The relation between board size and firm performance in firms with a history of poor operating performance

213 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

The Measurements of Firm Performance's Dimensions (2014, background): “…(2011), Khan and Javid (2011), Herri (2011), Chugh, Meador and Kumar (2011), Ibrahim, Rehman and Raoof (2010), Shao (2010), Chamberlain (2010), Larmou and Vafeas (2010), Uadiale (2010), Liargovas and Skandalis (2010), Bauer, Eichholtz and Kok (2009), Hsu, Hsiao and Li (2009), Bauwhede (2009),…”
Corporate boards, audit committees and voluntary disclosure: evidence from Italian Listed Companies (2013, background): “In this context, larger boards could contribute to mitigate agency conflicts among different types of shareholders (Di Pietra et al. 2008; Larmou and Vafeas 2010 ), by giving more minority shareholders representation opportunities and improved control environment (Laksmana 2008).”
Revisiting Agency Theory: Evidence of Board Independence and Agency Cost from Bangladesh (2015, background): “Although some scholars argue that a firm may derive greater benefits from a larger board (see, for example, Zahra and Pearce 1989; Coles et al. 2008; Kiel and Nicholson 2003; Larmou and Vafeas 2010) others argue that a smaller board is more effective, because it is easy to coordinate and achieve coh”