Search results

The purpose of this study is to present a quality improvement approach titled “Picture-Understanding-Action” used in Ireland to enhance the role of healthcare boards in the oversight of healthcare quality and its improvement.

The novel and practical “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach was implemented using the Model for Improvement to iteratively introduce changes across three quality improvement projects. This approach outlines the concepts and activities used at each step to support planning and implementation of processes that allow a board to effectively achieve its role in overseeing and improving quality. This approach matured over three quality improvement projects.

The “Picture” included quantitative and qualitative aspects. The quantitative “Picture” consisted of a quality dashboard/profile of board selected outcome indicators representative of the health system using statistical process control (SPC) charts to focus discussion on real signals of change. The qualitative picture was based on the experience of people who use and work in health services which “people-ised” the numbers. Probing this “Picture” with collective grounding, curiosity and expert training/facilitation developed a shared “Understanding”. This led to “Action(s)” from board members to improve the “Picture” and “Understanding” (feedback action), to ask better questions and make better decisions and recommendations to the executive (feed-forward action). The Model for Improvement, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles and a co-design approach in design and implementation were key to success.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first time a board has undertaken a quality improvement (QI) project to enhance its own processes. It addresses a gap in research by outlining actions that boards can take to improve their oversight of quality of care.

Reaching decisions in a deliberative manner is of utmost importance for boards, as their decision-making impacts entire organisations. The current study aims to investigate (1) the quality of group decisions made by board members, (2) their confidence in, satisfaction with, and reflection on the decision-making, and (3) the effect of two discussion procedures on objective decision quality and subjective evaluations of the decision-making.

Board members of various Dutch non-profit organisations (N = 141) participated in a group decision-making task and a brief questionnaire. According to the hidden-profile paradigm, information was asymmetrically distributed among group members and should have been pooled to reach the objectively best decision. Half of the groups received one of two discussion procedures (i.e. advocacy decision or decisional balance sheet), while the other half received none.

Only a fifth of the groups successfully chose the best decision alternative. The initial majority preference strongly influenced the decision, which indicates that discussion was irrelevant to the outcome. Nevertheless, board members were satisfied with their decision-making. Using a discussion procedure enhanced participants' perception that they adequately weighed the pros and cons, but did not improve objective decision quality or other aspects of the subjective evaluation. These findings suggest that board members are unaware of their biased decision-making, which might hinder improvement.

Rather than using student samples, this study was the first to have board members participating in a hidden-profile task.

This study aims to examine whether and how gender diversity on corporate boards is associated with voluntary nonfinancial disclosures, particularly water disclosures.

This study uses corporate water information disclosure data from Chinese listed firms between 2010 and 2018 to conduct regression analyses to examine the association between female directors and water information disclosure.

Empirical results show that female directors have a significantly positive association with corporate water information disclosure. Additionally, internal industry water sensitivity of firms moderates this significant relationship.

This study determined that female directors can promote not only water disclosure but also positive corporate water performance, reflecting the consistency of words and deeds of female directors in voluntary nonfinancial disclosures.

This paper describes a quality improvement project to improve oversight of quality at national board level using statistical process control (SPC) methods, complimented by a qualitative experience of patients and frontline staff. It demonstrates the application of the “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach and shares the lessons learnt.

Using co-design and applying the “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach, the project team supported the directors of the Irish health system to identify and test a qualitative and quantitative picture of the quality of care across the health system. A “Quality Profile” consisting of quantitative indicators, analysed using SPC methods was used to provide an overview of the “critical few” indicators across health and social care. Patient and front-line staff experiences added depth and context to the data. These methods were tested and evolved over the course of six meetings, leading to quality of care being prioritised and interrogated at board level.

This project resulted in the integration of quality as a substantive and prioritised agenda item. Using best practice SPC methods with associated training produced better understanding of performance of the system. In addition, bringing patient and staff experiences of quality to the forefront “people-ised” the data.

The application of the “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach facilitated the development of a co-designed quality agenda item. This is a novel process that shifted the focus from “providing” information to co-designing fit-for-purpose information at board level.

Managers must make numerous strategic decisions in order to initiate and implement a business model innovation (BMI). This paper examines how managers perceive the management team interacts when making BMI decisions. The paper also investigates how group biases and board members’ risk willingness affect this process.

Empirical data were collected through 26 in-depth interviews with German managing directors from 13 companies in four industries (mobility, manufacturing, healthcare and energy) to explore three research questions: (1) What group effects are prevalent in BMI group decision-making? (2) What are the key characteristics of BMI group decisions? And (3) what are the potential relationships between BMI group decision-making and managers' risk willingness? A thematic analysis based on Gioia's guidelines was conducted to identify themes in the comprehensive dataset.

First, the results show four typical group biases in BMI group decisions: Groupthink, social influence, hidden profile and group polarization. Findings show that the hidden profile paradigm and groupthink theory are essential in the context of BMI decisions. Second, we developed a BMI decision matrix, including the following key characteristics of BMI group decision-making managerial cohesion, conflict readiness and information- and emotion-based decision behavior. Third, in contrast to previous literature, we found that individual risk aversion can improve the quality of BMI decisions.

This paper provides managers with an opportunity to become aware of group biases that may impede their strategic BMI decisions. Specifically, it points out that managers should consider the key cognitive constraints due to their interactions when making BMI decisions. This work also highlights the importance of risk-averse decision-makers on boards.

This qualitative study contributes to the literature on decision-making by revealing key cognitive group biases in strategic decision-making. This study also enriches the behavioral science research stream of the BMI literature by attributing a critical influence on the quality of BMI decisions to managers' group interactions. In addition, this article provides new perspectives on managers' risk aversion in strategic decision-making.

This study aims to provide a comparative portrait of the profile of men and women in the boardrooms of listed companies (Euronext Lisbon, Portugal) during the first stage of the gender quota law, by comparing the profile of those board members appointed before the mandated quota law and those appointed after it. This study also seeks to contribute to a critical review of the main reservations expressed by some core institutional actors, who initially voiced their concern that it might be difficult to find women in equal conditions to men in terms of their cumulative experience and qualifications to serve as board members.

In addition to providing a comparative descriptive analysis of male and female board members’ profiles before and after the mandated gender quota law, an aggregate professional endowments measure (professional endowments Index) is also calculated.

The research findings show that, in the first stage of the quota law, men and women appointed as board members after the mandated gender quota law are fundamentally similar in their professional attributes, forming a more homogeneous boardroom than those holding board positions before it.

This study contributes to the literature on the profile of the men and women serving on the publicly listed company boards in Portugal, by comparing their profiles before and after the mandated gender quota law. This study also fills a gap in the literature, as studies about gender quotas and corporate boards relating to Portugal and Southern European countries in general are still relatively scant. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study carried out into the gender quota law on corporate boards in Portugal.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent of voluntary disclosures in UK higher education institutions’ (HEIs) annual reports and examine whether internal governance structures influence disclosure in the period following major reform and funding constraints.

The authors adopt a modified version of Coy and Dixon’s (2004) public accountability index, referred to in this paper as a public accountability and transparency index (PATI), to measure the extent of voluntary disclosures in 130 UK HEIs’ annual reports. Informed by a multi-theoretical framework drawn from public accountability, legitimacy, resource dependence and stakeholder perspectives, the authors propose that the characteristics of governing and executive structures in UK universities influence the extent of their voluntary disclosures.

The authors find a large degree of variability in the level of voluntary disclosures by universities and an overall relatively low level of PATI (44 per cent), particularly with regards to the disclosure of teaching/research outcomes. The authors also find that audit committee quality, governing board diversity, governor independence and the presence of a governance committee are associated with the level of disclosure. Finally, the authors find that the interaction between executive team characteristics and governance variables enhances the level of voluntary disclosures, thereby providing support for the continued relevance of a “shared” leadership in the HEIs’ sector towards enhancing accountability and transparency in HEIs.

In spite of significant funding cuts, regulatory reforms and competitive challenges, the level of voluntary disclosure by UK HEIs remains low. Whilst the role of selected governance mechanisms and “shared leadership” in improving disclosure, is asserted, the varying level and selective basis of the disclosures across the surveyed HEIs suggest that the public accountability motive is weaker relative to the other motives underpinned by stakeholder, legitimacy and resource dependence perspectives.

This is the first study which explores the association between HEI governance structures, managerial characteristics and the level of disclosure in UK HEIs.

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether corporate governance characteristics impact the voluntary disclosure of carbon emissions.

This empirical research was carried out in two stages. Initially, the carbon disclosures data were sourced from the annual and stand-alone sustainability reports of Turkish non-financial companies listed on Borsa Istanbul during 2011-2015. Later, the corporate governance characteristics that influence carbon disclosures were examined using panel data regression models.

The empirical findings of this study suggested that entities with a higher number of independent directors on their boards were more likely to respond to the Carbon Disclosure Project. In addition, board nationality diversity and the existence of a sustainability committee had a significant positive impact on the propensity to disclose carbon emissions and the extent of those disclosures.

This research provides empirical evidence of the determinants of carbon emission disclosures, which could be useful for organizations and regulatory bodies. Such an understanding is crucial to specify necessary policies that will provide emission reduction practices and policies for entities. This paper fills some of the gap in the literature by concentrating on the association between corporate governance characteristics and disclosures of a more specific environmental issue, being carbon emissions.

This study investigates the relationship between the Chief Executive Officer's (CEO) overconfidence and financial reporting complexity in Iran, a context characterized by weak corporate governance and heightened managerial discretion.

The sample consists of 1,445 firm-year observations from 2010 to 2021. CEO overconfidence (CEOOC) is evaluated using an investment-based index, specifically capital expenditures. Financial reporting complexity (Complexity) is measured through textual features, particularly three readability measures (Fog, SMOG and ARI) extracted from annual financial statements. The ordinary least squares (OLS) regression is employed to test the research hypothesis.

Results suggest that CEOOC is positively related to Complexity, leading to reduced readability. Additionally, robustness analyses demonstrate that the relationship between CEOOC and Complexity is more distinct and significant for firms with lower profitability than those with higher profitability. This implies that overconfident CEOs in underperforming firms tend to increase complexity. Also, firms with better financial performance present a more positive tone in their annual financial statements, reflecting their superior performance. The findings remain robust to alternative measures of CEOOC and Complexity and are consistent after accounting for endogeneity issues using firm fixed-effects, propensity score matching (PSM), entropy balancing approach and instrumental variables method.

This study adds to the literature by delving into the effect of CEOs' overconfidence on financial reporting complexity, a facet not thoroughly investigated in prior studies. The paper pioneers the use of textual analysis techniques on Persian texts, marking a unique approach in financial reporting and a first for the Persian language. However, due to the inherent challenges of text mining and feature extraction, the results should be approached with caution.

The insights from this study can guide investors in understanding the potential repercussions of CEOOC on financial reporting complexity. This will assist them in making informed investment decisions and monitoring the financial reporting practices of their invested companies. Policymakers and regulators can also reference this research when formulating policies to enhance financial reporting quality and ensure capital market transparency. The innovative application of textual analysis in this study might spur further research in other languages and contexts.

This research stands as the inaugural study to explore the relationship between CEOs' overconfidence and financial reporting complexity in both developed and developing capital markets. It thereby broadens the extant literature to include diverse capital market environments.

This study aims to investigate the effect of media coverage, negative media tone and the interaction between negative media tone and independent non-executive directors (INEDs) on strategic information disclosure (SD).

The authors rely on media agenda-setting theory, agency theory and a panel data set of 52 UAE non-financial listed firms from 2009 to 2016. Multivariate regressions examine the effect of media coverage and negative media tone on SD and examine the moderation of INEDs on the effect of negative media tone on SD while controlling for firm size, board size, board meeting frequency, firm profitability and leverage.

The results show that negative media tone has a negative effect on SD, and there is no association between media coverage and SD. The results show that INEDs are negatively associated with SD and have a negative moderating effect on the negative media tone–SD relationship. INEDs follow a conservative approach, encouraging less SD when their firms face negative media tone.

The authors measured media coverage and negative media tone by the number of news articles. In the robustness test, they use media tone score. They measured SD using an index that captures firm strategy dimensions. Though these measures are inherently subjective, they were used to measure variation in media coverage, media tone and SD across listed UAE non-financial firms. Mitigation of subjectivity was achieved through rigorous cross-checking measurements.

Findings assist UAE policymakers and the international business community with insights related to articulation of media to SD and INEDs’ role in moderating the effect of media on SD.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that combines media agenda-setting theory with agency theory and SD in an emerging market economy (the UAE). The study is also among the few studies that illustrate the possible role of INEDs under different media tones in emerging markets.