Search results

While there have been extensive empirical investigations of pay-performance sensitivity, the perspective of performance-pay has received less attention to date. While executive compensation is sensitive to firm performance, firm performance is also likely to be affected by executive compensation. Adopting multiple theoretical perspectives, the purpose of this paper is to examine whether executive compensation has a greater influence on firm performance or whether the latter has a greater influence on compensation.

Using data from a five-year period (2010-2014) for Financial Times and Stock Exchange 350 companies, the authors employ a set of simultaneous equation modelling to jointly investigate, after accounting for endogeneity problem, the mutual association of executive compensation and firm performance by employing four control variables (board size, non-executive directors, leverage and boardroom ownership).

The authors find strong evidence for the greater influence of executive compensation on firm performance than the pay-performance framework. This finding supports the tournament theory compared with the agency perspective.

Inevitably, there are limitations in a wide-ranging study of this nature that could be addressed in future research. As any empirical study utilising company data, there may be concerns to the effect of survivorship bias and the manner in which companies have reorganised, if there is any, themselves during the period under examination. There are also issues as to missing data, some measures relating to both executive compensation and corporate governance are not provided by the BoardEx database.

The study results provide evidence that using the tournament perspective by remuneration committees as a guide for determining executive compensation helps in achieving better performance. This helps in developing appropriate mechanisms for setting executive remuneration.

This paper combines an empirical investigation of the frameworks of pay-performance and performance-pay and develops a system of six simultaneous equations to examine the associations between executive compensation and firm performance.

This study aims mainly to test the effect of audit committee independence and expertise attributes on corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting, assurance and global reporting initiative (GRI) framework adoption and to investigate how CSR committee existence moderates this main relationship.

The study uses a large global sample that includes all (59,172) firm-year observations having CSR-related data in the Thomson Reuters Eikon database for a period between 2002 and 2019. The empirical analyses are based on random-effects logistic panel regression and Hayes methodology for the moderation analysis.

The study finds that audit committee independence and expertise are significantly associated with CSR reporting, CSR report assurance and GRI framework adoption. Moderation analysis largely supports the existence of a substitution role between audit and CSR committees and implies that audit committees are significant predictors of CSR reporting, assurance and GRI framework adoption mostly in the absence of the CSR committee.

The findings propose audit committee members be extra-vigilant in CSR reporting and assurance practices arising from undertaking substitution roles with the CSR committee. Hence, firms may configure their corporate structure in line with the results such as augmenting the audit committee with independent and expert members if they do not constitute a CSR committee. If firms establish a CSR committee, audit committee members may allocate less time to CSR reporting and assurance and more time to financial reporting quality.

This is the first study, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, to investigate the direct and indirect effect of audit committees’ attributes not only on CSR disclosure but also on GRI implementation and CSR reporting external assurance, considering the CSR committee’s possible substitutability or complementarity moderating role. This research develops a deeper understanding of audit committees’ non-financial role.

This paper reviews the field of internal auditing (IA) post-Enron to develop insights into how IA research has developed, offer a critique of the research to date and identify ways that future research can help to advance IA.

A structured literature review (SLR) was used to analyse 471 papers from 64 journals published between 2005 and 2018 based on a number of criteria, namely author, journal type, journal location, year, theme, theory, nature of research, research setting, regional focus, method and citations.

The IA literature has not significantly contributed to knowledge of the internal audit function (IAF), and one still knows relatively little about the factors that contribute to making the impact of IA practice effective and measurable. The IA literature is US-dominated (authors and journals), focussed on the American context (publicly listed companies), reliant on positivist analyses and largely makes no explicit reference to theory. Central regions (emerging economies) and key organisational settings (private SMEs and not-for-profit organisations) are largely absent in prior IA research. This paper evaluates and identifies avenues through which future research can help to advance IA in order to address emerging challenges in the field.

This is the first comprehensive review to analyse IA research in the post-Enron period (2005–2018). The findings are relevant to researchers who are looking for appropriate research outlets and emerging scholars who wish to identify their own research directions.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a conceptual framework that helps to investigate how the internal audit function (IAF) responds to both the introduction of the control logic of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems, and corporate governance’s (CG) institutional pressures. Furthermore, the paper aims to articulate the concurrence between the external pressures of CG and internal control logic of ERP systems.

The paper presents a review of the normative literature pertaining to the increase in significance of CG in the light of the worldwide economic crisis. The paper highlights a literature gap related to the lack of studies focusing on the impact of ERP systems implementation on the IAF practices.

The authors articulate institutional theory to formulate a conceptual framework that explains the reciprocal interplay between the macro external governance pressures, micro internal institutional logics inscribed in the ERP systems and their effect on IAF practices and structure within organisations.

The paper is conceptual in nature and therefore the proposed framework will be subsequently validated using a qualitative research approach in future research.

The conceptual framework would offer the internal auditors some strategies for enabling adaptation to the different internal and external pressures. Also the paper provides a platform for research community to investigate the influence of CG and ERP systems implementation on IAF adaptation.

The paper provides a clearer articulation of the various constructs that affect the IAF, which has gained great attention for assuring good CG.