Board Dynamics

Philip Stiles

doi:10.1017/9781108974875

References

Acharya, A., Kehoe, C., & Reyner, M. 2008. Private equity vs PLC boards in the UK: A comparison of practices and effectiveness. European Corporate Governance Institute, Finance Working Paper No. 233/2009. Google Scholar

Aggarwal, R.K., Evans, M.L., & Nanda, D. 2012. Non-profit boards: Size, performance and managerial incentives. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 53: 466–487. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Almandoz, J., & Tilcsik, A. 2016. When experts become liabilities: Domain experts on boards and organizational failure. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 1124–1149. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Barker, R. 2013. Well-trained directors are key to keeping stakeholders happy. The Guardian, May 30^th. www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/well-trained-directors-stakeholders-happy Google Scholar

Baysinger, B. D., Kosnik, R. D., & Turk, T. A. 1991. Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 205–214. CrossRef | Google Scholar

BBC. 2019. Barclays sees off Edward Bramson as rebel investor concedes defeat. May 2^nd. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48133531 Google Scholar

Bebchuk, L. A., & Fried, J. M. 2010. Tackling the managerial power problem. Pathways, Stanford University Press: 9–13. Google Scholar

Bebchuk, L. A., & Fried, J. 2004. Pay without performance: the unfulfilled promise of executive compensation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar

Becker, G. 1975. Human capital. Columbia University Press: New York. Google Scholar

BEIS. 2017. Corporate governance reform: The Government response to the Green Paper consultation, London: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Google Scholar

Berle, A., & Means, G. 1932. The modern corporation and private property. Commerce Clearing House, New York. Google Scholar

Bertrand, M., Black, S.E., Jensen, S., & Lleras-Muney, A. 2019. Breaking the glass ceiling? The effect of board quotas on female labour market outcomes in Norway. Review of Economic Studies, 86: 191–239. Google Scholar

Bhagat, S., & Black, B. 2002. The non-correlation between board independence and long-term firm performance. The Journal of Corporation Law, 27: 231–274. Google Scholar

Bhagata, S., & Bolton, B. 2008. Corporate governance and firm performance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14: 257–273. Google Scholar

Bjornberg, O., & Feser, C. 2015. CEO succession starts with developing your leaders. McKinsey Quarterly, May. www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/ceo-succession-starts-with-developing-your-leaders Google Scholar

Blair, M. M., 1995. Ownership and control: Rethinking corporate governance in the 21^st century. New York: Brookings Institution. Google Scholar

Blair, M. M., & Stout, L.A. 1999. A team production theory of corporate law. Virginia Law Review, 85: 247–328. Google Scholar

Blair, M. M. & Stout, L.A. 2001. Trust, trustworthiness, and the behavioural foundations of corporate law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 149: 1736–1810. Google Scholar

Block, D., & Gerstner, A. M. 2016. One-tier vs two-tier board structure: A comparison between the United States and Germany. Comparative corporate governance and financial regulation. Paper 1. http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/fisch_2016/1 Google Scholar

Boivie, S., Bednar, M. K., Aguilera, R. V., & Andrus, J. L. 2016. Are boards designed to fail? The implausibility of effective board monitoring. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 319–407. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Bøhren, Ø. & Staubo, S. 2016. Mandatory gender balance and board independence. European Financial Management, 22: 3–30. Google Scholar

British Academy. 2018. The future of the corporation: Reforming business for the 21st century: A framework for the future of the corporation. www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Reforming-Business-for-21st-Century-British-Academy.pdf Google Scholar

British Private Equity and Venture Capital Association (BVCA). 2018. Industry Activity. www.bvca.co.uk/Research/Industry-Activity Google Scholar

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: some universals in language usage. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

Bullock, A. 1977. Report of the committee of inquiry on industrial democracy (‘the Bullock Report’). Cmnd 6076, London, HMSO. Google Scholar

Burt, R. S. 1992. Structural holes. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar

Business Roundtable. 2019. Statement on the purpose of a corporation. August 19^th. https://opportunity.businessroundtable.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/BRT-Statement-on-the-Purpose-of-a-Corporation-with-Signatures.pdf Google Scholar

Cai, J., Nguyen, T., & Walkling, R. 2020. Director Appointments – It is Who You Know. 28th Annual Conference on Financial Economics and Accounting. Google Scholar

Cannella, A. A. Jr., & Lubatkin, M. 1993. Succession as a socio-political process: Internal impediments to outsider selection. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 763–93. Google Scholar

Carpenter, M. A., & Westphal, J. 2001. The strategic context of external network ties: examining the impact of director appointments on board involvement in strategic decision-making. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 639–660. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Carter, D. A., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, G.W. 2003. Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Review, 38: 33–53. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Carter, D. A., D’Souza, F., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, G.W. 2010. The gender and ethnic diversity of US boards and board committees and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18: 396–414. Google Scholar

Catalyst, 2020. Women CEOs of the S&P 500. Catalyst Research www.catalyst.org/research/women-ceos-of-the-sp-500/ Google Scholar

Chatterjee, S., & Harrison, J. S. 2001. Corporate governance. In Hitt, M., Freeman, R. E., & Harrison, J. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of strategic management, 543–563. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Google Scholar

Clarke, T. 2010. Recurring crises in Anglo-American corporate governance. Contributions to Political Economy, 29: 9–32. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Clarke, T., O’Brien, J., & O’Kelley, C. (Eds.). 2019 The Oxford handbook of the corporation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Cloyd, A. 2014. What is a board’s role in a family business? Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum. July 30^th. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2014/07/30/what-is-a-boards-role-in-a-family-business/ Google Scholar

Cohen, L., Frazzini, A., & Malloy, C.J. 2012. Hiring cheerleaders: board appointments of ‘independent’ directors. Management Science, 58: 1039–1058. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Coles, J. L., Daniel, N., & Naveen, L. 2014. Co-opted boards. The Review of Financial Studies, 27: 1751–1796. Google Scholar

Commonsense Principles of Corporate Governance 2.0. 2016. Millstein Centre, Columbia Law School, www.governanceprinciples.org/ Google Scholar

Conference Board, 2019. CEO succession practices. Conference Board USA. www.conference-board.org/topics/ceo-succession-practices Google Scholar

Craig-Smith, N., & Soonieus, R. 2018. How board members really feel about ESG, from deniers to true believers. Harvard Business Review Digital Article. April 19^th. https://hbr.org/2019/04/how-board-members-really-feel-about-esg-from-deniers-to-true-believers Google Scholar

Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R., & Cannella, A.A. Jr. 2003. Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28: 371–382. Google Scholar

Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Roengpitya, R. 2003. Meta-analyses of financial performance and equity: Fusion or confusion? Academy of Management Journal, 46: 13–26. Google Scholar

Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Ellstrand, A. E., & Johnson, J. L. 1998. Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 269–290. Google Scholar

Dalton, D. R., & Dalton, C. M. 2011. Integration of micro and macro studies in governance research: CEO duality, board composition, and financial performance. Journal of Management, 37: 404–411. Google Scholar

Davidson, R., Goodwin-Stewart, J., & Kent, P. 2005. Internal governance structures and earnings management. Accounting & Finance, 45: 241–267. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. 1997. Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22: 20–47. Google Scholar

Demb, A., & Neubauer, E. F. 1992. The corporate board: Confronting the paradoxes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Deschamps, J. P. 2010. Innovation governance: How proactive is your board? IMD Global Board Centre. www.imd.org/contentassets/885dd6fb1a99422bad3fd15567d41ce9/innovation-governance–how-proactive-is-your-board.pdf Google Scholar

Desender, K. A., Aguilera, R. V., Crespi, R., & García-Cestona, M. 2013. When does ownership matter? Board characteristics and behaviour. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 823–842. Google Scholar

Dhanrajani, S. 2019. Boardroom strategies redefined by algorithms: AI for CXO decision making. Forbes, March 31^st. Google Scholar

Donaldson, L. 1990. The ethereal hand: Organisational economics and management theory. Academy of Management Review, 15: 369–381. Google Scholar

Economist, 2018. Ten years on from Norway’s quota for women on corporate boards. February 17^th. https://www.economist.com/business/2018/02/17/ten-years-on-from-norways-quota-for-women-on-corporate-boards Google Scholar

Edmondson, A. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behaviour in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 350–383. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Ellstand, A. E., Tihanyi, L., & Johnson, J. L. 2002. Board structure and international political risk. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 769–777. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Eminet, A., & Guedri, Z. 2010. The role of nominating committees and director reputation in shaping the labour market for directors: An empirical assessment. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18: 557–574. Google Scholar

Empson, L., & Chapman, C. 2006. Partnership versus corporation: Implications of alternative forms of governance in professional service firms. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 24: 145–176. Google Scholar

Erel, I., Stern, L .H., Tan, C., & Weisbach, M. 2018. Selecting directors using machine learning. European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) – Finance Working Paper No. 605/2019. CrossRef | Google Scholar

European Trade Union Institute (ETUI). 2017. Benchmarking working Europe. www.etui.org/Publications2/Books/Benchmarking-Working-Europe-2017 Google Scholar

Ezzamel, M., & Watson, R. 1997. Wearing two hats: The conflicting control and management roles of non-executive directors. In Keasey, K., Thompson, S. and Wright, M. (Eds.) Corporate governance: Economic, management and financial issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 54–74. Google Scholar

Fainshmidt, S., Judge, W.Q., Aguilera, R.V., & Smith, A. 2018, Varieties of institutional systems: A contextual taxonomy of understudied countries. Journal of World Business, 53: 307–322. Google Scholar

Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26: 301–325. Google Scholar

Ferrari, G., Ferraro, V., Profeta, P., & Pronzato, C. 2018. Do board gender quotas matter? Selection, performance and stock market effects. IZA Discussion Paper No. 11462. Google Scholar

Fich, E. M., 2005, Are some outside directors better than others? Evidence from director appointments by fortune 1000 firms. The Journal of Business, 78: 1943–1972. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Financial Reporting Council (FRC), 2018. The UK corporate governance code. London, HMSO. Google Scholar

Financial Reporting Council (FRC), 2018a. Guidance on board effectiveness. London, HMSO. Google Scholar

Fink, L. 2018. Letter to CEOs: A sense of purpose. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum. January 18^th. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/01/17/a-sense-of-purpose/ Google Scholar

Finkelstein, S., & D’Aveni, R. A. 1994. CEO duality as a double-edged sword: How boards of directors’ balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1079–1108. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Fogel, E. M., & Geier, A. M. 2007. Strangers in the house: Rethinking Sarbanes-Oxley and the independent board of directors. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, 32: 33–72. Google Scholar

Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. 1999. Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24: 489–505. Google Scholar

Fragale, A. R., Sumanth, J. J., Tiedens, L. Z., & Northcraft, G. B. 2012. Appeasing equals: Lateral deference in organizational communication. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57: 373–406. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Gardner, H. K., & Peterson, R. S. 2019. Back channels in the boardroom. Harvard Business Review, September-October, 106-113. Google Scholar

Garg, S., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2017. Unpacking the CEO-Board relationship: How strategy-making happens in entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 60: 1828–1858. Google Scholar

Gill, M., Flynn, R. J. & Reissing, E. 2005. The governance self-assessment checklist: An instrument for assessing board effectiveness. Non-profit Management and Leadership, 15: 271−294. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Gilson, R. J., & Gordon, J. N. 2019. Board 3.0: An introduction. The Business Lawyer, 74: 351–366. Google Scholar

Gold, M., Kluge, N., & Conchon, A. 2010. In the Union and on the board: experiences on board-level employee representatives across Europe, Brussels: ETUI. Google Scholar

Govindarajan, V., Rajgopal, S., Srivastava, A., & Enache, L. 2018. Should dual-class shares be banned? Harvard Business Review Digital Article. March 12^th: 1–6. Google Scholar

Guarino, A. 2017. Activist investors: More harm than good. Global Risk Insights, August 8^th. https://globalriskinsights.com/2017/08/activist-investors-harm-good/ Google Scholar

Guest, P. 2019. Does board ethnic diversity impact board monitoring outcomes? British Journal of Management, 30: 53–74. Google Scholar

Gupta, P. P., & Leech, T. J. 2017. Risk oversight: Evolving expectations for boards. Conference Board Group Governance Centre. www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/c_140206w.pdf Google Scholar

Hackman, J. R. 1987. The design of work teams. In Lorsch, J. (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behaviour, 315–342. New York: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar

Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. 2001. Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

Hambrick, D., Misangyi, V. F., & Park, C. A. 2015. The QUAD model for identifying a corporate director’s potential for effective monitoring: Toward a new theory of board sufficiency. Academy of Management Review, 40: 323–344. Google Scholar

Hayes, R. M., & Schaefer, S. 1999. How much are differences in managerial ability worth? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 27: 125–148. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Hendry, J. 2002. The principals’ other problems: Honest incompetence and management contracts. Academy of Management Review, 27: 98–113. Google Scholar

Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. 2003. Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature. Economic Policy Review, 9: 7–26. Google Scholar

Hesketh, A., Sellwood-Taylor, J., & Mullen, S. 2020. Are you ready to serve on a board? Harvard Business Review Digital Article, January 31^st. https://hbr.org/2020/01/are-you-ready-to-serve-on-a-board Google Scholar

Higgs Review. 2002. Review of the role and effectiveness of non-executive directors. Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. Google Scholar

Hillman, A. J. 2005. Politicians on the board of directors: Do connections affect the bottom line? Journal of Management, 31: 464–481. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Hillman, A. J., Cannella, A. A., & Paetzold, R. L. 2000. The resource dependence role of corporate directors: Strategic adaptation of board composition in response to environmental change. Journal of Management Studies, 37: 235–256. Google Scholar

Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T. 2003. Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28: 383–396. Google Scholar

Hillman, A. J., Shropshire, C., & Canella, A. A. 2007. Organizational predictors of women on corporate boards. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 941–952. Google Scholar

Hillman, A. 1., Withers, M., & Collins, B. J. 2009. Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of Management, 35: 1404–1427. Google Scholar

Hodgson, P. 2009. A brief history of say on pay. Ivey Business Journal, Ivey Business Journal. Sep/Oct. 73: 1–1. https://iveybusinessjournal.com/publication/a-brief-history-of-say-on-pay/ Google Scholar

Holland, T. 1991. Self-assessment by non-profit boards. Non-profit Management and Leadership, 2: 25−36. Google Scholar

Hoppman, J., Naegele, F., & Girod, B. 2019. Boards as a source of inertia: Examining the internal challenges and dynamics of boards of directors in times of environmental discontinuities. Academy of Management Journal, 62: 437–468. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Hoskisson, R. E., Castleton, M. W., & Withers, M. C. 2009. Complementarity in monitoring and bonding: More intense monitoring leads to higher executive compensation. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23: 57–74. Google Scholar

Houlder, D., & Nandkishore, N. 2016. Corporate governance should combine the best of private equity and family firms. Harvard Business Review Digital Article, December 22^nd. Google Scholar

Huse, M. 2007. Boards, governance and value creation: The human side of corporate governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. 2005. From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56: 517–543. Google Scholar

Ingley, C.B., & Van der Walt, N.T. 2001. The strategic board: the changing role of directors in developing and maintaining corporate capability. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 9, 174–185. Google Scholar

Institute of Directors (IOD), 2018. What is the role of the senior independent director? IOD Factsheet. November 15^th.www.iod.com/news/news/articles/What-is-the-role-of-the-senior-independent-director Google Scholar

International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN). 2018. Ensuring effective board succession planning. www.icgn.org/ensuring-effective-board-succession-planning Google Scholar

Ittner, C., & Keutsch, T. 2015. The influence of board of directors’ risk oversight on risk management maturity and firm risk-taking. Management Accounting Section (MAS) Meeting. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2482791 CrossRef | Google Scholar

Institutional Shareholder Service (ISS). 2019. ESG Review. www.issgovernance.com/esg/ Google Scholar

Jensen, M.C. 1989. The eclipse of the public corporation. Harvard Business Review, September-October, 61–74. Google Scholar

Jeong, S. H., & Harrison, D. A. 2016. Glass breaking, strategy making, and value creating: meta-analytic outcomes of women as CEOs and TMT members. Academy of Management Journal, 60: 1219–1252. Google Scholar

Johnson, R., & Greening, D. 1999. The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 564–580. Google Scholar

Joshi, A., & Knight, A. 2015. Who defers to whom and why? Dual pathways linking demographic differences and dyadic deference to team effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 58: 59–84. Google Scholar

Judge, W. Q., & Zeithaml, C. P. 1992. Institutional and strategic choice perspectives on board involvement in the strategic decision process. Academy of Management Journal, 35: 766–794. Google Scholar

Kaczmarek, S., Kimino, S., & Pye, A. 2012. Antecedents of board composition: The role of nomination committees. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20: 474–489. Google Scholar

Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. 1993. The wisdom of teams. Cambridge, Harvard Business School Press. Google Scholar

Kay, J. 2012. The Kay review of UK equity markets and long-term decision making. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, UK Government Publishing Service. Google Scholar

Keay, A. R., & Loughrey, J. 2015. The framework for board accountability in corporate governance. Legal Studies, 35: 252–279. Google Scholar

Kiel, G., Nicholson, G., Tunny, J.A., & Beck, J. 2012. Directors at work: a practical guide for boards, Thomson Reuters, Sydney, 2012. Google Scholar

Kiel, G. C., & Nicholson, G. 2005. Evaluating boards and directors. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13: 613−631. Google Scholar

Kim, Y., & Canella, A. A. 2008. Toward a social capital theory of director selection. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16: 282–293. Google Scholar

Klarner, P., Probst, G., & Useem, M. 2019. Opening the black box: Unpacking board involvement in innovation. Strategic Organization, 1–33. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1476127019839321 Google Scholar

Klein, K. 2017. Does gender diversity on boards really boost company performance? Knowledge @ Wharton, May 18^th. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/will-gender-diversity-boards-really-boost-company-performance/ Google Scholar

Klemash, S., Doyle, R., & Smith, J.C. 2018). Effective board evaluation. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum. October 28^th. file:///C:/Users/pstil/OneDrive/Documents/Acer%20Files/Docs/Book%20Board%20dynamics/Effective%20Board%20Evaluation%20HBS.html Google Scholar

Klemash, S., Lee, J., & Pederson, K. 2019. How boards govern disruptive technology—key findings from a director survey. EY Centre for Board Matters. Google Scholar

Kollewe, J. 2018. Hedge funds pressure Whitbread to spin off Costa Coffee. The Guardian, April 15^th. www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/15/hedge-funds-pressure-whitbread-to-spin-off-costa-coffee Google Scholar

Kor, Y., & Misangyi, V. 2008. Outside directors’ industry specific experience and firms’ liability of newness. Strategic Management Journal, 29: 1345–1355. Google Scholar

Kor, Y., & Sundaramurthy, C. 2009. Experience-based human and social capital of outside directors. Journal of Management, 35: 981–1006. Google Scholar

Ferry, Korn, 2017. Three ways board members can think like activists. Korn Ferry Institute. file:///C:/Users/pstil/OneDrive/Documents/Acer%20Files/Docs/Book%20Board%20dynamics/Activist%20Boards%20Fall%202017%20Korn%20Ferry%20.pdf Google Scholar

Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Bell, B.S. 2003. Work groups and teams in organizations. In Borman, W.C., Ilgen, D.R., & Klimoski, R.J. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 12. Industrial and organizational psychology, 333–375. London: Wiley. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Krause, R., Semadeni, M., & Withers, M. C. 2016. That special someone: When the board views its chair as a resource. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 1990–2002. Google Scholar

Kroll, M., Walters, B. A., & Le, S. 2007. The impact of board composition and top management team ownership structure on post-IPO performance in young entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 1198–1216. Google Scholar

Larcker, D., & Tayan, B. 2016. Corporate governance matters. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Google Scholar

Lawrence, M. 2017. Corporate governance reform. Turning business towards long-term success. IPPR Commission on Economic Justice. Google Scholar

Libert, B., Beck, M., & Bonckek, M. 2017. AI in the boardroom: The next realm of corporate governance. MIT Sloan Management Review online, October 19^th. Google Scholar

Lipton, M. 2019. It’s time to adopt the new paradigm. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum. February 11^th. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/02/11/its-time-to-adopt-the-new-paradigm/ Google Scholar

Lipton, M. 2018. The future of the corporation. Oxford University Business Law Blog, www.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2018/11/future-corporation Google Scholar

Lipton, M. 2015. Risk management and the board of directors. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum, July 28^th. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2015/07/28/risk-management-and-the-board-of-directors-3/ Google Scholar

Lipton, M., Niles, S. V., & Miller, M.L. 2018. Risk management and the board of directors. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum, March 20^th. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/03/20/risk-management-and-the-board-of-directors-5/ Google Scholar

Local Authority Pension Fund Forum (LAPFF). 2019. Employees on boards Modernising governance. www.lapfforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/LAPFFEOBSURVEY.pdf Google Scholar

Lopez, D., Kohn, A.H., & Mooney, M.G. 2019. Management duty to set the right ‘tone at the top’. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum, May 28^th. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/05/26/management-duty-to-set-the-right-tone-at-the-top/ Google Scholar

Lorsch, J. W., & MacIver, E. 1989. Pawns and potentates: The reality of America’s corporate boards. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Google Scholar

Luoma, P., & Goodstein, J, 1999. Stakeholders and corporate boards: Institutional influences on board composition and structure. Academy of Management Journal. 42: 553–563. Google Scholar

Maak, T. 2007. Responsible leadership, stakeholder engagement, and the emergence of social capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 74: 329–343. Google Scholar

Magnuson, W.J. 2018. The public cost of private equity, Minnesota Law Review, 102: 1847–1910. Google Scholar

Marsh, P. 1993. Short-termism on trial. London: Institutional Fund Managers Association. Google Scholar

Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. 2001. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26: 356–376. Google Scholar

Martin, B. 2019. Activists target dozens of UK’s biggest companies. The Times, July 23^rd. www.thetimes.co.uk/article/activists-target-dozens-of-uk-s-biggest-companies-8ws66lpsn Google Scholar

Mayer, C. 2018. The future of the corporation: Towards humane business. Journal of the British Academy, 6(s1): 1–16. Google Scholar

Mayer, C. 2018a. Prosperity: Better business makes the greater good. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

McDonald, M. L., Westphal, J. D., & Graebner, M. E. 2008. What do they know? The effects of outside director acquisition experience on firm acquisition performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29: 1155–1177. CrossRef | Google Scholar

McKinsey, . 2019. Private markets come of age. McKinsey Global Private Markets Review. www.mckinsey.com/~/Private-markets-come-of-age-McKinsey-Global-Private-Markets-Review-2019-vFashx. Google Scholar

McKinsey, , 2016. The CEO guide to boards. McKinsey Quarterly, September. www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/the-ceo-guide-to-boards Google Scholar

McKinsey, . 2014. High-performing boards: What’s on their agenda? McKinsey Quarterly, April. www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/high-performing-boards-whats-on-their-agenda Google Scholar

Miller, D., Monin, T, M., & Prentice, D.A. 2000. Pluralistic ignorance and inconsistency between private and public behaviours. In Terry, D. J. and Hogg, M. A. (eds.), Attitudes, Behaviour, and Social Context: The Role of Norms and Group Membership, 95–113. Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum. Google Scholar

Miller, T., & Triana, M. D. C. 2009. Demographic diversity in the boardroom: mediators of the board diversity–firm performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46: 755–786. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Miller, D. T., & McFarland, C. 1987. Pluralistic ignorance: When similarity is interpreted as dissimilarity. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 53: 298–305. Google Scholar

Monks, R. A. G., & Minow, N. 2011. Corporate governance (5th ed.). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Google Scholar

Moore, M. 2016. Shareholder primacy, labour and the historic ambivalence of UK company law. University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series, No. 40/2016. Google Scholar

Moos, K., & Vecchio, A. 2012. Have we placed too much faith in corporate governance reform? Spencer Stuart, Point of View. www.spencerstuart.com/-/media/pdf-files/research-and-insight-pdfs/pov12_indart_govrnreformnew.pdf Google Scholar

Morris, P., & Phalippou, P. 2020. Thirty years after Jensen’s prediction: Is private equity a superior form of ownership? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 36: 291–313. Google Scholar

Moss, J. 2016. Theresa May promises worker representatives on boards. Personnel Today, June 11^th. www.personneltoday.com/hr/theresa-may-promises-worker-representatives-boards/ Google Scholar

Munkholm, N.V. 2018. Board level employee representation in Europe: an overview. Annual Conference of the European Centre of Expertise (ECE), Directorate General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion. Google Scholar

NACD, 2018. 2017–2018 public company governance survey. NACD. www.nacdonline.org/files/2017%E2%80%932018%20NACD%20Public%20Company%20Governance%20Survey%20Executive%20Summary.pdf Google Scholar

Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23: 242–266. Google Scholar

Nicholson, G., Kiel, G., & Tunny, J.A. 2012. Board evaluations: contemporary thinking and practice. In Sage Handbook of Corporate Governance. (Eds. Clarke, T., & Branson, D.M ) London: Sage. 285–324. Google Scholar

Nicholson, G., & Newton, C. J. 2010. The role of the board of directors: Perceptions of managerial elites. Journal of Management and Organization, 16: 201−218. Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 2008. The private equity board: a good governance model? London: Egon Zehnder. Google Scholar

Ocasio, W. 1999. Institutionalized action and corporate governance: The reliance on rules of CEO succession. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 384–416. Google Scholar

Parker, J. 2017. The Parker Review: A report into the ethnic diversity of UK boards. Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Policy. www.gov.uk/government/publications/ethnic-diversity-of-uk-boards-the-parker-review Google Scholar

Parrino, R. 1997. CEO turnover and outside succession: a cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 46: 165–197. Google Scholar

Peterson, R. 2020. Predicting the unpredictable. Harvey Nash/London Business School Annual Board Report. www.harveynash.com/group/mediacentre/AlumniHarveynashBoardResearch_2020.pdf Google Scholar

Pettigrew, A.M., & McNulty, T. 1995. Power and influence in and around the boardroom. Human Relations, 48: 845–873. Google Scholar

Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row. Google Scholar

Pletzer, J .L., Nikolova, R., Kedzior, K. K., & Voelpe, S. C. 2015. Does gender matter? female representation on corporate boards and firm financial performance – a meta-analysis. PLoS One: 10 (6):e0130005. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4473005/ Google Scholar

Posner, C. 2019. So long to shareholder primacy. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum. August 22^nd. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/08/22/so-long-to-shareholder-primacy/ Google Scholar

Post, C., & Byron, K. 2014. Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 58: 54–65. Google Scholar

Power, M. 1997. The audit society. Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

Pratley, N. 2018. Putting workers on the board is a bitter but necessary pill. The Guardian, September 5^th. www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2018/sep/05/putting-workers-on-the-board-is-a-bitter-but-necessary-pill Google Scholar

PWC. 2018. What should corporate boards know about artificial intelligence (AI)? www.pwc.com/us/en/services/governance-insights-center/library/technology-hub-artificial-intelligence.html Google Scholar

Pye, A., & Pettigrew, A. 2005. Studying board context, process and dynamics: Some challenges for the future. British Journal of Management, 16: 27–38. Google Scholar

Rees, C. 2019. Worker directors increasingly prominent in debates on corporate governance reform. Involvement and Participation Association. June 3^rd. www.ipa-involve.com/news/worker-directors-increasingly-prominent-in-debates-on-corporate-governance-reform Google Scholar

Rhee, J. 2017. A legal theory of shareholder primacy. Minnesota Law Review, 102: 1951–2017. Google Scholar

Rhoades, D. L., Rechner, P. L., & Sundaramurthy, C. 2000. Board composition and financial performance: A review and contingency model. Journal of Managerial Issues, 12: 76–91. Google Scholar

Rindova, V. P. 1999. What corporate boards have to do with strategy: a cognitive perspective, Journal of Management Studies, 36: 953–975. Google Scholar

Risso-Gill, J. 2018. It’s hard to get talent on board when non-executive roles don’t appeal. Daily Telegraph, August, 23^rd. www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/08/23/hard-get-talent-board-non-executive-roles-dont-appeal/ Google Scholar

Roberts, J. 2009. No one is perfect: The limits of transparency and an ethic for ‘intelligent’ accountability. Accounting, Organisations and Society. 34: 957–970. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Roberts, J. 2002. Building the complementary board: The work of the Plc chairman. Long Range Planning, 35: 493–520. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Roberts, J., McNulty, T., & Stiles, P. 2005. Beyond agency conceptions of the work of the nonexecutive director: Creating accountability in the boardroom. British Journal of Management, 16: S5–S26. Google Scholar

Roberts, J., & Stiles, P. 1999. The relationship between chairmen and chief executives: Competitive or complementary roles? Long Range Planning, 32: 36–48. Google Scholar

Romanelli, E., & Tushman, M. L. 1994. Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1141–1166. Google Scholar

Salesforce, 2018. Paula Goldman joins Salesforce as VP, Chief Ethical and Humane Use Officer. www.salesforce.com/news/stories/paula-goldman-joins-salesforce-as-vp-chief-ethical-and-humane-use-officer/ Google Scholar

Schein, E. 2010. Organizational culture and leadership, 4th Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar

Schepker, D. J., Nyberg, A. J., Ulrich, M., & Wright, P. M. 2018. Planning for future leadership: Procedural rationality, formalized succession processes, and CEO influence in CEO succession planning. Academy of Management Journal, 61: 523–552. Google Scholar

Shattuck, M., & Carter, M. 2018. Future proofing the board: corporate culture on the agenda. Teneo, November 16^th. www.teneo.com/future-proofing-the-board-corporate-culture-on-the-agenda/ Google Scholar

Shekshina, S. 2018. How to be a good board chair. Harvard Business Review, March-April, 96–105. Google Scholar

Sikka, P., Hudson, P., Hadden, T., et al., 2018. A better future for corporate governance: Democratising corporations for their long-term success. http://visar.csustan.edu/aaba/LabourCorpGovReview2018.pdf Google Scholar

Silverstein, A., McCormack, D., & Lamm, B, 2018. The board’s role in corporate social purpose. Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Forum, July 20^th. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/07/20/the-boards-role-in-corporate-social-purpose/ Google Scholar

Stuart, Spencer, 2019. US Board Index, www.spencerstuart.com/research-and-insight/us-board-index Google Scholar

Stuart, Spencer, 2019. UK Board Index, www.spencerstuart.com/research-and-insight/uk-board-index Google Scholar

Smale, A. 2013. Progress, but still a long way to go for women in Norway. New York Times, June 4^th. Google Scholar

Spira, L., & Bender, R. 2004. Compare and contrast: perspectives on board committees. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12: 489–499. Google Scholar

Statista, 2020. Number of companies trading monthly on the London Stock Exchange from January 2015 to January 2020. www.statista.com/statistics/324547/uk-number-of-companies-lse/ Google Scholar

Stevenson, W. B., & Radin, R. F. 2009. Social capital and social influence on the board of directors. Journal of Management Studies, 46: 16–44. Google Scholar

Stiles, P. 2001. The impact of the board on strategy: an empirical examination. Journal of Management Studies, 38: 627–650. Google Scholar

Stiles, P., & Taylor, B. 2001. Boards at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

Sundaramurthy, C., & Lewis, M. 2003. Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 28: 397–415. Google Scholar

Tajfel, H. 1981. Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

Terjesen, S., Aguilera, R. V., & Lorenz, R. 2014. Legislating a woman’s seat on the board: Institutional factors driving gender quotas for boards of directors. Journal of Business Ethics. 128: 233–251 Google Scholar

The Purposeful Company. 2018. Intrinsic purpose definition. The Purposeful Company Steering Group.www.biginnovationcentre-purposeful-company.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/tpc_intrinsic-purpose.pdf Google Scholar

Thuraisingham, M. 2019. Identity, power and influence in the boardroom: Actionable strategies for developing high impact directors and boards. London: Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar

Trainer, D. 2019. Verint: a tech laggard that is vastly overvalued. Forbes, July 24^th. www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2019/07/24/verint-a-tech-laggard-that-is-vastly-overvalued/#4bb36dbb6e65 Google Scholar

TUC. 2016. All aboard: making worker representation on company boards a reality. www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/All_Aboard_2016. Google Scholar

TUC. 2014. Beyond shareholder value: the reasons and choices for corporate governance reform. www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/BSV.pdf Google Scholar

Useem, M. 2006. How well-run boards make decisions. Harvard Business Review. November, 84: 130–138. Google Scholar

Vitols, S. 2010. Board level employee representation, executive remuneration and firm performance in large European companies. European Corporate Governance Institute and European Trades Union Institute. Google Scholar

Wagner, J. A., Steimpert, J. L., & Fubara, E. I. 1998. Board composition and organizational performance: Two studies of insider/outsider effects. Journal of Management Studies, 35: 655–677 Google Scholar

Weill, P., Apel, T., Woerner, S. L., & Banner, J. S. 2019. It pays to have a digitally savvy board. MIT Sloan Management Review, 60: 41–45. Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D. 1999. Collaboration in the boardroom: behavioural and performance consequences of CEO-board social ties. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 7–24. Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D., & Bednar, M. K. 2005. Pluralistic ignorance in corporate boards and firms’ strategic persistence in response to low firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 262–298. Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D., & Fredrickson, J. W. 2001. Who directs strategic change? Director experience, the selection of new CEOs, and change in corporate strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 1113–1137. Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D., & Khanna, P. 2003. Keeping directors in line: Social distancing as a control mechanism in the corporate elite. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 361–398. Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D., & Stern, I. 2006. The other pathway to the boardroom: interpersonal influence behaviour as a substitute for elite credentials and majority status in obtaining board appointments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51: 169–204. Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. 2013. A behavioural theory of corporate governance: Explicating the mechanisms of socially situated and socially constituted agency. Academy of Management Annals, 7: 607–661. Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. 1995. Who shall govern? CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 60–84. Google Scholar

Whitley, R. 2007. Business systems and organisational capabilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef | Google Scholar

Wiersema, M., Nishimura, Y., & Suzuki, K. 2018. Executive succession: The importance of social capital in CEO appointments. Strategic Management Journal, 39: 1473–1495. Google Scholar

Williams, K.Y., & O’Reilly, C.A. 1998. Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. In Staw, B.M. and Cummings, L.L. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behaviour, Greenwich: JAI Press, 77–140. Google Scholar

World Economic Forum, 2016. The new paradigm: a roadmap for an implicit corporate governance partnership between corporations and investors to achieve sustainable long-term investment and growth. www.shareholderforum.com/access/Library/20160902_WLRK.pdf Google Scholar

Wu, H. 2008. How do board-CEO relationships influence the performance of new product introduction? Moving from single to interdependent explanations. Corporate Governance; An International Review, 16: 77–89. Google Scholar

Zajac, E. J., & Westphal, J. D. 1996. Who shall succeed? How CEO/board preferences and power affect the choice of new CEOs. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 64–90. Google Scholar

Zhang, Y., & Rajagopalan, N. 2004. When the known devil is better than an unknown god: An empirical study of the antecedents and consequences of relay CEO successions. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 483–500. Google Scholar

Board Dynamics

This Element has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.

Book description

References

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Book summary page views