Corporate Governance Indices and Construct Validity

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Measurement Reliability and Validity
Advertisements

Comments on: Firm Growth and Finance: Are Some Financial Institutions Better Suited to Early Stages of Development than Others? by Robert Cull and L. Colin.
Seven possibly controversial but hopefully useful rules Paul De Boeck K.U.Leuven.
Law, Economics, Corporate Governance, and Corporate Scandal in a Transition Economy: Insight from China Discussion by TJ Wong Discussion by TJ Wong.
Good Research Questions. A paradigm consists of – a set of fundamental theoretical assumptions that the members of the scientific community accept as.
CFS021002HK-ZWE391-ql Discussion of Ownership structure and diversification strategies (by Shao, Jun from Nankai University) Qiao Liu, HKU Corporate Governance.
Doing Social Psychology Research
Measuring Social Life Ch. 5, pp
Factor Analysis Psy 524 Ainsworth.
Do Strong Corporate Governance Firms Still Require Political Connection? And Vice Versa? By Chung-Hua Shen, Yu-Chun Wang, and Chih-Yung Lin Discussed by.
Corporate Governance Indices Roberta Romano Yale Law School, NBER and ECGI International Conference on Institutional Quality Madrid, Jan. 22, 2009.
Ross Levine.  Contributes to a central question in corporate governance: ◦ How does governance affect firm performance? ◦ Y(f,c,t) = b*G(f,c,t) + c*X(f,c,t)
Writing research proposal/synopsis
1 Are East Asian companies benefiting from Western board practices? John Nowland Discussed by Joseph P.H. Fan Centre of Economics & Finance Chinese University.
Company LOGO New Paradigm for International Insurance Comparison: With an Application to Comparison of Seven Insurance Markets Wei Zheng, Peking University.
WHAT DO EDITORS REALLY WANT? THE PHD PROJECT ACCOUNTING DSA CONFERENCE AUGUST 6, 2011 KATHRYN KADOUS EMORY UNIVERSITY.
OECD Short-Term Economic Statistics Working PartyJune Maintaining long time series through industry classification changes Richard McKenzie.
Chapter 2 Doing Social Psychology Research. Why Should You Learn About Research Methods?  It can improve your reasoning about real-life events  This.
Applied Quantitative Analysis and Practices LECTURE#17 By Dr. Osman Sadiq Paracha.
Sample paper in APA style Sample paper in APA style.
Designing Research 1 문헌정보학연구방법론 -1. Introduction  An Introduction  The paper that provides readers with the background information for the research.
Qualitative Research Quantitative Research. These are the two forms of research paradigms (Leedy, 1997) which are qualitative and quantitative These paradigms.
Corporate Responsibility as Essential to Sustainable Tourism Yield
Estimating standard error using bootstrap
Discussion Smart and Illicit: Who Becomes an Entrepreneur and Do They Earn More? LEVINE-RUBINSTEIN by Itay Goldstein, Wharton.
“Developing Research Questions”
How does a person read and use an Academic Paper?
D. E. Koditschek 358 GRW ESE 290/291 Introduction to Electrical & Systems Engineering Research Methodology & Design
Commitment and Entrenchment in Corporate Governance
Discussion of What Drives Corporate Inversions? International Evidence
Measuring Social Inclusion
Department of Business Administration
Statistical Data Analysis - Lecture /04/03
The research process András István Kun.
The research process András István Kun.
Corporate governance and the stock liquidity in Australia
How to write an empirical research project in (labor) economics
Qualitative Research Quantitative Research.
Comments on v-dem project and its results
Comparative Analysis.
Qualitative and quantitative research for small business
Discussant: Bilal Zia World Bank
The research process András István Kun.
3rd Essay Prompt.
PROXIMITY AND INVESTMENT: EVIDENCE FROM PLANT-LEVEL DATA
Overview : What are the relevant factors? What are the
Recap Questions What is interactionism?
Chapter 7 Implications of Existence and Equivalence Theorems
One Evolutionary Path or Many?
Revisiting the Bright and Dark Sides of Capital Flows in Business Groups Written by:Joseph P. H. Fan,Li Jin & Guojian Zheng 王锦
RESEARCH METHODS Lecture 18
Corporate Governance Indices and Construct Validity
Writing Academic Papers In English Language Journals
If selection construct
EPSY 5245 EPSY 5245 Michael C. Rodriguez
Are Stock Option Grants to Directors of State-Controlled Chinese Firms Listed in Hong Kong Genuine Compensation? ——Zhihong Chen, Yuyan Guan, Bin Ke,2013,The.
From Notes to Research Paper. Pathways to Success
If selection construct
Identification: Instrumental Variables
Assessment of Learning in Student-Centered Courses
Introduction to Experimental Design
Synthesis.
Main contribution of the paper
The research process András István Kun.
The research process András István Kun.
A modest attempt at measuring and communicating about quality
Chapter 4 Summary.
Comment on Ferrarini’s Conformity Gap & Ownership Structure
Tips for Writing Proposals
Authored by Mingyi Hung, T.J. Wong, Tianyu Zhang
Presentation transcript:

Corporate Governance Indices and Construct Validity Discussion by Yishay Yafeh Hebrew University, CEPR, ECGI

Structure of this Discussion Not the usual “summary and then comments” format A bit of “what the paper does” and my immediate reactions to it… Then some more fundamental issues

Summary/Alternative Titles “Is Bernie getting old? Revisiting the CG Indices Literature” (to which he and his co-authors have been major contributors) “The Art (and Science?) of Constructing CG Indices” The CG Indices approach has merit but is associated with major conceptual and empirical issues The paper attempts to address a few of them (not the major ones)

Authors’ Approach to the Construction of Intl. CG Indices Are the concepts used (e.g., “board independence”) available across countries/environments? They do not ask what does it mean to be an “independent director” in China/Turkey? (WVS/culture analogy) Is there variation across firms within a country in a given dimension? Focus here: Do the different variables within a sub-index (e.g., “disclosure”) measure the same thing? Should they?

Looking at CG indices Cronbach’s alpha within a sub-index (e.g., board effectiveness) Claim: should not be “too high” but not “too low” either (substitutes or complements?) PCA aggregation of variables within an index or sub-index Circumvent the indices’ binary nature & equal weights? Check if constructs are correlated with Q (should they be?)

Results (with my quibbles) “Soft” impression that Cronbach’s alpha seems OK for the most part Mechanical reporting of PCA measures for diff countries/indices Is this the best way to show certain sub-indices/components matter? Mechanical reporting of corr with Q Why is disclosure more important in one country and board independence in another? Statistical (no variation) features or economic substance?

More Serious Quibbles What is the point of linking the indices or their components to Q? To show that the index is reasonable? To show that good CG “causes” improved performance (with policy implications)? This requires a totally different empirical standard In what way is the analysis of the link between CG and Q here novel relative to earlier work by Bernie and his co-authors? (and, of course, why Q?)

Fundamental Issues Not sure the CG indices-based lit has really progressed beyond the initial idea GIM: novelty, plus an elegant attempt to separate causality from sample selection and omitted variables Insights from improvements to GIM (e.g., Bebchuk and co-authors)? Bernie’s earlier work: transformation to EMs/concentrated ownership context What next? What insights can be gained from index refinement?

Fundamental Issues (2) Perhaps the next stage is to study whether country-level and company-level CG are substitutes? Does disclosure at the firm level replace weak disclosure rules at the country level? Why do some CG components work in some cases but not in others? Why would disclosure be important and the board is less so, or vice versa? Missing theory? Disclosure matters only when combined with “private enforcement?”

Fundamental Issues (3) Index components are sometimes related, e.g., board structure may affect/determine disclosure This would affect the statistical relation between these index components Mechanical discussion in the paper does not address these (economic) issues

In sum… What is the real objective of this study? Discuss fundamental concepts associated with the CG indices approach (I am all for this!) or offer robustness tests which could be included in any future (or past) paper in this line of research? (less exciting?) Discuss fundamental cross-country differences in CG or just point out the differences without inquiring about the underlying institutional and economic forces driving them?

In sum (2) I would strongly encourage the authors to move from a technical/mechanical level of discussion to a more “fundamental” approach. What is the relation between the CG indices “industry” and basic economic concepts of governance? Can these indices be used for policy? Can these indices can be used to study other/new fundamental questions such as country vs. firm-level governance?

Thank You (and see you in Tokyo next year)