Corporate Governance: A Critical Comparison among International Theories, Codes of Best Practices, and Empirical Research

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

As strong role played by the financial globalized market, several countries have adopted rules and principles
(best practice codes) to be shared among all companies, in order to provide tools to solve governance problems, regulate
relations among managers and shareholders. This paper seeks to investigate American, English, German, Japanese and Italian
codes of conduct. Literature agrees that corporate governance archetypes are those Anglo-Saxon and German-Japanese; on
the other hand the Italian model represents an interesting case study. These three models are based on different international
theories (Agency, Stakeholder, Resource Dependence, and Stewardship). Scholars maintain that the Agency theory is the
most valid of the theories, with respect to the existence of international convergence processes. Thus, the objective of the
paper is twofold. First of all, we want to understand which international theory has been adopted by Anglo-Saxon,
German-Japanese, and Italian codes. Secondly, we wish to verify whether empirical research confirms principle efficacy
contained in codes of corporate governance. From a comparative study among international theories and rules it would
emerge that variables contained in the codes would be better explained and regulated under Agency approach. It should be
noted, however, that each country – in spite of the convergence processes towards a single standard of rules – is affected by
their social, and economic background. Finally, we could argue that empirical studies do not often explain critical success
factors in the same way of codes although both are the result of best practices.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)304-315
Number of pages12
JournalManagement
Volume3
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Empirical research
Corporate governance
Best practice
Agency theory
Shareholders
Stakeholders
Resource dependence
Financial markets
Stewardship
Archetypes
Economics
Managers
Governance
Empirical study
Comparative study

Keywords

  • Corporate Governance
  • International Theories of Corporate Governance
  • Anglo-Saxon and European Codes of Best Practice
  • empirical research

Cite this

@article{f9848da0968e4861aea20011aef6fee5,
title = "Corporate Governance:: A Critical Comparison among International Theories, Codes of Best Practices, and Empirical Research",
abstract = "As strong role played by the financial globalized market, several countries have adopted rules and principles(best practice codes) to be shared among all companies, in order to provide tools to solve governance problems, regulaterelations among managers and shareholders. This paper seeks to investigate American, English, German, Japanese and Italiancodes of conduct. Literature agrees that corporate governance archetypes are those Anglo-Saxon and German-Japanese; onthe other hand the Italian model represents an interesting case study. These three models are based on different internationaltheories (Agency, Stakeholder, Resource Dependence, and Stewardship). Scholars maintain that the Agency theory is themost valid of the theories, with respect to the existence of international convergence processes. Thus, the objective of thepaper is twofold. First of all, we want to understand which international theory has been adopted by Anglo-Saxon,German-Japanese, and Italian codes. Secondly, we wish to verify whether empirical research confirms principle efficacycontained in codes of corporate governance. From a comparative study among international theories and rules it wouldemerge that variables contained in the codes would be better explained and regulated under Agency approach. It should benoted, however, that each country – in spite of the convergence processes towards a single standard of rules – is affected bytheir social, and economic background. Finally, we could argue that empirical studies do not often explain critical successfactors in the same way of codes although both are the result of best practices.",
keywords = "Corporate Governance, International Theories of Corporate Governance, Anglo-Saxon and European Codes of Best Practice, empirical research",
author = "Alessandro Merendino",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.5923/j.mm.20130306.03",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
pages = "304--315",
journal = "Management",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corporate Governance:

T2 - A Critical Comparison among International Theories, Codes of Best Practices, and Empirical Research

AU - Merendino, Alessandro

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - As strong role played by the financial globalized market, several countries have adopted rules and principles(best practice codes) to be shared among all companies, in order to provide tools to solve governance problems, regulaterelations among managers and shareholders. This paper seeks to investigate American, English, German, Japanese and Italiancodes of conduct. Literature agrees that corporate governance archetypes are those Anglo-Saxon and German-Japanese; onthe other hand the Italian model represents an interesting case study. These three models are based on different internationaltheories (Agency, Stakeholder, Resource Dependence, and Stewardship). Scholars maintain that the Agency theory is themost valid of the theories, with respect to the existence of international convergence processes. Thus, the objective of thepaper is twofold. First of all, we want to understand which international theory has been adopted by Anglo-Saxon,German-Japanese, and Italian codes. Secondly, we wish to verify whether empirical research confirms principle efficacycontained in codes of corporate governance. From a comparative study among international theories and rules it wouldemerge that variables contained in the codes would be better explained and regulated under Agency approach. It should benoted, however, that each country – in spite of the convergence processes towards a single standard of rules – is affected bytheir social, and economic background. Finally, we could argue that empirical studies do not often explain critical successfactors in the same way of codes although both are the result of best practices.

AB - As strong role played by the financial globalized market, several countries have adopted rules and principles(best practice codes) to be shared among all companies, in order to provide tools to solve governance problems, regulaterelations among managers and shareholders. This paper seeks to investigate American, English, German, Japanese and Italiancodes of conduct. Literature agrees that corporate governance archetypes are those Anglo-Saxon and German-Japanese; onthe other hand the Italian model represents an interesting case study. These three models are based on different internationaltheories (Agency, Stakeholder, Resource Dependence, and Stewardship). Scholars maintain that the Agency theory is themost valid of the theories, with respect to the existence of international convergence processes. Thus, the objective of thepaper is twofold. First of all, we want to understand which international theory has been adopted by Anglo-Saxon,German-Japanese, and Italian codes. Secondly, we wish to verify whether empirical research confirms principle efficacycontained in codes of corporate governance. From a comparative study among international theories and rules it wouldemerge that variables contained in the codes would be better explained and regulated under Agency approach. It should benoted, however, that each country – in spite of the convergence processes towards a single standard of rules – is affected bytheir social, and economic background. Finally, we could argue that empirical studies do not often explain critical successfactors in the same way of codes although both are the result of best practices.

KW - Corporate Governance

KW - International Theories of Corporate Governance

KW - Anglo-Saxon and European Codes of Best Practice

KW - empirical research

U2 - 10.5923/j.mm.20130306.03

DO - 10.5923/j.mm.20130306.03

M3 - Article

VL - 3

SP - 304

EP - 315

JO - Management

JF - Management

IS - 6

ER -