A study of the impact of Malaysian code on corporate governance practices on firm performance in Malaysia

  • Authors

    • Siti Marlia Shamsudin
    • Norliana Omar
    • Noor Saatila Mohd Isa
    • . .
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.35.29300
  • Corporate Governance, Firm Performance, MCCG.

  • Abstract

    A good corporate governance framework is imperative to improve the corporate governance standards and to establish the roles and responsibilities of the key members of the company. Therefore, considering the importance role of the corporate governance, the aims of this study is to examine the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance by taking into consideration the changes in Malaysia Code on Corporate Governance 2007 (MCCG 2007) and Malaysia Code on Corporate Governance 2012 (MCCG 2012). The sample of this study consists of top 90 firms listed in Bursa Malaysia for the period from 2008 to 2016. The findings indicate that the board independence, board size and board compensation positively and significantly influence the firm performance. On the other hand, CEO duality has a negative impact on firm performance. Thus, the findings of this study shed the light on the significance of practicing good corporate governance to enhance the firm performance.

     

     

  • References

    1. [1] Abdallah, A. A. N., & Ismail, A. K. (2017). Corporate governance practices, ownership structure, and corporate performance in the GCC countries. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 46, 98-115.

      [2] Alshetwi, M. (2017). The Association between Board Size, Independence and Firm Performance: Evidence from Saudi Arabia. Global Journal of Management And Business Research, 17(1).

      [3] Arora, A., Arora, A., Sharma, C., & Sharma, C. (2016). Corporate governance and firm performance in developing countries: evidence from India. Corporate Governance, 16(2), 420-436.

      [4] Balsmeier, B., Buchwald, A., & Stiebale, J. (2014). Outside directors on the board and innovative firm performance. Research Policy, 43(10), 1800-1815.

      [5] Bhagat, S., & Black, B. (2000). Board independence and long-term firm performance. Unpublished paper, University of Colorado.

      [6] Bhuiyan, M. B. U. (2015). Do problem directors affect firm operating performance? Asian Review of Accounting, 23(2), 170-185.

      [7] Brick, I. E., Palmon, O., & Wald, J. K. (2006). CEO compensation, director compensation, and firm performance: Evidence of cronyism? Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(3), 403-423.

      [8] Buallay, A., Hamdan, A., & Zureigat, Q. (2017). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: Evidence from Saudi Arabia. Australasian Accounting Business & Finance Journal, 11(1), 78.

      [9] Duppati, G., Sune, A., & Samanta, N. (2017). Corporate governance, research and development volatility and firm performance-Evidence from Spain and Ireland. Cogent Economics & Finance, 5(1), 1317117.

      [10] Duru, A., Iyengar, R. J., & Zampelli, E. M. (2016). The dynamic relationship between CEO duality and firm performance: The moderating role of board independence. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4269-4277.

      [11] Edwards, F. R. (2004). US Corporate Governance: What Went Wrong and Can It Be Fixed? Market discipline across countries and industries, 237.

      [12] Fuzi, S. F. S., Halim, S. A. A., & Julizaerma, M. K. (2016). Board Independence and Firm Performance. Procedia Economics and Finance, 37, 460-465.

      [13] Ilhan Nas, T., Ilhan Nas, T., Kalaycioglu, O., & Kalaycioglu, O. (2016). The effects of the board composition, board size and CEO duality on export performance: Evidence from Turkey. Management Research Review, 39(11), 1374-1409.

      [14] Kumar, S. (2016). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance in Indian Listed IT Companies. International Journal of Core Engineering & Management, 2(10), 219 – 230.

      [15] Lee, S. P., & Isa, M. (2015). Directors’ remuneration, governance and performance: the case of Malaysian banks. Managerial Finance, 41(1), 26-44.

      [16] Mohd nor, M., Shafee, N.B. & Samsuddin, N. (2014). Board Characteristics and Malaysian Firm Performance. Global Journal of Contemporary Research in Accounting, Auditing and Business Ethics (GJCRA), Vol: 1 Issue 3.

      [17] Nahar Abdullah, S. (2006). Directors' remuneration, firm's performance and corporate governance in Malaysia among distressed companies. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 6(2), 162-174.

      [18] Nguyen, T., Locke, S., & Reddy, K. (2014). A dynamic estimation of governance structures and financial performance for Singaporean companies. Economic Modelling, 40, 1-11.

      [19] Norwani, N. M., Zam, Z. M., & Chek, I. T. (2011). Corporate Governance Failure and Its Impact on Financial Reporting Within Chosen Companies. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(21).

      [20] Pandey, R., Vithessonthi, C., & Mansi, M. (2015). Busy CEOs and the performance of family firms. Research in International Business and Finance, 33, 144-166.

      [21] Raithatha, M., & Komera, S. (2016). Executive compensation and firm performance: Evidence from Indian firms. IIMB Management Review, 28(3), 160-169.

      [22] Rose, C. (2016). Firm performance and comply or explain disclosure in corporate governance. European Management Journal, 34(3), 202-222.

      [23] Shrivastav, S. M., & Kalsie, A. (2016). The Relationship Between CEO Duality and Firm Performance: An Analysis Using Panel Data Approach. IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, 15(2).

      [24] Sukumaran, A.K.S. (2013). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance-Evidence from Indian Stock Market. I J A B E R, Vol. 11, No. 2, (2013): 285-297.

      [25] Theeravanich, A. (2013). Director compensation in emerging markets: A case study of Thailand. Journal of Economics and Business, 70, 71-91.

      [26] Vo, D., & Phan, T. (2013). Corporate governance and firm performance: empirical evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Economic Development, 62-78.

      [27] Wijethilake, C., Ekanayake, A., & Perera, S. (2015). Board involvement in corporate performance: evidence from a developing country. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 5(3), 250-268.

      [28] Zalewska, A. (2014). Gentlemen do not talk about money: Remuneration dispersion and firm performance relationship on British boards. Journal of Empirical Finance, 27, 40-57.

      [29] Zabri, S. M., Ahmad, K., & Wah, K. K. (2016). Corporate Governance Practices and Firm Performance: Evidence from Top 100 Public Listed Companies in Malaysia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35, 287-296.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Marlia Shamsudin, S., Omar, N., Saatila Mohd Isa, N., & ., . (2018). A study of the impact of Malaysian code on corporate governance practices on firm performance in Malaysia. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(3.35), 200-203. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.35.29300

    Received date: 2019-05-16

    Accepted date: 2019-05-16