Search results

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the actual status of roles and responsibilities of boards in nonprofit organizations in China by comparative analysis and through setting the USA as a frame of reference.

Five roles and responsibilities are compared between Chinese and American nonprofits. Among Chinese nonprofits, foundations and associations are compared. Both primary and secondary data are used.

On the roles and responsibilities of nonprofit boards, developed countries such as the USA are more active than China. Within China, boards of foundations are more active than the boards of associations.

Small sampling limits universality and applicability of this paper's conclusions. Every sort of role and responsibility are not further divided.

This paper examines the extent to which boards fulfill roles and responsibilities, and provides reference effects for further researches and for improvement of board governance of nonprofits in China.

This study aims to examine the effect of corporate governance mechanisms on social responsibility in Latin America.

The hypotheses were tested using a sample of 371 companies based in eight Latin American countries, resulting in 4,823 observations.

The results show that more independent boards, with greater female representation and the presence of a sustainability committee lead companies to behave more ethically. The findings indicate that corporate governance mechanisms play an important role for companies to engage in social responsibility actions.

Governments can use these findings to draft regulations that encourage Latin American companies to disclose more non-financial information and to support a more diverse board composition. The evidence shows that the quality of national governance plays a key role in times of crisis by encouraging more responsible behavior by companies.

This study broadens the scope of application of agency theory and the resource-based view by demonstrating that the board of directors is a unique composition and that organizations must understand how to balance external and internal members on their boards in order to achieve higher social and environmental performance.

Este estudio tiene como objetivo examinar el efecto de los mecanismos de gobierno corporativo en la responsabilidad social en América Latina.

Las hipótesis se probaron utilizando una muestra de 371 empresas con sede en 8 países de América Latina, lo que resultó en 4.823 observaciones.

Los resultados muestran que directorios más independientes, con mayor representación femenina y la presencia de un comité de sustentabilidad llevan a las empresas a comportarse de manera más ética. Los hallazgos indican que los mecanismos de gobierno corporativo juegan un papel importante para que las empresas realicen acciones de responsabilidad social.

Este estudio amplía el alcance de la aplicación de la teoría de la agencia y la visión basada en los recursos al demostrar que la junta directiva es una composición única y que las organizaciones deben entender cómo equilibrar los miembros externos e internos en sus juntas para lograr un mayor impacto social. y desempeño ambiental.

Los gobiernos pueden usar estos hallazgos para redactar regulaciones que alienten a las empresas latinoamericanas a divulgar más información no financiera y apoyar una composición de directorio más diversa. Nuestra evidencia muestra que la calidad de la gobernanza nacional juega un papel clave en tiempos de crisis al fomentar un comportamiento más responsable por parte de las empresas.

This study aims to use the original data collected from school board members representing nonprofit charter schools in the state of Minnesota to examine the relationship between the distribution of board-executive governance responsibilities and the performance of organizations operating as part of a New Public Management style macro-governance reform.

A combination of survey data collected from Minnesota charter school board members and hard performance data were utilized in two OLS regression models to predict the link between organizational governance and school performance.

The authors find that boards can improve hard measures of organizational performance by shifting responsibility of day-to-day operations closer to the executive, and public advocacy duties closer to the board. The results build on the existing literatures on school board governance and board-executive relations. Overall, the findings suggest the existence of an ideal balance between board-executive governance responsibilities in key functional areas on charter school boards.

Though a healthy literature exists regarding the value of charter schools, very few studies have actually explored the way in which these organizations are governed. This study is the first to link charter board governance responsibilities to performance.

This study aims to provide the intellectual structure of the academic literature on board characteristics and corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD) and corporate social responsibility performance (CSRP). To do that, the authors analyse the main theories, data sources and methodologies used by researchers, providing information on methodological bias and research gaps. Beyond that, this study offers a novel picture of the most critical drivers of CSRP/CSRD and offer constructive suggestions to guide future research.

A content analysis was performed on 242 articles extracted from the Web of Science database from 1992 to 2019.

Results indicate that board characteristics have a significant and increasing impact on corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature. The results also revealed that the board practices play a crucial role in managing CSRP/CSRD-related issues. The study also identifies the effect of the critical board characteristics on CSRP, CSRD quantity and CSRD quality. Furthermore, the study findings provide an overarching picture of the patterns and trends of the systematic nexus between board characteristics and CSRP/CSRD quality and quantity.

The study findings help provide an overarching picture of the systematic nexus patterns and trends between board characteristics and CSRP/CSRD quality and quantity. These results draw potential future avenues to bridge the void in the current board–CSR literature by presenting fruitful and indispensable directions for future research (governance mechanisms, new methodologies, variables, countries, etc.). It also suggests multidimensional and in-depth insights for reforming the board of directors’ guidelines.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, minimal attention has been paid to systematising the literature on board and CSR.

Analyzing data collected from the charter school board members and the superintendent in a charter school district in a southeastern state about the quality and usefulness of training, the purpose of this paper is to provide an important foundation for understanding training and development for charter school boards in the USA.

This study uses a qualitative case study approach to examine a charter school district and the preparedness of charter school board members to serve in that district. The authors sampled one charter school district in the southeast region of the USA and interviewed five charter school board members and the superintendent.

The first theme is composition and responsibility of charter school board members, which outlines the roles and responsibilities that charter school board members assume when they serve on this charter district board. The second theme is preparedness to serve, which traces the readiness of charter school board members to serve on a board. The final theme is training and documents related to the kind of training charter school board members receive once they are appointed to the board.

This study provides a conceptual framework about the dimensions and standards associated with preparedness to serve as a charter school board member and broadens the authors’ understanding of the roles and responsibilities of charter school boards, their preparedness to serve and the training and development they receive.

The modern corporation is evaluated by many measures that go beyond profit, which was the emphasis for years previously. Today’s corporation is weighed against expectations of many stakeholders, including not just customers but employees, investors, the government and even the public at large with no discernible financial or other tie to a company. As such, corporate boards necessarily must be concerned with more than financial performance, including corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the increasing emphasis on environmental, social and governance (ESG) metrics. Given that public relations scholars and practitioners have long been concerned with stakeholder relationships, social responsibility and other non-financial indicators, it would make sense that public relations has a more obvious presence on corporate boards.

This study examined the 25 companies in the Fortune Modern Board 25 to determine how many board members had a background or expertise in public relations that would contribute to the leadership necessary for the concerns of the modern corporation, and whether the boards had a committee designated to public relations or related functions.

Results show that there are few corporate boards that have public relations represented prominently in either their members or committees. The same is true for executive leadership teams. Public relations or communications executives do appear to play some role in ESG, CSR and DEI reporting, but often there are staff members with those specific titles and roles.

The study was limited to 25 corporations on a Forbes list that ranked them as best in communicating ESG, CSR and DEI. The method examined publicly available literature which was revealing to the research questions, but more could be learned by interview or survey with CCOs.

The study shows the current presence of public relations capacity in terms of members of corporate boards, corporate committees and among the C-suite is not significant. Also, rather than PR as a function owning modern concerns of DEI, ESG and CSR, there are professionals with specific expertise in those areas who are responsible for those corporate issues.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR), ESG (environmental, social, governance) and DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) have recently been stressed as important for corporations to measure and report. The role of the public relations profession in managing and/or communicating in these areas is important to consider in terms of public expectations and satisfaction of communication on these subjects.

This paper is unique in integrating public relations theory and practice with board theory and the current management concerns with ESG, CSR and DEI. Little if any previous research has considered which professions are in charge of communicating on these concerns.

This study aims to examine the effect of the structure of board of directors and company ownership on social responsibility disclosure of listed companies on the Tehran Stock Exchange.

The variables of the study included independent board of directors, institutional ownership, managerial ownership, family ownership and family-managerial ownership. The study population consisted of 125 listed companies on the Tehran Stock Exchange during the years 2009-2014. Content analysis used to measure social responsibility disclosure level and test hypothesis was performed using multiple regression analysis.

The results demonstrated that there was no significant relationship between any of the independent variables and the level of social responsibility disclosure. This study empirically shows managers, investors and other stakeholders that if business owners are made of different groups, namely, institutional ownership, managerial and family ownership, it will not affect the social responsibility disclosure in annual reports.

The outcomes of the current study may bridge the gap between social responsibility disclosure and ownership structure in a developing country like Iran.

This study looks at board governance in Ontario hospitals.

We conducted a research of the hospitals’ websites and a survey of board directors to study the board structure and examine governance practice in Ontario hospitals.

The findings suggest that the board structure and process in Ontario hospitals are in compliance with Accreditation Canada’s Governance Standards, and such administrative controls are appropriate. Ontario hospital boards, in general, have fulfilled their key functions of governance in terms of working as an effective board; developing a clear direction; supporting the organization to achieve its mandate; maintaining positive relationships with external stakeholders; and being accountable and achieving sustainable results. Building knowledge through information is an area where improvement is needed.

Ontario hospitals have implemented appropriate administrative controls in terms of board composition and committee structure. The results of a survey of 99 board directors from over 25 hospitals suggest that directors, in general, have a good understanding of their governance role and relationship with senior management as well as the government. The findings are also supportive of good governance practice where executives manage and nonexecutive directors monitor the performance of the executives. According to the respondents, Ontario’s hospital boards are actively involved in setting the mission, strategic goals and objectives of their organizations, and they take appropriate steps to ensure that risk management, client safety, and quality improvements are incorporated in their governance and strategic planning process. In order to discharge their fiduciary duty effectively, respondents would like to have more information from different sources. This is an area where management accounting professionals can become involved such that relevant information from a variety of sources, especially external sources, are provided to board directors for decision making.

Ontario’s hospital sector has undertaken initiatives through research and publications to promote good governance practice. Such leadership is critical to ensure that directors have the competence and skills to discharge their duties and responsibilities diligently. Hospital boards should focus on renewal while ensuring that board directors are equipped for the challenging task of governing through professional development and continuing education.

Limitations related to the use of questionnaire applies to this research study. Self-selection bias and low response rate limit the generalizability of the findings. Future research can examine the behavior of directors in the boardroom and the impact of governance variables on hospital performance, such as quality of care and patient safety.

In light of the conflict between scholarly findings supporting corporate social responsibility’s positive impact on corporate financial performance (CFP) versus findings showing negative impact on CFP, the academic literature has reoriented toward determining the contingency conditions that affect the underlying relationships. This paper aims to investigate two potential contingency factors, the chief executive officer’s (CEO) corporate social responsibility (CSR) expertise and board members’ CSR expertise.

This paper uses an unbalanced panel of archival data of 168 firms from the S&P 500 index for the period 2006–2013. The analytic model is estimated using the feasible generalized least squares regression method with heteroscedasticity and panel-specific AR1 autocorrelation.

The findings reinforce the perspective that CSR positively affects the firm’s financial performance. The authors find that firms realize optimal results from their CSR investments when both the board and the CEO have greater CSR expertise. In other words, both, CEO CSR expertise and board CSR expertise positively impact the CSR–CFP relationship.

The findings of this study advance the literature in three important areas, namely, the social responsibility–financial responsibility relationship, the governance literature and upper echelons theory. First, the theoretical arguments and the empirical evidence highlight that CSR–CFP relationship is at least partly contingent upon the CEO’s and board members’ CSR expertise. Second, this study introduces two important variables: the CEO and board’s CSR experience as proxies for their CSR expertise. Future researchers may consider decomposing the various components of CSR to study the differential impact of each component on financial performance.

First, this study finds that while the CEO CSR expertise may be of value for the firm, such value can only be realized under a capable and effective board that has adequate knowledge in the field of CSR. Second, this study shows that the best-case scenario for firms occurs when both its board members and CEO have had greater prior CSR involvement that contributed to their knowledge inventory and skills. Greater knowledge and skills enhance the quality of the decisions that comprise the firm’s CSR strategy.

While it seems intuitive that prior CSR knowledge and expertise should lead to more and better CSR initiatives, there are few if any studies that empirically examine the effects of this premise on a firm’s financial performance. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study appears to be the first that directly tests the relationship between executives’ CSR experience and firm performance.

In a review of the literature, supported by six case studies, executive development for senior managers in public and private organisations is explored in depth. The study looks at the roles and responsibilities of the chairman, CEO, executive and non‐executive directors, the required capabilities to achieve successful performance, and the related executive development activity implemented to support these. Methods of delivery, development needs analysis and evaluation are explored in case organisations to ascertain current practice. A detailed review of the leadership and governance literatures is included to highlight the breadth of knowledge required at director level. Key findings of the study include the importance of focusing executive development on capability enhancement, to ensure that it is supporting organisational priorities, and on its thorough customisation to the corporate context. Deficiencies in current corporate practice are also identified.