• Register
  • Login
  • Persian

Financial Accounting Knowledge

  1. Home
  2. Board Structure and Corporate Social Responsibility: Contingency versus Agency Theory

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Guide for Authors

Terms and Conditions

Forms

Board Structure and Corporate Social Responsibility: Contingency versus Agency Theory

    Authors

    • Farshad Sabzalipour 1
    • Ali Sayadi Somar 2
    • Asma Rezaei 3
    • Karim Kazemi 4

    1 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran

    2 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting,, Faculty of Management and Economic, Lorestan University, Khoramabad, Iran

    3 MSc of Accounting, Ilam Bakhtar Higher Education Institute, Ilam, Iran

    4 MSc of Accounting, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran

,

Document Type : Research Paper

10.30479/jfak.2024.19856.3170
  • Article Information
  • References
  • Download
  • How to cite
  • Statistics
  • Share

Abstract

Purpose: Studies in the field of corporate governance have tried to formulate a model that is compatible with all companies with different goals by using of agency theory. On the other hand, some researchers emphasize on presenting a contingency perspective. The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between the board structure and corporate social responsibility by considering the role of contingency factors.
Method: The research data includes 128 companies admitted to the Tehran Stock Exchange in the period of 2016 to 2021. Structural equation modeling and SmartPLS3 software were used to test the hypotheses. The three factors of firm size, business strategy and business competition have considered as contingency factors that affect the board structure.
Results: Contingency factors including firm size, business strategy and business competition have a positive and significant effect on the board structure, and the board structure has a significant mediating effect on the relationship between the contingency factors and corporate social responsibility.
Conclusion: Companies with a strong strategy, large size and high business competitiveness have a more efficient board structure. Contingency factors are among the factors affecting the board structure, and the fitting of the board structure with contingency factors lead to improve corporate social responsibility.
Contribution: Studies based on agency theory are unable to explain the effectiveness of the board of directors in the field of corporate social responsibility due to having a narrow theoretical lens. By providing a contingency framework, this study contribute to the existing literature, and helps the legislators to formulate new guidelines and laws.

Keywords

  • "Corporate Social Responsibility"
  • "Board Structure"
  • "Agency Theory"
  • "Contingency Theory"

Main Subjects

  • Corporate Finance
  • XML
  • PDF 1.33 M
  • RIS
  • EndNote
  • Mendeley
  • BibTeX
  • APA
  • MLA
  • HARVARD
  • CHICAGO
  • VANCOUVER
References
Adib, M., Xianzhi, Z., & Eiris, V. (2019). Board characteristics and Corporate Social Performance nexus-a multi-theoretical analysis: evidence from South Africa. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 21(1), 24-38.
Adams, R. B., & Funk, P. (2012). Beyond the glass ceiling: does gender matter? Management science, 58 (2), 219-235.
Afzali, A., Ashrafi, M., Naderian, A., & Gorganli Doji, J. (2024). The Impact of Board materialism on CSR. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 13(50), 187-202. (In Persian).
Aguilera, R. V., Filatotchev, I., Gospel, H., & Jackson, G. (2008). An organizational approach to comparative corporate governance: Costs, contingencies, and complementarities. Organization science, 19 (3), 475-492.
Allahyari, A., Pourzamani, Z., & Torabi, T. (2018). The Effectiveness of Corporate Governance on the Relationship between Social Responsibility and Tax Justice. Management Accounting, 11(38), 27-46. (In Persian).
Aras, G., & Crowther, D. (2008). Governance and sustainability: An investigation into the relationship between corporate governance and corporate sustainability. Management Decision, 46(3), 433-448.
Azim, M. I. (2012). Corporate governance mechanisms and their impact on company performance: A structural equation model analysis. Australian journal of management, 37(3), 481-505.
Bai, X., Chang, J. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: the mediating role of marketing competence and the moderating role of market environment. Asia-Pacific J. Manag. 32, 505-530.
Barandak, S., & Mansoori Habib Abadi, F. (2020). Efficiency of corporate boards and corporate social responsibility performance: The moderating role of CEO financial knowledge background. Journal of Accounting and Management Vision, 2(19), 108-127.
Bashirimanesh, N., Ghadamyari,. N, & Ahmadi, H. (2021). Corporate Social Responsibility and women On Corporate Boards, Women in development and politics, 20(3). 343-363. (In Persian).
Bassen, A., & Kovács, A. M. (2020). Environmental, social and governance key performance indicators from a capital market perspective. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. 809-820.
Benn, S., Edwards, M., & Williams, T. (2014). Organizational change for corporate sustainability: Routledge.
Bergman, M. M., Bergman, Z., & Berger, L. (2017). An empirical exploration, typology, and definition of corporate sustainability. Sustainability, 9(5), 753
Carpenter, M. A., & Westphal, J. D. (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(4), 639-660.
Certo, S. T., Lester, R. H., Dalton, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2006). Top management teams, strategy and financial performance: A meta‐analytic examination. Journal of Management studies, 43(4), 813-839.
Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., Park, J. H., & Jang, M. G. (2017). Exploring the relationship between board characteristics and CSR: Empirical evidence from Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 225-242.
Coles, J. L., Daniel, N. D., & Naveen, L. (2008). Boards: Does one size fit all? Journal of financial economics, 87(2), 329-356.
Cornforth, C. (2003). Conclusion: Contextualizing and Managing the Paradoxes of Governance. In C. Cornforth (Ed.). The governance of public and non-profit organizations. London: Routledge.
Crutzen, N., & Herzig, C. (2013). A review of the empirical research in management control, strategy and sustainability. Studies in managerial and financial accounting, 26, 165-195.
Crifo, P., Escrig-Olmedo, E., & Mottis, N. (2018). Corporate Governance as a Key Driver of Corporate Sustainability in France: The Role of Board Members and Investor Relations. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-20.
Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2003). Women in the boardroom: A business imperative. Journal of Business strategy, 24(5).
Desender, K. A., Aguilera, R. V., Lópezpuertas-Lamy, M., & Crespi, R. (2016). A clash of governance logics: Foreign ownership and board monitoring. Strategic management journal, 37(2), 349-369.
Donaldson, L. (2001). The Contingency Theory of Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Fakir, A. A. (2020). Board of Directors’ Characteristics and Corporate Sustainability Performance: A Mediating Role of Internal Control Mechanisms. Doctoral dissertation, University of Malaya.
Fakir, A. A., Jusoh, R., & Rahin, N. M. (2019). Board of directors' characteristics, internal control mechanisms and corporate sustainability performance: a theoretical framework. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 15(6), 765-784.
Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. (1981); “Evaluating Structural Equation Modeling with Unobserved Variables and Measurement Error”; Journal of Marking Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Gani, L., & Jermias, J. (2006). Investigating the effect of board Independence on performance across different strategies. The International Journal of Accounting, 41, 295–314.
Garcia-Torea, N., Fernandez-Feijoo, B., & de la Cuesta, M. (2016). Board of director's effectiveness and the stakeholder perspective of corporate governance: Do effective boards promote the interests of shareholders and stakeholders? BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 19(4), 246-260.
Ghofar, A., & Sardar, S. M. N. (2013). Analysis of the determinants and effectiveness of corporate governance: A contingency theory approach. In A conference paper: Asian conference on corporate governance and sustainability, Thailand.
Giroud, X., & Mueller, H. M. (2010). Does corporate governance matter in competitive industries? Journal of Financial Economics, 95(3), 312–331.
Godfrey, P.C., & Hatch, N.W. (2007). Researching corporate social responsibility: an agenda for the 21st century. J. Bus. Ethics. 70, 87-98.
Haldma, T., & Laats, K. (2002). Contingencies influencing the management accounting practices of Estonian manufacturing companies. Management Accounting Research, 13, 379–400.
Hartmann, F. & Moers, F. (2003). Testing contingency hypotheses in budgetary research using moderated regression analysis: a second look. Accounting, Organization and Society. 28(7–8), 803–809.
Heald, M. (2018). The social responsibilities of business: Company and community, 1900-1960: Routledge.
Heracleous, L. (2001). What is the impact of corporate governance on organisational performance? Corporate governance: an international review, 9(3), 165-173.
Hermalin, B., & Weisbach, M. S. (2001). Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature. NBER, No. 8161.
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(2), 235-256
Huang, Y. S., & Wang, C.-J. (2015). corporate governance and risk-taking of Chinese firms: The role of board size. International Review of Economics & Finance, 37(3), 96-113.
Hussain, N., Rigoni, U., & Orij, R. P. (2018). Corporate Governance and Sustainability Performance: Analysis of Triple Bottom Line Performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(2), 411-432.
Ittner, C., & Larcker, D. (2001). Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: a value-based management perspective. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32 (1-3), 349-410.
Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2017). The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting. Harvard Business School research working paper, 11-100.
Jacoby, S. M. (2005). Corporate governance and employees in the United States. H. Gospel, A. Pendleton, eds. Corporate Governance and Labour Management: An International Comparison. Oxford University Press, 284–309.
Jo, H., Song, M. H., & Tsang, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder governance around the world. Global Finance Journal, 29, 42-69.
Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. (2012). The causal effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 53-72.
Judge, W. (2012). The importance of considering context when developing a global theory of corporate governance. Corporate governance: An international review, 20(2), 123-124.
Khan, A., Muttakin, M. B., & Siddiqui, J. (2013). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of business ethics, 114, 207-223.
Kiel, G. C., & Nicholson, G. J. (2003). Board composition and corporate performance: How the Australian experience informs contrasting theories of corporate governance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 11(3), 189–205.
Koke, J. (2001), “Corporate governance, market discipline, and productivity growth”, Discussion Paper. 01-55, Centre for European Economic Research.
Kunst, V., & Beugelsdijk, S. (2018). Managerial ownership and firm performance: the cultural boundaries of agency theory. In Academy of Management. 1. 14213.
Lockett, A., Moon, J., & Visser, W. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in management research: focus, nature, salience and sources of influence. J. Manag. Stud. 43. 115-136.
Lehn, K., Sukesh, P., Zhao, M. (2003). Determinants of the size and structure of corporate boards: 1935–2000. Katz Graduate School of Business Working Paper, 1-50.
Mellahi, K., Frynas, J. G., Sun, P. & Siegel, D. (2016). A Review of the Nonmarket Strategy Literature: Towards a Multi-Theoretical Integration. Journal of Management, 42(1): 143-173.
Mallin, C. A., & Michelon, G. (2011). Board reputation attributes and corporate social performance: An empirical investigation of the US best corporate citizens. Accounting and Business Research, 41(2), 119-144.
Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative science quarterly, 48(2), 268-305.
McGuinness, P. B., Vieito, J. P., & Wang, M. (2017). The role of board gender and foreign ownership in the CSR performance of Chinese listed firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 42, 75-99.
Mizruchi, M. S. (1983). Who controls whom? An examination of the relation between management and boards of directors in large American corporations. Academy of Management Review, 8(3), 426-435.
Mohamed, F. F. M. (2020). The impact of board characteristics on corporate social responsibility performance of companies: Evidence from emerging markets, Master's thesis.
Monks, R. A. ., & Minnow, N. (2011). Corporate Governance (5th ed.). West Sussex: John Wiley & sons Ltd.
McGuinness, P. B., Vieito, J. P., & Wang, M. (2017). The role of board gender and foreign ownership in the CSR performance of Chinese listed firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 42, 75-99.
Muttakin, M. B., Khan, A., & Mihret, D. G. (2018). The effect of board capital and CEO power on corporate social responsibility disclosures. Journal of Business Ethics, 150, 41-56.
Ortiz‐de‐Mandojana, N., & Aragon‐Correa, J.A. (2015). Boards and sustainability: the contingent influence of director interlocks on corporate environmental performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24(6), 499-517.
Pourali, M., & Hijami, M. (2014).  Investigating the relationship between social responsibility disclosure and institutional ownership in companies listed on the TSE, Knowledge of management accounting and auditing, 3(10). 135-150.
Post, C., Rahman, N., & McQuillen, C. (2015). From board composition to corporate environmental performance through sustainability-themed alliances. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(2), 423-435.
Rahdari, A. H., & Anvary Rostamy, A. A. (2015). Designing a general set of sustainability indicators at the corporate level. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 757-771.
Randøy, T. & Jenssen, J. J. (2004). Board Independence and Product Market Competition in Swedish Firms, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12 (3). 281-289.
Roberts, J., McNulty, T. & Stiles, P. (2005). Beyond Agency Conceptions of the Work of the Non-Executive Director: Creating Accountability in the Boardroom. Journal of Management, 16, S5-S26.
Rowley, T., Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Bus. Soc. 39, 397-418.
Sanda, A. (2011). Board independence and firm financial performance: evidence from Nigeria: African Economic Research Consortium.
Shaukat, A., Qiu, Y., & Trojanowski, G. (2016). Board attributes, corporate social responsibility strategy, and corporate environmental and social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 135, 569-585.
Tian, G. Y., & Twite, G. (2009). Corporate governance, external market discipline and firm productivity. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17, 403–417.
Ujunwa, A. (2012). Board characteristics and the financial performance of Nigerian quoted firms. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 12(5), 656-674.
Velte, P., Jones, G., & Jones, G. (2016). Women on management board and ESG performance. Journal of Global Responsibility, 7(1), 98-109.
Walls, J. L., Berrone, P., & Phan, P. H. (2012). Corporate governance and environmental performance: is there really a link? Strategic management journal, 33(8), 885-913.
Walls, J. L., & Hoffman, A. J. (2013). Exceptional boards: Environmental experience and positive deviance from institutional norms. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(2), 253-271.
Wang, H., & Choi, J. (2013). A new look at the corporate social-financial performance relationship the moderating roles of temporal and inter-domain consistency in corporate social performance. J. Manag. 39, 416-441.
Webb, E. (2004). An examination of socially responsible firms' board structure. Journal of Management and Governance, 8(3), 255-277.
Williamson, O. E. (1983). "Organization Form, Residual Claimants, and Corporate Control", Journal of Law & Economics, 26(2), 351-366.
Wu, M.L. (2006). Corporate social performance, corporate financial performance, and firm size: a meta-analysis. J. Am. Acad. Bus. 8, 163-171.
Zhang, J. Q., Zhu, H., & Ding, H. (2013). Board composition and corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation in the post Sarbanes-Oxley era. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), 381-392.
Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of management, 15(2), 291- 334.
    • Article View: 922
    • PDF Download: 527
Financial Accounting Knowledge
Volume 11, Issue 1 - Serial Number 40
April 2024
Pages 113-137
Files
  • XML
  • PDF 1.33 M
Share
How to cite
  • RIS
  • EndNote
  • Mendeley
  • BibTeX
  • APA
  • MLA
  • HARVARD
  • CHICAGO
  • VANCOUVER
Statistics
  • Article View: 922
  • PDF Download: 527

APA

Sabzalipour, F. , Sayadi Somar, A. , Rezaei, A. and Kazemi, K. (2024). Board Structure and Corporate Social Responsibility: Contingency versus Agency Theory. Financial Accounting Knowledge, 11(1), 113-137. doi: 10.30479/jfak.2024.19856.3170

MLA

Sabzalipour, F. , , Sayadi Somar, A. , , Rezaei, A. , and Kazemi, K. . "Board Structure and Corporate Social Responsibility: Contingency versus Agency Theory", Financial Accounting Knowledge, 11, 1, 2024, 113-137. doi: 10.30479/jfak.2024.19856.3170

HARVARD

Sabzalipour, F., Sayadi Somar, A., Rezaei, A., Kazemi, K. (2024). 'Board Structure and Corporate Social Responsibility: Contingency versus Agency Theory', Financial Accounting Knowledge, 11(1), pp. 113-137. doi: 10.30479/jfak.2024.19856.3170

CHICAGO

F. Sabzalipour , A. Sayadi Somar , A. Rezaei and K. Kazemi, "Board Structure and Corporate Social Responsibility: Contingency versus Agency Theory," Financial Accounting Knowledge, 11 1 (2024): 113-137, doi: 10.30479/jfak.2024.19856.3170

VANCOUVER

Sabzalipour, F., Sayadi Somar, A., Rezaei, A., Kazemi, K. Board Structure and Corporate Social Responsibility: Contingency versus Agency Theory. Financial Accounting Knowledge, 2024; 11(1): 113-137. doi: 10.30479/jfak.2024.19856.3170

  • Home
  • About Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Contact Us
  • Sitemap

News

Financial Accounting Knowledge, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY NC) .

 

Newsletter Subscription

Subscribe to the journal newsletter and receive the latest news and updates

© Journal Management System. Powered by Sinaweb