Board Composition and Corporate Performance: how the Australian experience informs contrasting theories of corporate governance

By Geoffrey Kiel, Gavin Nicholson. 2003

1,226 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1e44b281e510aebd5ce4ae14ee7ff76af1ec59f1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Gender Studies

Citations in the corpus

Multiple Directorships and Corporate Performance in Australian Listed Companies (2006, neutral): “These figures correspond to previous Australian studies (see Arthur, 2001; Kiel and Nicholson, 2003; Stapledon and Lawrence, 1996).”
East Meets West? Board Characteristics in an Emerging Market: Evidence from Turkish Banks (2008, methodology): “For example, Kiel and Nicholson (2003) find a positive and significant correlation between Tobin’s Q and duality in their correlation analysis, nevertheless, like Abdullah (2004) and Weir and Liang (2000), they did not observe any significant relationship between these variables in the regression…”
Examining the influence of corporate governance on intellectual capital efficiency: Evidence from top service firms in Australia (2015, background): “It also identifies CEO duality, board size, board composition and committee composition as internal corporate governance mechanisms which seem to play an important role in Australian firms (see Henry, 2008; Kang et al., 2007; Kiel and Nicholson, 2003).”
The Effect of Board Size and Composition on the Efficiency of UK Banks (2011, background): “The former implies that boards can provide additional networking and better access to resources (Kiel and Nicholson, 2003 ) that should be useful in maximising the firm’s value; the latter suggests that boards are a legal fiction dominated by management, and consequently they play a passive role in”
Too Good to be True: Board Structural Independence as a Moderator of CEO Pay-for-Firm-Performance (2011, neutral): “These results are consistent with those of Kiel and Nicholson (2003), who suggested that relative to the UK and the USA, Australia has shown a demonstrably greater adherence to prescriptions for board structural independence.”
Does Board Gender Diversity Influence Financial Performance? Evidence from Spain (2015, background): “In this line, Kiel and Nicholson (2003) suggest that, due to the multidisciplinary nature of the topic, no single theory can provide a complete framework to form the relation between diversity and performance.”
Gender Diversity on European Banks’ Boards of Directors (2011, neutral): “…that is more equitable and, in some sense (Carver 2002; Keasey et al. 1997), economic benefits rest on the underlying assumption that the board’s composition affects the way the board performs its functions, which partially determines firm performance (Dalton et al. 1999; Kiel and Nicholson 2003).”