Board Size, Independence and Performance: An Analysis of Thai Banks

174 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.

Which Governance Mechanisms Promote Efficiency in Reaching Poor Clients? Evidence from Rated Microfinance Institutions (2012, unknown): “Financial intermediaries usually have larger boards than do non-financial firms, but the empirical evidence shows both a positive and negative relation between board size and performance (Adams and Mehran, 2003; Pathan et al., 2007; Belkhir, 2004).”
The Impact of Corporate Governance on the Efficiency Performance of the Thai Non-Life Insurance Industry (2010, unknown): “5 Pathan et al. (2007).”
Intellectual Capital Performance and Profitability of Banks: Evidence from Pakistan (2019, background): “Further, Yeung (2018); Esman and Kebede (2013); Tanna et al. (2011); Andres and Vallelado (2008); Pathan et al. (2007) also found a positive impact of board independence on financial performance.”
Bank performance in China: A Perspective from Bank efficiency, risk-taking and market competition (2019, methodology): “This result indicates that there will be a significant increase in the demand of non-interest generating businesses in a higher developed banking market, which proceeds a significant increase in ROA but not NIM.”