore Hayes (2002)
Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis.The Journal of applied psychology, 87 2
A. Hussein, S. Singh, S. Farouk, A. Sohal (2016)
Knowledge sharing enablers, processes and firm innovation capabilityJournal of Workplace Learning, 28
R. Said, Y. Zainuddin, Hasnah Haron (2009)
The relationship between corporate social responsibility disclosure and corporate governance characteristics in Malaysian public listed companiesSocial Responsibility Journal, 5
Journal of Financial Economics, 3
A. Ibrahim, M. Hanefah (2016)
Board diversity and corporate social responsibility in JordanJournal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 14
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 14
A. Konrad, Vicki Kramer, S. Erkut (2008)
Critical Mass:: The Impact of Three or More Women on Corporate BoardsOrganizational Dynamics, 37
Abdulla Al-Ali, S. Singh, Moza Al-Nahyan, A. Sohal (2017)
Change management through leadership: the mediating role of organizational cultureInternational Journal of Organizational Analysis, 25
N. Smith, V. Smith, M. Verner (2005)
Do Women in Top Management Affect Firm Performance? A Panel Study of 2500 Danish FirmsIO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets eJournal
J. Coles, Naveen Daniel, L. Naveen (2005)
Boards: Does One Size Fit All?Drexel University LeBow College of Business Research Paper Series
J. Barney (1991)
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive AdvantageJournal of Management, 17
Merve Kılıç, C. Kuzey, Ali Uyar (2015)
The impact of ownership and board structure on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting in the Turkish banking industryCorporate Governance, 15
Giovanni Cespa, Giacinta Cestone (2004)
Corporate Social Responsibility and Managerial EntrenchmentSEIN Social Impacts of Business eJournal
Stephen Bear, N. Rahman, Corinne Post (2010)
The Impact of Board Diversity and Gender Composition on Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm ReputationJournal of Business Ethics, 97
Roberto Fernández‐Gago, L. Cabeza‐García, Mariano Nieto (2014)
Corporate social responsibility, board of directors, and firm performance: an analysis of their relationshipsReview of Managerial Science, 10
Corinne Post, Kris Byron (2014)
Women on Boards and Firm Financial Performance: A Meta-AnalysisAcademy of Management Journal, 58
M. Shamil, Junaid Shaikh, Poh-Ling Ho, A. Krishnan (2014)
The influence of board characteristics on sustainability reporting Empirical evidence from Sri Lankan firmsAsian Review of Accounting, 22
(2017)
Malaysian code on corporate governance securities commission Malaysia
A. Issa, Hong-xing Fang (2019)
The impact of board gender diversity on corporate social responsibility in the Arab Gulf statesGender in Management: An International Journal
N. Sheikh, Zongjun Wang, Shoaib Khan (2013)
The impact of internal attributes of corporate governance on firm performanceInternational Journal of Commerce and Management, 23
Emma Schultz, David Tan, Kathleen Walsh (2010)
Endogeneity and the corporate governance - performance relationAustralian Journal of Management, 35
M. Harjoto, H. Jo (2011)
Corporate Governance and CSR NexusJournal of Business Ethics, 100
Elinda Esa, Nazli Ghazali (2012)
Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Malaysian government‐linked companiesCorporate Governance, 12
Salim Darmadi (2010)
Do Women in Top Management Affect Firm Performance? Evidence from IndonesiaCGN: Equity & Diversity (Topic)
M. Arellano, Stephen Bond (1991)
Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment EquationsThe Review of Economic Studies, 58
M. Morsing, M. Schultz (2006)
Corporate Social Responsibility Communication: Stakeholder Information, Response and Involvement StrategiesWiley-Blackwell: Business Ethics: A European Review
Isaac Ofoeda (2017)
Corporate governance and non-bank financial institutions profitabilityInternational Journal of Law and Management, 59
Chen Ming, L. Eam (2016)
Estimating the nonlinear effects of female directors on financial performanceGender in Management: An International Journal, 31
Pradeep Kumar, A. Singh (2019)
Flexibility in service operations: review, synthesis and research agendaBenchmarking: An International Journal
The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it aims to investigate the dynamic impact of board composition (board size, board independence and board diversity) on independent corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices (marketplace, environment, community and workplace). Second, it tends to examine the mutual effect of board composition and CSR practices on organizational returns (return on assets and Tobin’s Q) of 631 Malaysian PLCs listed on Bursa Malaysia during 2006-2017.Design/methodology/approachThe dynamic model (system GMM) provided by Arellano and Bond (1991) and Arellano and Bover (1995) is used for estimations that control for potential dynamic endogeneity, reverse causality, unobserved heterogeneity and simultaneity problems.FindingsFindings reveal weak linkage between board composition and CSR practices where only board diversity is found to be positively linked to marketplace practices of CSR. Further, the mutual impact of board composition and CSR practices on organizational returns suggests board size be positive and board independence to be negative with Tobin’s Q. Board diversity is negative with ROA and positive with Tobin’s Q. Conversely, CSR practices indicate marketplace practices are positive and community practices are negative with Tobin’s Q, environment practices are insignificant with performance, whereas workplace practices are positive with ROA and negative with Tobin’s Q.Practical implicationsThis research is practically considerable for Bursa Malaysia, Securities Commission Malaysia, policymakers, stakeholders, investors and managers. For academia, the theoretical linkages between agency theory, resource dependence theory, resource-based view and stakeholder theory are highlighted. Moreover, methodological underpinnings are also novel for academicians as well as for practitioners.Originality/valueThe paper uncovers multiple aspects: first, it elaborates the dynamic relationship between board composition and CSR practices; second, it examines the combined effect of board composition and CSR practices on company’s accounting and market gains; finally, the study controls for dynamic endogeneity that is the main econometric problem for CG-CSR-performance relationships.
Journal of Asia Business Studies – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jun 15, 2020
Keywords: Corporate social responsibility; Board composition; System GMM; Endogeneity; Organizational returns
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.