Характеристики совета директоров и финансовая результативность: исследование российских нефтегазовых компаний
Целью работы было определение и изучение взаимосвязи между разнообразием состава Совета директоров российских нефтегазовых компаний и финансовым результатом компании. Задача исследования заключалась в анализе нефтегазовых компаний (нефте- и газоперерабатывающих, нефте- и газодобывающих компаний), которые находятся в ТОП-500 российских компаний (https://www.rbc.ru/rbc500/) и понять, как различные характеристики совета директоров (количество директоров, средний настольная возраст, наличие представителей разного пола, доля иностранных директоров в Совете, средний срок правления и средний стаж работы в отрасли правления) связаны с принятием решений и финансовыми показателями организации путем проведения эмпирического исследования (регрессионного анализа). Исследование показало, что средний возраст, средний срок правления и количество директоров находятся в отрицательной связи с результативностью компании, в то время как доля женщин и международных директоров и средний опыт работы в отрасли положительно связаны с результативностью компании.
INTRODUCTION7
Oil and gas industry and the Board of Directors 10
• Oil and gas industry in Russia10
• Role of the Board of Directors12
• Measures of performance of oil and gas companies21
Board’s characteristics and financial performance empirical analysis29
• Research hypothesis29
• Research methodology31
• Description of data and data collection process 31
• Correlation analysis37
• Regression analysis and analysis of the obtained results39
• Managerial implication 43
• Limitations and possible further research directions44
• CONCLUSION 47
List of references49
Appendix 52
There are many factors that have impact on company’s performance. One of these factors which bring about multiple discussions is corporate governance. Corporate Governance can be defined as a “a system of law and sound approaches by which corporations are directed and controlled focusing on the internal and external corporate structures with the intention of monitoring the actions of management and directors and thereby, mitigating agency risks which may stem from the misdeeds of corporate officers.”(SifunaAnazettPacy, 2012).
At the end of 2002 more than 90 Codes of Corporate Governance were adopted in different countries. The contribution of these accepted documents to the better corporate governance is crucial and do not lose its pace nowadays. Dahya and McConnell (2007) stress that the Code of Best Practice (known as Cadbury Committee Report) published in 1992 in UK have triggered a wave of similar publications is other European counties. In Russia, however, the overall corporate governance culture was always perceived as not enough developed and thus poor, leading to the nascence of corporate conflicts. It is considered that the relation between shareholders and managers in Russia is still an the formation stage and the economy needs time to achieve the high level of corporate governance culture, nevertheless the country is moving in the right direction and the increasing number of papers devoted to the corporate governance proves it.
Board Structure represents one of the core issues in corporate governance today. “Efficient corporate governance is one of the crucial drivers for improvement of the Сompany’s competitiveness. Development of the Company is impossible without an efficient structure in place that regulates the relations between the Board of Directors, the executive board and the shareholders, without investors being sure that the Company’s management spends their funds in a reasonable manner to achieve capitalization growth.” (Lukoil, 2018).It is believed that the effectiveness of the Board of Directors varies depending on its structure. As structural components of this body, it is possible to distinguish the following ones: gender, age, working experience in the industry, tenure in the board, nationality.
Due to the fact that Russia is one of the biggest oil and gas exporters in the world (according to IEF RAS in 2017 oil and gas were accounted for 62,4% of total export of Russia) and thus author’s high interest in the oil and gas industry, it was decided to focus on that industry as the object of the current research. The opportunity to combine the prior knowledge and experience in order to study corporate governance in Russian oil and gas companies was considered as appealing by the author. Moreover, this sector of Russian economy is the most profitable one and that is why may be interesting to study.
The goal of the research is to determine and examine the relationship between the diversity of the board of directors in Russian oil and gas companies and the company’s performance. This topic was chosen in order to prove that the success of some oil and gas company was achieved not only due to the availability of these natural resources in Russia, but also because of the effective governance and usage of these resources by the group of different people. As the structure of board of directors may vary it would be interesting to find the level of diversity with which the company can achieve the higher performance as different people have different experience, vision and ideas which can affect the decision-making process in a positive way, but, from the other hand, too much difference may cause some misunderstandings and destructions.
Research questions:
• Which indicators of the diversity of the board of directors are important to examine and to change in order to improve the financial performance of the oil and gas companies?
• How to diversify the board of directors to have better performance of the company?
The research objectives are to analyze oil and gas companies (oil and gas refining, oil and gas extracting companies) which are in top 500 Russian companies (https://www.rbc.ru/rbc500/) and to understand how different characteristics of board’s diversity influence the decision-making and financial performance of the organization by conducting an empirical study.
This research consists of two main chapters correlated with the research goal. First chapter contains literature review and is divided into three parts. First part gives short overview of the oil and gas sector in Russia and comprises different methods used for the measurement of the performance in the oil and gas industry. Second part provides general analysis of the Board of Directors and its role in the company using the existing researches that study the link between the Board of Directors and performance of the company. Third section serves as a base for hypothesis statement and is concentrated on the relation between the board of directors’ characteristics and performance.
The second chapter describes the methodology applied in the current research and the obtained results. It is divided into seven parts. First part states the hypotheses which are based on the literature review and are going to be tested further in this research. Second part describes the variety of possible methods to be applied to this study and justifies the choice of the methods. In the third section the data description is provided along with the specification of the data collection process. The fourth part is devoted to the coefficient estimation and correlation detection for the sample of data. The fifth part contains the detailed examination of the regression model and meaning of coefficients. The section number six claims the novelty of the conducted research and its importance in terms of both academic paper and managerial application. The seventh part finalizes the paper with a consideration of limitations of the research and gives the possible directions for the further researches.
To sum up, the research topicality is in the lack of research on Corporate Governance in Russian oil and gas companies, especially taking into account the importance of the industry for the country.
Akpan1, Edem O. &Amra, Noor A. (2014), “Board characteristics and company performance: Evidence from Nigeria”, Journal of Finance and Accounting; 2(3): 81-89
• Barnhart, S., Marr, M., & Rosenstein, S. (1994),“Firm performance and board composition: Some new evidence”, Managerial and Decision Economics, 15 (4): 329-340.
• Baysinger, B. and Butler, H. (1985), “Corporate governance and the board of directors: Performance effects of changes in board composition”, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 101‐24.
• Berezinets I., Garanina T., Ilina Y., “Intellectual Capital of of a board of directors and its elements: introduction to the concepts”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 17 No. 4, 2016, pp. 1-22.
• Berezinets, I.V., Ilyina, Y.B. and Cherkasskaya, A.V. (2013), “Strukturasovetadirektorov I finansovayarezul’tativnost’ rossiyskikhotkrytykhaktsionernykhobshchestv”, Vestnik, SPbGU. Ser. Menedzhment, Vol. 2, pp. 3-52.
• Bezemer, P. J., Maassen, G. F., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., Volberda, H. W. (2007), “Corporate Governance”, An International Review 15 (6), 1119-1129.
• Bhutta, N. T., & Ali Shah, S. Z. (2015),“Do Behavioural Biases Impact Corporate Entrepreneurship, Agency Cost and Firm Performance: Evidence from Developed and Developing Economies?”, Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences, 9(3).
• Bøhren, Ø.,&Strøm, R. Ø. (2010),“Governance and politics: Regulating independence and diversity in the board room”, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 37(9, 10).
• Brickley, J.A. and James, C.M. (1987), “The takeover market, corporate board composition, and ownership structure: the case of banking”, Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 161‐80.
• Carter, D. A., D’Souza, F., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2010), “The gender and ethnic diversity of US boards and board committees and firm financial performance”, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(5), 396-414.
• Cerbioni, F., &Parbonetti, A. (2007). Exploring the effects of corporate governance on intellectual capital disclosure: An analysis of European biotechnology companies, EuropeanAccounting Review, 16(4), 791–826.
• Chief Executive, (2016): “The Impact of Board Tenure on Company Performance”.
• Child, J. (1974), “Managerial and Organizational Factors”, Journal of Management Studies, 11, 175-189.
• Cohen, J. (1988), “Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences), 2nd edition, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Coller T., Goedhart M., Wessels W. (2015), “Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies”, Wiley Finance, 6th Edition, pp. 441.
• CSIMarket.com (2018), Oil & Gas Integrated Operations, Management Effectiveness.
• Dahya, J and McConnell, John J., (2007), “Board Composition, Corporate Performance, and the Cadbury Committee Recommendation”, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 42, No. 3 (Sep., 2007), pp. 535-. 564.
• Deloitte Access Economics, (2016): “Toward Gender Parity : Women On Boards Initiative”, Research Report.
• Essays, UK. (November 2013). Company Board Size and Performance in the UK and USA.
• Ferreira, D. (2015), “Board diversity: should we trust research to inform policy?”, Corporate Governance: An International Review, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 108-11.
• Hambrick, D.C. & Mason, P.A. (1984),“Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers”, Academy of Management Review, 9(1) 193-106.
• Hawawini, G., and D. Keim. (2000),“The Cross Section of Common Stock Returns: A Review of the Evidence and Some New Findings”, Cambridge University Press.
• Hillman A. &Dalziel T. (2015), “Boards of directors and firm performance: integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives”, The academy of management re-view, № 28: 383-396.
• Ionascu, M. (2018): “Women on Boards and Financial Performance: Evidence from a European Emerging Market”, Sustainability 2018, 10(5), 1644.
• Kanter, R.M. (2012): “Ten Reasons People Resist Change”, Harvard Business Review.
• Kesner, Idalene F. (1988),“Directors’ characteristics and committee membership: An investigation of type, occupation, tenure, and gender”, Academy of Management Journal 31: 1, 66–84.
• Larcker, D., So, E. and Wang, C. (2013), “Boardroom centrality and firm performance”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 55 Nos 2-3, pp. 225-250.
• Luckerath-Rovers M., “Women on Board and Firm Performance”, Journal of Management & Governance, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 2 , pp. 491-509.
• Marinova, J., Plantenga, J., and Remery, C. (2010),“Gender diversity and firm performance: evidence from dutch and danish boardrooms”, Working Papers 10-03, Utrecht School of Economics.
• McIntyre, M. L., Murphy, S. A., & Mitchell, P. (2007). The top team: examining board composition and firm performance. Corporate Governance, 7(5), 547.
• Milliken F., Martins L., “Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups”, Academy of Management Review, 1996, Volume 21, pp. 402-433.
• Minfin, (2018): “Ezhegodnaia informatsiya ob ispolnenii federalnogo budgeta”.
• Murphy, M., and McIntyre, M.L. (2007), “Board of director performance: a group dynamics perspective. Corporate Governance”, The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, Vol. 7 Issue 2, p209-224.
• Nkundabanyanga, S.K. (2016), “Board governance, intellectual capital and firm performance: importance of multiplicative effects”, Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 20-45.
• Nimtrakoon S. (2015), “The relationship between intellectual capital, firms’ market value and financial performance”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(3).
• Oxelheim, L. and T. Randoy, (2001), “The Impact of Foreign Board Membership on Firm Value.” Journal of Banking and Finance, Working Papers No. 567.
• Sifuna, AnazettPacy (2012). “Disclose or Abstain: The Prohibition of Insider Trading on Trial”. JournalofInternationalBankingLawandRegulation. 27 (9).
• Spencer, Stuart (2016), Spencer Stuart Board Index, November 2016.
• Swartz N-P and S. Firer, (2005), “Board Structure and Intellectual Capital Performance in South Africa.” Meditari Accountancy Research Vol. 13 No. 2: 145-166.
• Vafeas, N. (2003),“Length of board tenure and outside director independence”, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Vol. 30 Issue 7/8, p1043-1064.
• Wallace, R.S.O. and T.E. Cooke, (1990), “The Diagnosis and Resolution of Emerging Issues in Corporate Disclosure Practices.” Journal of Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 20: p143-151.
• Wellalage, N. H., Locke, S. (2012): “Women on board, firm financial performance and agency costs”, Asian Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 2, Issue 2, p113–127.
• Wernerfelt, Birger; Montgomery, Cynthia A. (1988), “Tobin’s q and the Importance of Focus in Firm Performance”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 78, No. 1. (Mar., 1988), pp. 246-250.
• Wolfe, J. (2003)., “The Tobin Q as a company performance indicator”, Development in Business Simulation and Experiental Learning, Volume 30.
• Yardeni Research Incorporated, (2018): “Global Index Briefing: MSCI Forward P/Es”, May 16, 2018
Последние выполненные заказы
Хочешь уникальную работу?
Больше 3 000 экспертов уже готовы начать работу над твоим проектом!
4.6 (30 отзывов)
4.8 (105 отзывов)
5 (49 отзывов)
4.6 (30 отзывов)
4.6 (92 отзыва)
5 (145 отзывов)
4.8 (40 отзывов)
4.9 (298 отзывов)
5 (8 отзывов)
