臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：Corporate Governance, Executive Compensation, and Bank Performance in Indonesia
作者：安志誠
作者(外文)：AGUNG DHARMAWAN BUCHDADI
校院名稱：南臺科技大學
系所名稱：經營管理博士學位學程
指導教授：周德光
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2018
主題關鍵詞：公司治理；審計委員會；董事會會議；Corporate Governance；Audit Committee；Board Meeting
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:1
This thesis aims to examine the impact of the good corporate governance (GCG) variables proposed by the central bank to bank performance and also examine the determinant of compensation from the GCG variables and the firm performance. The GOG variables are the independent board (IB), the annual board meeting (BM), the percentage of annual board of director meeting attendance (ABM), the annual board-executive meeting (BEM), the percentage of annual board-executive meeting attendance (ABEM), audit committee (AC), audit committee meeting (ACM), the percentage of annual audit committee meeting attendance (AACM), risk committee (RC), risk committee meeting (RCM), and the percentage of annual risk committee meeting attendance (ARCM), remuneration and nomination committee (RNC), remuneration and nomination committee meeting (RNCM), and the percentage of annual remuneration and nomination committee meeting attendance (ARNCM). We developed 10 model equations and analyzed it using two stage least square (2SLS) regression to deal with the endogeinity problems. The data are the listed bank in Indonesia capital market from 2006 to 2015.
The findings reveal that the independent board (IB) only have positive effect to net interest margin ratio (NIM) of the samples and especially the big banks. However, the IB does have significant impact on the ROA and the market value–based performance. In addition, the findings show that the attendance level of board meeting (ABM) has a positive impact on the ROA and NIM among the small banks. It also found that attendance level of board-executive meeting (ABEM) has a positive impact on the ROA among the big banks. Finally, It is also noted that audit committee meeting in the small banks has a positive effect to the ROA, while the big banks will enhance the market value- based performance. In addition, the attendance of audit meeting will also improve the market value among the big banks.
In addition, the findings regarding the performance on pay relation as it is mainly suggested in agency theory reveal that accounting-based performancehas a positive impact on the executive’s compensation (EC). However, the market-value based performance does not provide a positive impact on the EC. In addition, the results regarding the pay on the performance relation reveal that the EC has a positive impact on accounting-based performance, but not the market-value based performance. Then, in Indonesia, the pay (executive compensation) on performance (accounting-based performance) and the performance on pay relationship have a dynamic correlation in which both correlations are valid.
Finally, the study on the ownership structure, we found that the ownership concentration holders behave differently with the thesis in agency theory which will more focus to monitor the bank to make it have better performance as they have the benefit and the reason to do so. Beside, in the state banks, the findings reveal that the pay has a positive impact on accounting based performance, the accounting based performance also has a positive impact on executive’s compensation, and the remuneration committee has a negative relationship to the executives’ compensation. While only in the state bank the remuneration and nomination committee has a good impact on both accounting-based performance and market value-based performance
This thesis aims to examine the impact of the good corporate governance (GCG) variables proposed by the central bank to bank performance and also examine the determinant of compensation from the GCG variables and the firm performance. The GOG variables are the independent board (IB), the annual board meeting (BM), the percentage of annual board of director meeting attendance (ABM), the annual board-executive meeting (BEM), the percentage of annual board-executive meeting attendance (ABEM), audit committee (AC), audit committee meeting (ACM), the percentage of annual audit committee meeting attendance (AACM), risk committee (RC), risk committee meeting (RCM), and the percentage of annual risk committee meeting attendance (ARCM), remuneration and nomination committee (RNC), remuneration and nomination committee meeting (RNCM), and the percentage of annual remuneration and nomination committee meeting attendance (ARNCM). We developed 10 model equations and analyzed it using two stage least square (2SLS) regression to deal with the endogeinity problems. The data are the listed bank in Indonesia capital market from 2006 to 2015.
The findings reveal that the independent board (IB) only have positive effect to net interest margin ratio (NIM) of the samples and especially the big banks. However, the IB does have significant impact on the ROA and the market value–based performance. In addition, the findings show that the attendance level of board meeting (ABM) has a positive impact on the ROA and NIM among the small banks. It also found that attendance level of board-executive meeting (ABEM) has a positive impact on the ROA among the big banks. Finally, It is also noted that audit committee meeting in the small banks has a positive effect to the ROA, while the big banks will enhance the market value- based performance. In addition, the attendance of audit meeting will also improve the market value among the big banks.
In addition, the findings regarding the performance on pay relation as it is mainly suggested in agency theory reveal that accounting-based performancehas a positive impact on the executive’s compensation (EC). However, the market-value based performance does not provide a positive impact on the EC. In addition, the results regarding the pay on the performance relation reveal that the EC has a positive impact on accounting-based performance, but not the market-value based performance. Then, in Indonesia, the pay (executive compensation) on performance (accounting-based performance) and the performance on pay relationship have a dynamic correlation in which both correlations are valid.
Finally, the study on the ownership structure, we found that the ownership concentration holders behave differently with the thesis in agency theory which will more focus to monitor the bank to make it have better performance as they have the benefit and the reason to do so. Beside, in the state banks, the findings reveal that the pay has a positive impact on accounting based performance, the accounting based performance also has a positive impact on executive’s compensation, and the remuneration committee has a negative relationship to the executives’ compensation. While only in the state bank the remuneration and nomination committee has a good impact on both accounting-based performance and market value-based performance
Abdallah, A. A.-N., & Ismail, A. K. (2016). Corporate Governance Practices, Ownership Structure, and Corporate Performance in the GCC Countries. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, In Press(In Press), In Press. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2016.08.004

Adams, M., & Jiang, W. (2016). Do outside directors influence the financial performance of risk-trading firms? Evidence from the United Kingdom (UK) insurance industry. Journal of Banking and Finance, 64, 36–51. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2015.11.018

Aggarwal, R., Erel, I., Ferreira, M., & Matos, P. (2011). Does governance travel around the world? Evidence from institutional investors. Journal of Financial Economics, 100(1), 154–181. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.10.018new window

Aggarwal, R. K. (2007). Executive Compensation and Incentives. Handbook of Empirical Corporate Finance SET (Vol. 1). Woodhead Publishing Limited. http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53265-7.50009-3new window

Aguilera, R. V., & Crespi-Cladera, R. (2015). Global corporate governance: On the relevance of firms’ ownership structure. Journal of World Business, 51(1), 50–57. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2015.10.003new window

Akbar, S., Poletti-Hughes, J., El-Faitouri, R., & Shah, S. Z. A. (2016). More on the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance in the UK: Evidence from the application of generalized method of moments estimation. Research in International Business and Finance, 38, 417–429. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2016.03.009

Al-Najjar, B. (2014). Corporate governance, tourism growth and firm performance: Evidence from publicly listed tourism firms in five Middle Eastern countries. Tourism Management, 42, 342–351. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.09.008

Alessandri, T. M., & Pattit, J. M. (2014). Drivers of R&D investment: The interaction of behavioral theory and managerial incentives. Journal of Business Research, 67(2), 151–158. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.11.001

Alves, P., Barbosa, E., & Morais, P. (2016). Research in International Business and Finance Executive pay and performance in Portuguese listed companies. Research in International Business and Finance, 37, 184–195. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2015.11.006

Ammann, M., Oesch, D., & Schmid, M. M. (2011). Corporate governance and firm value: International evidence. Journal of Empirical Finance, 18(1), 36–55. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2010.10.003new window

Arafat, M. Y., Warokka, A., Buchdadi, A. D., & Suherman. (2013). Banking efficiency and performance: a test of banking characteristics in an emerging market. J. for Global Business Advancement, 6(1), 13–23. http://doi.org/10.1504/JGBA.2013.053475new window

Babalos, V., Kostakis, A., & Philippas, N. (2009). Managing mutual funds or managing expense ratios? Evidence from the Greek fund industry. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 19(4), 256–272. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.mulfin.2009.01.001

Balafas, N., & Florackis, C. (2014). CEO compensation and future shareholder returns: Evidence from the London Stock Exchange. Journal of Empirical Finance, 27, 97–115. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2013.10.011

Balsam, S., Fernando, G. D., & Tripathy, A. (2011). The impact of firm strategy on performance measures used in executive compensation. Journal of Business Research, 64(2), 187–193. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.01.006

Bank Indonesia. (2006). Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor 8/4/PBI/2006 Tentang Pelaksanaan Good Corporate Governance Bagi Bank Umum (Bank Indonesia Regulation No. 8/4 / PBI / 2006 on Implementation of Good Corporate Governance for Commercial Bank). Retrieved from http://www.bi.go.id/id/peraturan/kodifikasi/bank/Documents/GCG Complete.pdf

Bank Indonesia. (2016a). Arsitektur Perbankan Indonesia (Indonesian Banking Architecture). Retrieved January 1, 2016, from http://www.bi.go.id/id/perbankan/arsiteltur/Contents/Default.aspxnew window

Bank Indonesia. (2016b). PROGRAM PENINGKATAN KUALITAS MANAJEMEN DAN OPERASIONAL PERBANKAN. Retrieved January 1, 2016, from http://www.bi.go.id/id/perbankan/arsitektur/manajemen/Contents/Default.aspxnew window

Basu, S., Hwang, L. S., Mitsudome, T., & Weintrop, J. (2007). Corporate governance, top executive compensation and firm performance in Japan. Pacific Basin Finance Journal, 15(1), 56–79. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2006.05.002new window

Black, B., & Kim, W. (2012). The effect of board structure on firm value: A multiple identification strategies approach using Korean data. Journal of Financial Economics, 104(1), 203–226. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.08.001new window

Black, B. S., de Carvalho, A. G., & Gorga, É. (2012). What matters and for which firms for corporate governance in emerging markets? Evidence from Brazil (and other BRIK countries). Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(4), 934–952. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2011.10.001

Borisova, G., Brockman, P., Salas, J. M., & Zagorchev, A. (2012). Government ownership and corporate governance: Evidence from the EU. Journal of Banking and Finance, 36(11), 2917–2934. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.01.008

Brick, I. E., & Chidambaran, N. K. (2010). Board meetings, committee structure, and firm value. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(4), 533–553. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2010.06.003

Brown, K., Jha, R., & Pacharn, P. (2015). Ex ante CEO severance pay and risk-taking in the financial services sector. Journal of Banking and Finance, 59, 111–126. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2015.04.027

Cai, C. X., Hillier, D., Tian, G., & Wu, Q. (2015). Do audit committees reduce the agency costs of ownership structure? Pacific Basin Finance Journal, 35, 225–240. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2015.01.002

Cavaco, S., Crifo, P., Rebérioux, A., & Roudaut, G. (2017). Independent directors: Less informed but better selected than affiliated board members? Journal of Corporate Finance. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.01.004

Chen, C. H., & Al-Najjar, B. (2012). The determinants of board size and independence: Evidence from China. International Business Review, 21(5), 831–846. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2011.09.008

Chen, H. J., & Lin, K. T. (2016). How do banks make the trade-offs among risks? The role of corporate governance. Journal of Banking and Finance, 72, S39–S69. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.05.010

Chou, H. I., Chung, H., & Yin, X. (2013). Attendance of board meetings and company performance: Evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Banking and Finance, 37(11), 4157–4171. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.07.028

Chou, T.-K., & Buchdadi, A. D. (2017). Independent Board, Audit Committee, Risk Committee, the Meeting Attendance level and Its Impact on the Performance: A Study of Listed Banks in Indonesia. International Journal of Business Administration, 8(3), 24. http://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v8n3p24

Chou, T. K., & Buchdadi, A. D. (2016). Bank Performance and Its Underlying Factors: A Study of Rural Banks in Indonesia. Accounting and Finance Research, 5(3), 55–63. http://doi.org/10.5430/afr.v5n3p55

Claessens, S., & Yurtoglu, B. B. (2013). Corporate governance in emerging markets: A survey. Emerging Markets Review, 15, 1–33. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2012.03.002

Coles, J. W., McWilliams, V. B., & Sen, N. (2001). An examination of the relationship of governance machanisms to performance. Journal of Management, 27(1), 23–50. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(00)00085-4new window

Conyon, M. J. (1997). Corporate governance and executive compensation. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 15(4), 493–509. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7187(96)01032-6

Conyon, M. J., & He, L. (2011). Executive compensation and corporate governance in China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17(4), 1158–1175. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2011.04.006

Crespi-Cladera, R., & Pascual-Fuster, B. (2015). Executive directors’ pay, networks and operating performance: The influence of ownership structure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 34(2), 175–203. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2014.09.004

Curak, M., Poposki, K., & Pepur, S. (2012). Profitability Determinants of the Macedonian Banking Sector in Changing Environment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 44, 406–416. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.045

Devers, C. E., Cannella, A. A., Reilly, G. P., & Yoder, M. E. (2007). Executive Compensation: A Multidisciplinary Review of Recent Developments. Journal of Management, 33(6), 1016–1072. http://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308588

Dietrich, A., & Wanzenried, G. (2011). Determinants of bank profitability before and during the crisis: Evidence from Switzerland. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 21(3), 307–327. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2010.11.002

Dincer, H., Gencer, G., Orhan, N., & Sahinbas, K. (2011). A performance evaluation of the Turkish banking sector after the global crisis via CAMELS ratios. In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 1530–1545). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.09.051

Duru, A., Iyengar, R. J., & Zampelli, E. M. (2015). The dynamic relationship between CEO duality and firm performance: The moderating role of board independence. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4269–4277. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.001

Faleye, O., Reis, E., & Venkateswaran, A. (2013). The determinants and effects of CEO-employee pay ratios. Journal of Banking and Finance, 37(8), 3258–3272. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.03.003

Faria, P., Martins, F. V., & Brandão, E. (2014). The Level of CEO Compensation for the Short and Long-term – A View on High-tech Firms. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 1023–1032. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.949

Fungáčová, Z., & Poghosyan, T. (2011). Determinants of bank interest margins in Russia: Does bank ownership matter? Economic Systems, 35(4), 481–495. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2010.11.007

Germain, L., Galy, N., & Lee, W. (2014). Corporate governance reform in Malaysia: Board size, independence and monitoring. Journal of Economics and Business, 75, 126–162. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2014.06.003

Gillan, S. L. (2006). Recent Developments in Corporate Governance: An Overview. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(3), 381–402. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2005.11.002

Guillet, B. D., Kucukusta, D., & Xiao, Q. (2012). An examination of executive compensation in the restaurant industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 86–95. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.04.014new window

Guo, Z., & Kga, U. K. (2012). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance of Listed Firms in Sri Lanka. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 40, 664–667. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.246

Hainz, C., Horváth, R., & Hlaváček, M. (2014). The interest rate spreads in the Czech Republic: Different loans, different determinants? Economic Systems, 38(1), 43–54. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2013.10.002new window

Hirschey, M. (2003). 10 - Corporate governance and the legal environment. Tech Stock Valuation, 229–263. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-012349704-8.50024-6

Holmstrom, B. R., & Tirole, J. (1989). Chapter 2 The theory of the firm. In Handbook of Industrial Organization (Vol. 1, pp. 61–133). http://doi.org/10.1016/S1573-448X(89)01005-8new window

Huang, Y. S., & Wang, C. J. (2015). Corporate governance and risk-taking of Chinese firms: The role of board size. International Review of Economics and Finance, 37, 96–113. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2014.11.016

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Jensen, M. C., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1985). Management compensation and the managerial labor market. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 7(1–3), 3–9. http://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(85)90025-4

John, K., & Senbet, L. L. W. (1998). Corporate governance and board effectiveness. Journal of Banking & Finance, 22, 371–403. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(98)00005-3

Kanapathippillai, S., Johl, S. K., & Wines, G. (2015). Remuneration committee effectiveness and narrative remuneration disclosure. Pacific Basin Finance Journal, (2015). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2016.02.006

Ko, H. A., Tong, Y. (Jamie), Zhang, F. (Frank), & Zheng, G. (2016). Corporate governance, product market competition and managerial incentives: Evidence from four Pacific Basin countries. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 40, 491–502. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2016.10.009

Liang, Q., Xu, P., & Jiraporn, P. (2013). Board characteristics and Chinese bank performance. Journal of Banking and Finance, 37(8), 2953–2968. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.04.018

Liu, Y., Miletkov, M. K., Wei, Z., & Yang, T. (2015). Board independence and firm performance in China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 30, 223–244. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2014.12.004

Lozano, M. B., Martinez, B., & Pindado, J. (2016). Corporate governance, ownership and firm value: Drivers of ownership as a good corporate governance mechanism. International Business Review, 25(6), 1333–1343. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.04.005

Lu, C., Hung, C.-S., Fan, L., & Chen, S. (2005). The Relationship between Non-performing Loans and Ownership Structure and Characters of Listed Financial Institutions in Taiwan. Journal of Acciunting and Corporate Governance, 2(1), 61–79.new window

Madison, K., Holt, D. T., Kellermanns, F. W., & Ranft, A. L. (2015). Viewing Family Firm Behavior and Governance Through the Lens of Agency and Stewardship Theories. Family Business Review, 29(1), 65–93. http://doi.org/10.1177/0894486515594292new window

Markonah, Cahaya, Y. F., & Riwayati, H. E. (2016). The Effect of Banking Company Performance toward Good Corporate Governance Listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219, 486–492. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.024

Mashayekhi, B., & Bazaz, M. S. (2008). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance in Iran. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 4(2), 156–172. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1815-5669(10)70033-3

Müller, V.-O. (2014). The Impact of Board Composition on the Financial Performance of FTSE100 Constituents. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, 969–975. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.573

Munisi, G., Hermes, N., & Randoy, T. (2014). Corporate boards and ownership structure: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. International Business Review, 23(4), 785–796. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.12.001

Munisi, G., & Randoy, T. (2013). Corporate Governance and Company Performance across Sub-Saharan African Countries. Journal of Economics and Business, 70, 92–110. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2013.08.003

Murray, M. P. (2006). Econometrics A Modern Introduction (chapter 16 Lecture 24). Retrieved June 9, 2017, from wps.aw.com/wps/media/objects/2387/.../ch16lectr24.ppt

Nguyen, T., Locke, S., & Reddy, K. (2015). Ownership concentration and corporate performance from a dynamic perspective: Does national governance quality matter? International Review of Financial Analysis, 41, 148–161. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2015.06.005

Olson, D., & Zoubi, T. A. (2011). Efficiency and bank profitability in MENA countries. Emerging Markets Review, 12, 94–110. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2011.02.003

Omran, M. (2009). Post-privatization corporate governance and firm performance: The role of private ownership concentration, identity and board composition. Journal of Comparative Economics, 37(4), 658–673. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2009.02.002

Poczter, S. (2016). The long-term effects of bank recapitalization: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 25, 131–153. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2015.05.001

Prommin, P., Jumreornvong, S., Jiraporn, P., & Tong, S. (2016). Liquidity, ownership concentration, corporate governance, and firm value: Evidence from Thailand. Global Finance Journal, 31, 73–87. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2016.06.006

Raithatha, M., & Komera, S. (2016). Executive compensation and firm performance: Evidence from Indian firms. IIMB Management Review, 28(3), 160–169. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2016.07.002

Riaz, S., Liu, Y., & Ahmad, M. I. (2016). Dividend Policy and Corporate Governance Perspective. Accounting and Finance Research, 5(3), 78–86. http://doi.org/10.5430/afr.v5n3p77

Roman, A., & Şargu, A. C. (2013). Analysing the Financial Soundness of the Commercial Banks in Romania: An Approach based on the Camels Framework. Procedia Economics and Finance, 6(13), 703–712. http://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(13)00192-5

Romano, G., & Guerrini, A. (2014). The effects of ownership, board size and board composition on the performance of Italian water utilities, Utilities Policy, 31, 18–28. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2014.06.002

Salim, R., Arjomandi, A., & Seufert, J. H. (2016). Does corporate governance affect Australian banks’ performance? Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 43, 113–125. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2016.04.006

Samaha, K., Dahawy, K., Hussainey, K., & Stapleton, P. (2012). The extent of corporate governance disclosure and its determinants in a developing market: The case of Egypt. Advances in Accounting, 28(1), 168–178. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2011.12.001new window

Schultz, E. L., Tan, D. T., & Walsh, K. D. (2010). Endogeneity and the corporate governance - performance relation. Australian Journal of Management, 35(2), 145–163. http://doi.org/10.1177/0312896210370079

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, LII, n. 2,(2), 737–783. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb04820.x

Siregar, S. V., & Utama, S. (2008). Type of earnings management and the effect of ownership structure, firm size, and corporate-governance practices: Evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Accounting, 43(1), 1–27. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intacc.2008.01.001new window

Slomka-Golebiowska, A., & Urbanek, P. (2016). Corporate boards, large blockholders and executive compensation in banks: Evidence from Poland. Emerging Markets Review, 28, 203–220. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2016.08.001

Subekti, I., & Sumargo, D. K. (2015). Family Management, Executive Compensation and Financial Performance of Indonesian Listed Companies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 578–584. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.076

Suherman, Rahmawati, W., & Buchdadi, A. D. (2011). Firm performance, corporate governance, and executive compensation in financial firms: Evidence from Indonesia. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1805532

Sun, J., & Liu, G. (2014). Audit committees’ oversight of bank risk-taking. Journal of Banking and Finance, 40(1), 376–387. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.12.015new window

Sun, P. H., Mohamad, S., & Ariff, M. (2016). Determinants driving bank performance: A comparison of two types of banks in the OIC. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2016.02.007

Tan, Y. (2014). Corporate governance in the banking sector. In Performance, Risk and Competition in the Chinese Banking Industry (pp. 39–64). Elsevier. http://doi.org/10.1533/9781780634463.39

Tao, N. B., & Hutchinson, M. (2013). Corporate governance and risk management: The role of risk management and compensation committees. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 9(1), 83–99. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2013.03.003new window

Ting, P.-H. (2011). The determinants of board size and composition: Evidence from Taiwan banks. African Journal of Business Management, 5(17), 7622–7631. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2008.01.002

Trinugroho, I., Agusman, A., & Tarazi, A. (2014). Why have bank interest margins been so high in Indonesia since 1997/1998 financial crisis. Research in International Business and Finance, 32, 139–158. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2014.04.001

Uddin, H. (2016). Effect of government share ownership on corporate risk taking: Case of the United Arab Emirates? Research in International Business and Finance, 36, 322–339.

Upadhyay, A. D., Bhargava, R., & Faircloth, S. D. (2014). Board structure and role of monitoring committees. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1486–1492. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.07.017

Were, M., & Wambua, J. (2014). What factors drive interest rate spread of commercial banks? Empirical evidence from Kenya. Review of Development Finance, 4(2), 73–82. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rdf.2014.05.005

Widiarti, A. W., Siregar, H., & Andati, T. (2015). The Determinants of Bank’s Efficiency In Indonesia. Buletin Ekonomi Moneter Dan Perbankan, 18(2), 129–156.

Wu, J., & Tu, R. (2007). CEO stock option pay and R&D spending: a behavioral agency explanation. Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 482–492. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.006

Yin, H., Yang, J., & Mehran, J. (2013). An empirical study of bank efficiency in China after WTO accession. Global Finance Journal, 24, 153–170. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2013.07.001

Zhu, J., Ye, K., Tucker, J. W., & Chan, K. (Johnny) C. (2016). Board hierarchy, independent directors, and firm value: Evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 41, 262–279. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2016.09.009

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：963（臺灣：955，外國：8） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2042760 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67860228
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上