Yönetici Endeksi D-INDEX ’nın Firma Performansı Üzerıne Etkisi: Bist 100 Şirketleri Üzerıne Bir Araştırma

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1, 253 - 268, 01.04.2015

Nida Abdıoglu Recep Kılıc

Öz

Bu çalışmada, BIST100 endeksinde yer alan şirketler için kurumsal yönetim kalitesi ve firma performansı arasındaki ilişki incelenmektedir. Kurumsal yönetim kalitesi, temsilci çatışmalarını azaltan bir mekanizma olarak kabul edilmiş ve bu azalışın artan firma performansıyla sonuçlanacağı varsayılmıştır. Çalışmada, Yönetici endeksi DINDEX , kurumsal yönetim kalitesinin bir göstergesi kabul edilmiş ve çalışmayı literatürde yer alan benzer çalışmalardan farklılaştırmak amaçlanmıştır. Bu endeksi oluşturmak için Bushee vd. 2010 çalışmasından yararlanılmıştır. Ampirik bulgulara göre D-INDEX’in firma performansı üzerinde herhangi bir etkisi bulunmamıştır. İkinci aşama olarak, firma performansı ve D-INDEX arasındaki ilişki farklı endüstrilerdeki şirketler için incelenmiş ve elektrik endüstrisindeki şirketlerden yüksek kurumsal yönetim kalitesine sahip şirketlerin, yüksek performansa sahip olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Söz konusu şirketlerin kurumsal yönetimdeki değişiklikleri çabuk uygulamaya geçirmeleri bu sonuca ulaşmada etkili olmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

Firma Performansı, D-INDEX, Kurumsal Yönetim Kalitesi, BİST 100, Panel Veri

The Effect of Directors’ Index on Firm Performance: An Evidence from BIST100 Firms

Öz

This study investigates the relation between corporate performance of firms listed in Borsa İstanbul 100 index BIST100 . With accepting corporate governance as a mechanism to reduce the agency conflicts between managers and shareholders, we assume that this reduction results with increased firm performance. We differentiate this study from the existing literature by accepting directors’ index D-INDEX as a proxy for corporate governance quality for the companies existed in BIST100. We follow Bushee et al. 2010 to create D-INDEX. Our findings indicate that DINDEX does not have any effect on corporate performance of BIST100 firms. As a second step, we examine the relation between firm performance and D-INDEX for each industry in our dataset. We find that among the firms in electricity industry those have high level of corporate governance quality have high level of firm performance. We explain this result with the quick adjustments of these firms to the changes in corporate governance

Anahtar Kelimeler

Firm Performance, D-INDEX, Corporate Governance Quality, BIST100, Panel Data

Kaynakça

• Adams, R. and D. Ferreira, 2007. A theory of friendly boards. The Journal of Finance, , 217-250.
• Adams, R. and D. Ferreira, 2009. Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94, 291-309.
• Basti, E., Bayyurt, N. and A. Akin, 2011. A Comparative Performance Analysis of Foreign and Domestic Manufacturing Companies in Turkey. European Journal of Economics and Political Studies, 4(2), 125-137.
• Bebchuk, L., and A.Cohen, 2005. The Costs of Entrenched Boards. Journal of Financial Economics, 78, 409–33.
• Bebchuk, L., Cohen, A. and A.Ferrell, , 2009. What Matters in Corporate Governance. The Review of Financial Studies, 22 (2), 783-827.
• Brickley, J. and C. James, 1987. The Takeover Market, Corporate Board Composition and Ownership Structure: The Case of Banking. Journal of Law and Economics, 30, 161-180.
• Brown, L., and M. Caylor. 2006. Corporate Governance and Firm Valuation. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25, 409–34.
• Bushee, B.J., Carter, M.E., J. Gerakos, 2010. Institutional Investor Preferences for Corporate Governance Mechanisms. Working Paper. The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
• Byrd, J., and K. Hickman., 1992. Do outside directors monitor managers? Evidence from tender offer bids. Journal of Financial Economics, 32, 195–221.
• Core, J., Guay,W., T. Rusticus, 2006. Does weak governance cause weak stock returns? An examination of firm operating performance and investors' expectations. Journal of Finance, 61, 655–687.
• Dahya, J. and J. J. McConnell 2005. Outside Directors and Corporate Board Decisions, Journal of Corporate Finance, 11, 37-60. Denis, D.K., J.J. McConnell, 2003. International Corporate Governance. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38, 1-36.
• Fama, E. F. and M. C.Jensen, 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301-324.
• Fang, V.W., Noe, T.H., S. and Tice, 2009. Stock Market Liquidity and Firm Value.
• Journal of Financial Economics, 94 (1), 150-169. Gompers, P. A., Ishii, J.L., and A. Metrick, 2003. Corporate governance and equity prices. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 107–155.
• Gujarati, D.N., 2004. Basic Econometrics. The McGraw−Hill Companies.
• Guner, A.B., Malmendier, U. and G. Tate, 2008. Financial expertise of directors.
• Journal of Financial Economics, 88, 323–354. Hallock, K. 1997. Reciprocally interlocking boards of directors and executive compensation.
• Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 32, 331–44. Harris, M. and A.Raviv, 2008. A Theory of Board Control and Size. Review of Financial Studies, 21 (4), 1797-1832.
• Hermalin, B.E. and M.S.Weisbach, 2003. Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: a survey of the economic literature. Economic Policy Review, 9, 7-26.
• Jensen, M.C. and W.H., Meckling, 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360
• Rosenstein, S., and J. Wyatt., 1990. Outside directors, board independence, and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics, 26,175–91.
• Shivdasani, A. and D., Yermack, 1999. CEO involvement in the selection of new board members: An empirical analysis. The Journal of Finance, 54, 1829-1853
• Shivdasani, A., 1993. Board composition, ownership structure, and hostile takeovers. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 16, 167-198
• Yermack, D. 1996. “Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors.” Journal of Financial Economics, 40, 185-212.