Why Adopt Codes of Good Governance? A Comparison of Institutional and Efficiency Perspectives

By Alessandro Zattoni, Francesca Cuomo. 2008

377 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f1b661a3a449fa01d11c027bde0738a0dc008119

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 Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Antecedents of Shareholder Activism in Target Firms: Evidence from a Multi‐Country Study (2010, neutral): “For example, Zattoni and Cuomo (2008) found that corporate codes in civil law countries were more focused on the symbolic legitimacy, while those in common law countries were more likely to challenge managerial opportunism.”
The Effect of Environmental, Social and Governance Consistency on Economic Results (2016, methodology): “For addressing the idiosyncrasy among regions according to their legal system, this study uses the Zattoni and Cuomo [55] criterion to classify countries according to the legal origin system (ENGLISH SYSTEM) (FRENCH SYSTEM) (GERMAN SYSTEM) (SCANDINAVIAN SYSTEM).”
Islamic Governance, National Governance, and Bank Risk Management and Disclosure in MENA Countries (2017, background): “Hence, the sociological neo-institutionalism theorists suggest that individuals and firms not only compete for critical resources, but also endeavour to gain social acceptance (“organisational legitimacy”) (Zattoni & Cuomo, 2008).”
Maturation of Corporate Governance Research, 1993-2007: An Assessment (2009, background): “For example, Zattoni and Cuomo (2008) study whether their adoption is driven by the objective to reinforce investors’ rights or rather to tap into global financial markets.”
Corporate Governance and Performance in Socially Responsible Corporations: New Empirical Insights from a Neo‐Institutional Framework (2013, positive): “…nature and consequences of CSR and CG practices (Parker, 2005; Devinney, 2009), there is an increasing consensus that these practices have to be examined from a theoretical perspective, which encompasses both legitimation and efficiency motives (Zattoni & Cuomo, 2008; Judge et al., 2008, 2010).”
Convergence of Corporate Governance: Critical Review and Future Directions (2009, background): “Zattoni and Cuomo (2008) examined the adoption of governance codes in civil law countries compared with common law countries and found that the codes in civil law countries tended to be more ambiguous and lenient, suggesting that the codes were developed more for legitimation reasons than substanti”
Good corporate governance in Nigeria: Antecedents, propositions and peculiarities (2015, background): “…(instrumentality) and legitimacy (symbolic) in explaining why firms may engage in good governance practices in an international business environment (Aguilera & Cuervo-Cazurra, 2004; Zattoni & Cuomo, 2008; Judge et al., 2008, 2010; McCarthy & Puffer 2008; Lien et al., 2005; Lau et.al., 2007).”
Integrating agency and resource dependence theory: Firm profitability, industry regulation, and board task performance (2013, background): “…this increased homogeneity in governance practices, including higher transparency in the appointment of directors, larger proportion of independent, and the adoption of board committees aligns Italian corporate law to the majority of regulation in developed countries (Zattoni & Cuomo, 2008).”
Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Synergies and Interrelationships (2008, background): “” Our findings thus highlight the salience of the sociopolitical view of CG as suggested by prior research (Aguilera and Jackson, 2003; Gordon and Roe, 2004: Aguilera et al., 2006; Zattoni and Cuomo, 2008), translating into our first theoretical proposition:”
Compliance and multidimensional firm performance: Evaluating the efficacy of rule-based code of corporate governance (2013, positive): “The rise and wide acceptability of codes of good governance can be seen from the fact that therewere 72 codes in 24 countries in 1999 (Aguilera and Cuervo-Cazurra, 2004) and in 2008 the website for European Corporate Governance Institute reported 189 codes in 63 countries (Zattoni and Cuomo, 2008).”