The Relationship between the Board Structure and Bank Profitability: Dynamic Panel Data Analysis

Year 2018, , 248 - 264, 20.12.2018

Ersan Ersoy , Yüksel Aydın

https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.479433

Cited By: 2

Abstract

The aim of this study
is to examine the relationship between board structure of commercial banks and
their profitability in Turkey. The study covers the time period of 2007-2013
and dynamic panel regression models (Pooled OLS, fixed effects and system GMM estimators)
are used in the analysis process. The variables such as board size, the
proportion of independent directors, the proportion of foreign directors and
the dual position of the chairman of the board and the general manager of the
bank are used for the board characteristics. According to the results obtained
from the study, there is no statistically significant association between board
size and profitability. In addition, both the proportion of independent
directors and the proportion of foreign directors are found to be negatively
related to bank profitability. It has also been observed that the influence of
dual position of the chairman of the board and general manager of the bank on
profitability is positive. As for the control variables, there is no
statistically significant link between bank size and lending level variables
and profitability. However, the effect of bank capital on profitability is
positive and statistically significant.

Keywords

Bank performance, board characteristics, panel data analyses, board size, independent director, foreign director, CEO-Duality

YÖNETİM KURULU YAPISI VE BANKA KARLILIĞI ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: DİNAMİK PANEL VERİ ANALİZİ

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’de mevduat bankalarının yönetim kurulu yapısı ile banka karlılığı arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Çalışma 2007-2013 dönemini kapsamaktadır ve analizlerde dinamik panel regresyon modelleri (Havuzlanmış EKK, sabit etkiler ve sistem GMM tahmincileri) kullanılmıştır. Yönetim kurulu değişkeni olarak, yönetim kurulunun büyüklüğü, bağımsız yönetici oranı, yabancı yönetici oranı ve liderlik yapısı değişkenleri kullanılmıştır. Çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlara göre, yönetim kurulu büyüklüğü ile karlılık arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki bulunamamıştır. Hem yönetim kuruluna atanan bağımsız yönetici sayısı ile hem de yönetim kurulunda yer alan yabancı yönetici sayısı ile karlılık arasında negatif yönlü bir ilişki olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Genel müdürlük ve yönetim kurulu başkanlığı görevlerini aynı kişinin icra etmesi durumunun ise karlılığı artırdığı görülmüştür. Banka düzeyinde kullanılan kontrol değişkenlerinden banka büyüklüğü ve kredilendirme düzeyi değişkeni ile banka karlılığı arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki çıkmamıştır. Banka sermayesi değişkeni ile banka karlılığı arasında ise istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve pozitif yönlü bir ilişki bulunmuştur.

Keywords

Banka Karlılığı, Yönetim Kurulu Yapısı, Dinamik Panel Veri Analizi, Yönetim Kurulu Büyüklüğü, Bağımsız Yönetici, Yabancı Yönetici, Liderlik Yapısı

References

• Adams, R. B. and Mehran, H. (2012). Bank Board Structure and Performance: Evidence for Large Bank Holding Companies. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 21(2), 243-267.
• Arellano, M. and Bover, O. (1995). Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error-Components Model. Journal of Econometrics, 68, 29-51.
• Aygün, M., Taşdemir, A. ve Çavdar, E. (2010). Banka Performansı Üzerinde Yönetim Kurulu Büyüklüğünün Etkisi. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 24(3), 67-78.
• Belhaj, S. and Mateus, C. (2016). Corporate Governance Impact on Bank Performance: Evidence from Europe. Corporate Ownership & Control, 13(4), 583-597.
• Berle, A. and Means, G. (1932). The Modern Corporation and Private Property, New York: Macmillan.
• Blundell, R. and Bond, S. (1998). Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143.
• Bukair, A. A. and Rahman, A. A. (2015). Bank Performance and Board of Directors Attributes by Islamic Banks. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 8(3), 291-309.
• Chahine, S. and Safieddine, A. (2011). Is Corporate Governance Different for the Lebanese Banking System?. Journal of Management & Governance, 15(2), 207-226.
• Choi, S. and Hasan, I. (2005). Ownership, Governance, and Bank Performance: Koreanexperience. Financial Markets, Institutions& Instruments, 14(4), 215-242.
• De Andres, P. and Vallelado, E. (2008). Corporate Governance in Banking: The Role of the Board of Directors. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(12), 2570-2580.
• Denis, D. K. (2001). Pages Twenty-Five Years of Corporate Governance Research … and Counting. Review of Financial Economics, 10(3), 191-212.
• Doğan, M. and Yıldız, F. (2013). The Impact of the Board of Directors’ Size on the Bank’s Performance: Evidence from Turkey. European Journal of Business and Management, 5(6), 130-140.
• Donaldson, L. and Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship Theory or Agency Theory? CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49-65.
• Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288-307.
• Fama, E. F. and Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency Problems and Residual Claims. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 327-349.
• García-Meca, E., García-Sánchez, I. M. and Martínez-Ferrero, J. (2015). Board Diversity and its Effects on Bank Performance: An International Analysis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 53, 202-214.
• Georgantopoulos, A. G. and Filos, I. (2017). Board Structure and Bank Performance: Evidence for the Greek Banking Industry during Crisis Period. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 7(1), 56-67.
• Ghosh, S. (2006). Do Board Characteristics Affect Corporate Performance? Firm-Level Evidence for India. Applied Economics Letters, 13(7): 435-443.
• Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric Analysis (5th ed.). Singapore: Pearson Education Inc.
• Green, S. (2005). Sarbanes-Oxley and the Board of Directors: Techniques and Best Practices for Corporate Governance, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Hajer, C. and Anis, J. (2018). Analysis of the Impact of Governance on Bank Performance: Case of Commercial Tunisian Banks. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 9(3), 871-895.
• Jensen, M. C. (1993). The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems. The Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831-880.
• Jensen, M. C. and Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
• Judge, W. Q., Naoumova, I. and Koutzevol, N. (2003). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance in Russia: An Empirical Study. Journal of World Business, 38(4), 385-396.
• Isik, O. (2017). The Dynamic Association between CEO-Duality and Bank Performance: The Moderating Role of Board Size. Research Journal of Business and Management, 4(4), 460-468.
• Işık, Ö. (2017). Kurumsal Yönetim ve Firma Yönetim Kurulu, İstanbul: Kriter Yayınevi.
• Kaymak, T. and Bektas, E. (2008). East Meets West? Board Characteristics in an Emerging Market: Evidence from Turkish Banks. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(6), 550-561.
• Kyereboah-Coleman, A., Adjasi, C. K. D. and Abor, J. (2006). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: Evidence From Ghanaian Listed Companies. Corporate Ownership & Control, 4(2), 123-132.
• Liang, Q., Xu, P. and Jiraporn, P. (2013). Board Characteristics and Chinese Bank Performance. Journal of Banking& Finance, 37(8), 2953-2968.
• Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects’. Econometrica, 49, 1417-1426.
• Pathan, S. and Faff, R. (2013). Does Board Structure in Banks Really Affect Their Performance?. Journal of Banking& Finance, 37(5), 1573-1589.
• Pathan, S., Skully, M. and Wickramanayake, J. (2007). Board Size, Independence and Performance: An Analysis of Thai Banks. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, 14(3), 211-227.
• Pfeffer, J. (1973). Size, Composition, and Function of Hospital Boards of Directors: A Study of Organization-Environment Linkage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(3), 349-364.
• Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper and Row.
• Staikouras, P. K., Staikouras, C. K. and Agoraki, M. E. K. (2007). The Effect of Board Size and Composition on European Bank Performance. European Journal of Law and Economics, 23(1), 1-27.
• Stančić, P., Čupić, M. and Obradović, V. (2014). Influence of Board and Ownership Structure on Bank Profitability: Evidence from South East Europe. Economic Research-Ekonomskaistraživanja, 27(1), 573-589.
• 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.