THE DISCLOSURE BEHAVIOR AND PERFORMANCE OF RUSSIAN FIRMS: PUBLIC DISCLOSURE INDEX AND DEA APPLICATION

Year 2016, Volume: 3 Issue: 3, 257 - 266, 30.09.2016

Eyup Kahveci Rashad Taliyev

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2016321997

Abstract

This paper aims, to measure the levels of public
disclosure of 92 manufacturing firms listed on Russian Stock Exchange and
empirically investigates the link between the level of disclosure and firm
performance proxies as of December 2009. To carry out this study, annual
financial reports of the firms were accepted as a proxy for the level of
disclosure released on firms’ web-sites and the reports used to construct a
disclosure index as a yardstick to measure the level of a firm’s disclosure. A
disclosure index was constructed as a yardstick to measure the level of firm’s
disclosure by using the firms’ annual reports. 
CCR - DEA model and BCC – DEA model used to obtain efficiency scores.
PDI and TA used as inputs, MV, MV/BV and Tobin’s q used as outputs. Average
score of PDI is 0,69. The highest PDI was 0.81 and the lowest one was 0.45.
Only 7 firms have scale efficiency and the technical efficiency at the same
time. Other 84 firms don’t have total efficiency, technical efficiency or scale
efficiency. 

Keywords

Public Disclosure Index, firm performance, corporate governance, annual reports, voluntary disclosure

References

• Akerlof, G., 1970. The market for lemons: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488-500.
• Ashbaugh, S.H., Collins, D.W., & Lafond, R., 2004. Corporate governance and the cost of equity capital. [Cited 10 February 2015.] Available from URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=639681.
• Berle, A., Means, G., 1932. The modern corporation and private property. New York, Macmillan
• Black, B.S., 2002. The corporate governance behavior and market value of russian firms. Emerging markets review, 2(2), 89-108.
• Black, Bernard.S., Love I., & Rachinsky, A., 2006. Corporate governance and firms' market values: time series evidence from Russia. Emerging markets review, 7(4), 361—379.
• Bollen, L., Hassink, H., & Bozic, G., 2006. Measuring and explaining the quality of internet investor relations activities: a multinational empirical analysis. International journal of accounting information systems, 7(4), 273-298.
• Botosan, C.A., 1997. Disclosure level and the cost of equity capital. The accounting review, 72 (3), 323-349.
• Chow, C.W., & Wong – Boren, A., 1987. Voluntary financial disclosure by Mexican corporations. Accounting review, 62(3), 533-541.
• Chung, K.H., Pruitt, W.S., 1994. A simple approximation of Tobin’s q. Financial management, 23(3), 70-74.
• Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K., .2006. Introduction to data envelopment analysis and its uses. Springer.
• Cormier, D., Ledoux, M., & Magnan, M., 2009. The use of web sites as a disclosure platform for corporate performance. International journal of accounting information systems, 10(1), 1-24.
• Fan, Z., Wang, L., & Zhang, J., 2003. Corporate competitive strategy and voluntary disclosure. [Cited 11 January 2015.] Available from URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1106614.
• Firth, M.A., 1979. The effect of size, stock market listings, and auditors on voluntary disclosure incorporate annual reports. Accounting and business research, 9(36), 273-280.
• Gandia, J. L., 2008. Determinants of internet-based corporate governance disclosure by Spanish listed companies. Online information review, 32(6), 791-817.
• Griffith, J.M., 1999. CEO ownership and firm value. Managerial and decision economics, 20(1), 1-8.
• Huafang, X., & Jianguo, Y., 2007. Ownership structure, board composition and corporate voluntary disclosure.evidence from listed companies in china. Managerial auditing journal, 22(6), 604-619.
• Jensen, M.C., & 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., Naumova, I., & Koutzevol, N., 2003. Corporate governance and firm performance in russia: an empirical study. Journal of world business, 38(4), 385–396.
• Kahveci, E., 2011. Firm performance and resource-based theory: an application with DEA. International Journal of Contemporary Business Studies, 2(4), 38-50.
• Kahveci, E., Celen, Y., & Ekşi, İ. H., 2014. Türk mevduat bankalarının performansının vza pencere analizi ile belirlenmesi. Bankacılar dergisi, 24(86), 53-66.
• Klapper, Leora F., & Love, I., 2004. Corporate governance, investor protection and performance in emerging markets. Journal of corporate finance, 10(5), 703-728.
• Kuznetsov, P., & Muravyev, A., 2004. Ownership structure and firm performance in russia: the case of blue chips of the stock markets. Economics education and research consortium - Russia program.
• Liu, J., Eddie, A., 2007. Determinants of disclosures of a-, b- and h-share companies. Asian review of accounting, 15(1), 72-92.
• McKinsey and Company. 2002. Global Investor Opinion Survey on Corporate Governance, Newyork: McKinsey &Company.
• Meek, G.K., Roberts, C.B., & Gray, S.J., 1995. Factors influencing voluntary annual report disclosures by U.S., U.K. and continental European multinational corporations. Journal of international business studies, 26(3), 555-572.
• OECD, 2004. Corporate Governance Principles. [Cited 12 August 2016.] Available from URL: https://www.oecd.org/corporate/ca/corporategovernanceprinciples/31557724.pdf
• Perçin, S., & Ustasüleyman, T., 2007. Teskstil ve gıda sektöründe etkinlik ölçümü: Vza-malmquist tfp endeksi uygulaması. İktisat işletme ve finans, 22(250), 154-171.
• Sengupta, P., 1998, Corporate disclosure quality and the cost of debt. The accounting review, 73(4), 459-474.
• Silva, W. M., & Alves, L.A., 2004. The voluntary disclosure of financial information on the internet and thefirm value effect in companies across Latin America, [Cited 12 January 2015.] Available from URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=493805.
• Spence, M., 1973. Job market signaling. The quarterly journal of economics, 87(3), 355-374.
• Standard & Poor’s. 2007. Portrait of Russian corporate boards mirrors their concentrated ownership structure and highlights hindrances to stronger governance. Standard & Poor’s Governance Services.
• Tobin, J., 1969. A general equilibrium approach to monetary theory. Journal of money, credit and banking, 1(1), 15-29.
• Ulucan, A., 2000. Şirket performanslarının ölçülmesinde veri zarflama analizi yaklaşımı: genel ve sektörel bazda değerlendirmeler. Hacettepe üniversitesi iktisadi ve idari bilimler fakültesi dergisi, 18(1), 419-437.
• Ulucan, A., 2002. ISO500 şirketlerinin etkinliklerinin ölçülmesinde veri zarflama analizi yaklaşımı:farklı girdi çıktı bileşenleri ve ölçeğe göre getiri yaklaşımları ile değerlendirmeler. Ankara üniversitesi SBF dergisi, 57(2), 182-2002.
• Wallace, O.R.S., Naser, K., & Mora, A., 1994. The relationship between the comprehensiveness of corporate annual reports and firm characteristics in Spain. Accounting and business research, 25(97), 41-53.
• Zhu, J,. 2000. Multi-factorperformance measure model with an application to Fortune 500 companies. European journal of operational research. 123, 105 – 124.