SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar Dergisi / 2011 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 554

The analysis of the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance (tobin-q and abnormal return) in Turkey

Türkiye’de kurumsal yönetim ve firma performansı (tobin-q ve anormal getiri) arasındaki ilişkinin analizi

ERSAN ERSOY
ALİ BAYRAKDAROĞLU
Famil ŞAMİLOĞLU
Pages
71–83
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The expectation that the presence of audit committee would increase the performance in firms is not confirmed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to test the relationship between corporate gover nance and firm performance for 51 firms listed in the ISE-100 index using Panel Logistic Regression Models (PLRM).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The data cover a ten years period betwe en1998-2007.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The expectation that the presence of audit committee would increase the performance in firms is not confirmed.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to test the relationship between corporate gover nance and firm performance for 51 firms listed in the ISE-100 index using Panel Logistic Regression Models (PLRM). The data cover a ten years period betwe en1998-2007. The case that CEO is neither also the chairman of the board of di rectors nor a board member, the size of board of directors and ownership con centration increase the value of Tobin-q. Nevertheless Managerial ownership is not found to be an important variable improving firm performance. Results from the panel logistic regression models indicate that while foreign ownership increases firm performance in terms of Tobin-q, it reduces abnormal stock returns of the firm. The expectation that the presence of audit committee would increase the performance in firms is not confirmed.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, İMKB–100 endeksinde yer alan 51 firma için kurumsal yö netim ile firma performansı arasındaki ilişkiyi Panel Lojistik Regresyon Modelle ri (PLRM) kullanarak test etmektir. Analizler, 1998-2007 dönemini kapsayan 10 yıllık veri dikkate alınarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada CEO’nun aynı zaman da yönetim kurulu üyesi veya yönetim kurulu başkanı olmaması durumu, yöne tim kurulu üye sayısının büyüklüğü ve sahiplik yoğunlaşmasının Tobin-q değeri ni arttırdığı tespit edilmiştir. Yönetici sahipliğinin firma performansını arttırmada önemli bir değişken olmadığı, ancak yabancı sahipliğinin Tobin-q temelinde firma performansını arttırırken, hisse senedi getirilerini azalttığı belirlenmiştir. Firmalarda denetim komitesinin varlığının performansı arttıracağı beklentisi gerçekleşmemiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERSOY, E., BAYRAKDAROĞLU, A., ŞAMİLOĞLU, F. (2011). The analysis of the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance (tobin-q and abnormal return) in Turkey. Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar Dergisi, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 554, 71–83. https://ajindex.com/articles/224120

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. AKTAN, C. Can; (2006),
  2. Kurumsal Şirket Yönetimi, SPK, Yayın No: 196. ANDERSON, Ronald C.; Sattar A. MANSI and Reeb DAVID M; (2004), “Board Characteristics, Accounting Report Integrity, and the Cost of Debt”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 37 (3), pp.315-342.
  3. AYDIN, Nurhan, Mustafa SAYIM ve Abdullah YALAMA; (2007), “Foreign Ownership and Firm Performance: Evidence from Turkey”, International Research Journal of Finance and Eco nomics, 11, pp.103-111.
  4. BAEK, Jae-Seung; Jun-Koo KANG and Kyung Suh PARK; (2004), “Corporate Governance and Firm Value: Evidence from the Korean Financial Crisis”, Journal of Financial Econom ics,71(2), pp.265-313.
  5. BEINER, Stefan; Wolfgang DROBETZ; Marcus M SCHMID and Zimmermann, HEINZ; (2006), “An Integrated Framework of Corporate Governance and Firm Valuation”, European Fi nancial Management, 12(2), pp.249-283.
  6. BEN-AKIVA, Moshe and, R. Lerman STEVEN; (1985), Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand, The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press,
  7. England. BERLE, Adolf A. and Gardiner C. MEANS; (1932), the Modern Corporation and Private Property, Macmillan, New York. BHAGAT, Sanjai and Brian BOLTON; (2008), “Corporate Gov ernance and Firm Performance”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 14(3), pp.257-273.
  8. BIANCO, Magda and Paola CASAVOLA; (1999), “Italian Cor porate Governance: Effects on Financial Structure and Firm Performance”, European Economic Review, 43(4-6), pp.1057- 1069. BLACK, Bernard S.; Hasung JANG and Woochan KIM; (2003), “Does Corporate Governance Affect Firm Value? Evidence from Korea”, Stanford Law School Working Paper, No: 237. http:// www.haas.berkeley.edu/groups/finance/black.pdf, 11.09.2010.
  9. BRUNER, Robert F.; Kenneth M. EADES; Robert S. HARRIS; Robert C. HIGGINS; (1998), “Best Practices in Estimating the Cost of Capital: Survey and Synthesis”, Financial Practice and Education, 8(1), pp.20-33.
  10. CHAGANTI, Rajeswararao S.; Vijay MAHAJAN and Subhash SHARMA; (1985), “Corporate Board Size, Composition and Corporate Failures in Retailing Industry”, Journal of Manage ment Studies, 22(4), pp.400-417.
  11. ÇITAK, Levent; (2007), “The Impact of Ownership Structure on Company Performance; A Panel Data Analysis on Istanbul Stock Exchange Listed Companies”, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 9, ss.107-119.
  12. DALTON, Dan R.; Catherine M. DAILY; Alan E. ELLSTRAND and Jonathan L. JOHNSON; (1998), “Meta-Analytic Reviews of Board Composition, Leadership Structure, and Financial Per formance”