TÜRKİYE’DE KURUMSAL YÖNETİM DERECELENDİRMESİ: FİRMALARIN PUANLARININ İNCELENMESİ

Year 2022, Volume: 21 Issue: 43, 451 - 473, 15.06.2022

Ezgi Ecem Okan , Erginbay Uğurlu

https://doi.org/10.46928/iticusbe.1091327

Cited By: 2

Abstract

2001 yılındaki kurumsal yönetim krizi ve sonraki yıllardaki krizlerden sonra yönetişime artan bilgi ilgi oluştu. Bu ilgi de kurumsal yönetime odaklandı. Türkiye’de de 2003 yılından sonra kurumsal yönetimle ilgili gelişmeler yaşandı. 2003 yılında Sermaye Piyasası Kurumu “Türkiye Kurumsal Yönetim İlkeleri’ni yayınladı. 2007 yılında kurumsal yönetim derecelendirme şirketleri ile ilgili esaslar Resmi Gazete’de yayınlandı. Amaç: Bu gelişmelere bağlı olarak bu makale Türkiye’deki kurumsal yönetim derecelendirme kuruluşlarını ve bu kuruluşların derecelendirme değerlerini araştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Yöntem/Tasarım / Metodoloji / Yaklaşım: Derecelendirme firmalarını ve onların verdikleri derecelendirmeleri araştırmak için TKYD web sayfasından 2007 yılından 2010 yılına kadar yıllık veriler elde edilmiştir. Bu veriler kullanılarak yapılan ayrıntılı bir araştırma bulunmadığından basit tanımlayıcı istatistikler ve veri görselleştirme teknikleri kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: İki ana sonuç elde edildi. Bunlardan birincisi Türkiye’de iki baskın derecelendirme firması olduğunu göstermektedir. İkincisi incelenilen firmaların derecelendirme değerlerinin yıla bağlı olarak arttığını göstermektedir. Özgünlük: Türkiye’deki kurumsal yönetim derecelendirme kuruluşlarının derecelendirme değerleri ile ilgili kapsamlı bir analiz olmaması nedeniyle, bu makale gelecekteki araştırmacılar için temel bilgiyi oluşturacaktır.

Keywords

Kurumsal yönetim, firma performansı, derecelendirme, Türkiye

Supporting Institution

Yok

Project Number

Yok

Thanks

Yok

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING IN TURKEY: INVESTIGATION OF SCORES OF FIRMS

Abstract

After the corporate governance crisis in 2001, and the crises in the following years increased the concern about the governance of the firms. The concern focused on corporate governance. There were important developments in Turkey related to corporate governance after 2003. The Capital Markets Board of Turkey (CMB) published “Corporate Governance Principles of Turkey” in 2003, and the corporate governance rating agency's rules were published in Official Gazette in 2007. Purpose: Based on these developments, the paper aims to investigate corporate governance rating firms in Turkey and their rating scores. Method/Design/Methodology/Approach: To investigate the rating firms and their scores, annual data are collected from the TKYD website from 2007 to 2010. Because no article comprehensively investigates the data, we use simple descriptive statistics and data visitation methods. Findings: We find two main results. The first one shows that there are two dominant rating companies in Turkey. The second shows that the firms have increasing rating values by year. Originality: In the absence of any comprehensive analysis of Turkey's corporate governance rating firms' rating scores, this article will constitute base information for further research.

Keywords

Corporate governance, firm performance, rating, Turkey

Project Number

Yok

References

• Arslan, T. Ö. (2018). Kurumsal Yönetim Derecelendirme Notunun Hisse Senedi Performansına Etkisi: BİST-100’de Bulunan Yüksek Kurumsal Yönetim Derecesine Sahip Şirketler Üzerine Bir Uygulama. (Unpublished Master Thesis). İzmir Kâtip Çelebi University, Social Sciences Institute, Financial Economics.
• Ararat, M., Claessens, S. and Yurtoglu, B. B. (2021). Corporate governance in emerging markets: A selective review and an agenda for future research, Emerging Markets Review, 48, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2020.100767.
• Bakır, A. (2009). Bankaların Risk Derecelendirmesi ve Basel II Kriterlerinin Türk Bankacılık Sistemine Maliyeti. (Unpublished Master Thesis). İnönü University, Social Sciences Institute, Business Adminsitration.
• Boyacıoğlu, M. A. (2005). Bankalarda Derecelendirme (Rating) ve Türk Bankacılık Sektörü Üzerine Ampirik Bir Çalışma. İstanbul, İktisadi Araştırmalar Vakfı.
• Boyacıoğlu, M. A. (2005). Bankalarda Derecelendirme (Rating) ve Türk Bankacılık Sektörü Üzerine Ampirik Bir Çalışma. İstanbul, İktisadi Araştırmalar Vakfı. Cadbury Committee (1992). The Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance. Gee and Co. Ltd., London.
• Claessens, S. (2006). Corporate Governance and Development, The World Bank Research Observer, 21 (1), 91–122. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkj004.
• Claessens, S. ve Yurtoglu, B. B. (2013). Corporate governance in emerging markets: A survey. Emerging Markets Review, 15, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2012.03.002.
• Chang, C. C., Ho, K. Y., Hsiao, Y. J. ve Chan, C. H. (2019). Solicited versus Unsolicited Credit Rating and Bank Leverage Decision.
• Elkinawy, S. (2005). Mutual fund preferences for Latin American equities surrounding financial crises, Emerging Markets Review, 6 (3), 211-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2005.05.001.
• Brown, R. (2005) "Enron/Andersen: Crisis in U.S. Accounting and Lessons for Government", Public Budgeting <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&amp;"/> Finance, 25(3), pp. 20-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5850.2005.00365.x.
• Ergin, E. (2012). Corporate Governance Ratings and Market-based Financial Performance: Evidence from Turkey. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 4 (9), 61-68. https://doi:10.5539/ijef.v4n9p61.
• Ferri, G. ve Lacitignola, P. (2010). Does Europe Need Its Own Rating Agencies?. Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Metodi Matematici - Università di Bari, series.
• Gompel, Van J. (2011). Corporate Governance and Stock Returns in US Markets 1998- 2008. (Master Thesis). Maastricht University School of Business and Economics.
• Isiaka, A. (2015). Corporate Governance Ratings and Firm Performance: Canadian Evidence. 2015 Canadian Academic Accounting Association (CAAA) Annual Conference.
• Jiang, J.X., Stanford, M.H., Xie, Y. (2012). Does it Matter Who Pays for Bond Ratings? Historical Evidence, Journal of Financial Economics 105, 607-621.
• Karagöl, E.T. and İstiklal Mıhçıokur, Ü. (2012). Credit Rating Agencies: Searching for Alternatives. SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Studies Report.
• Kılıç, M. (2009). Corporate Governance and Rating: Unsolicited Corporate Governance Rating Model Suggestion for Public Firms. (Master's Thesis). Anadolu University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Business Administration.
• Kılıç, M. and Benligiray, Y. (2012). Corporate Governance and Rating Process. Audit, 9, 60-73. Köse, Y. E. (2010). Effects on Corporate Governance and Fraud Control. (PhD Thesis). Marmara University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Business Administration.
• Krahnen, J. P. ve Weber, M. (2001). Generally accepted rating principles. Journal of Banking and Finance, 25(1), 3–23. Mattarocci, G. (2014). The Independence of Credit Rating Agencies - How Business Models and Regulators Interact. MA, USA: Elsevier.
• Önder, M. F. and Mutlucan Sayın, S. (2016). Corporate Governance Rating Firms and Their Place in Turkish Law. Journal of Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Law, 1 (2), 105-133.
• Partnoy, F. (2006). How and why credit rating agencies are not like other gatekeepers. San Diego legal studies paper no. 07-46.
• Parker, Lee D. (2005). ‘Corporate Governance Crisis down under: Post-Enron Accounting Education and Research Inertia’. European Accounting Review 14(2):383–94. doi: 10.1080/09638180500126876.
• Resmi Gazete (2007). Communiqué on Principles Regarding Rating Activities and Rating Agencies in the Capital Markets (Series VIII, No: 51)
• Resmi Gazete (2014) Retrieved on 10 January 2022 from https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2014/01/20140103-3.htm
• Sandıkcıoğlu, A. (2005). Corporate Governance Compliance Rating. (Qualification Study). Capital Markets Board Partnerships Finance Department.
• SPK (2021). Authorized Rating Agencies with Corporate Governance Principles Compliance Rating. Retrieved on 23 December 2021 from https://www.spk.gov.tr/Sayfa/Index/6/10/1.
• Sukumaran, K. (2020). Corporate Governance Ratings - Concept, Methodology and Practice. The Third National Research Conference by Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs (IICA) at New Delhi.
• Sylla, R. (2002). An historical primer on the business of credit rating. In R. M. Levich, R. Majnoni & C. Reinhart (Eds.), Ratings, rating agencies and the global financial system. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
• TKYD (2021). The Corporate Governance Association of Turkey, Retrieved on 17 December 2021 from https://www.tkyd.org/tr/tkyd-kurumsal-yonetim-komisyonlar-calisma-gruplari-sermaye-piyasasi-calisma-grubu-ve-bist-kurumsal-yonetim-endeksi-kurumsal-yonetim-endeksi-tum-firmalar.html
• TSPAKB (2005). Private Sector Debt Instruments Report Current Situation and Recommendations. Istanbul: Editor: Alparsalan Budak, Private Sector Debt Instruments Working Group, Publication No: 25.
• Van Roy, P. (2006). Is there a difference between solicited and unsolicited bank ratings and if so, why ?. Working paper research n° 79. the National Bank of Belgium.
• White, L. J. (2010). The credit rating agencies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2), 211–226.
• Yeğen, S. (2016). Examining the Relationship between the Degree of Compliance with Corporate Governance Principles and Firm Performance. (Master's Thesis). Hacettepe University Institute of Social Sciences Business Administration Department Accounting Finance Department.