Search results

This paper makes the first attempt to provide a new analytical framework for research on the evolution of China's corporate governance models. The purpose of this paper is to investigate developmental corporate governance mechanisms in China the over past decades from a synthetic and dynamic analytical viewpoint.

This is a conceptual paper.

The evolution of corporate governance from an administrative to an economic model in China was not a smooth process and was confronted with various unavoidable institutional and ideological obstacles. Consequently, the transition of governance models has demonstrated the following four salient characteristics: gradualism, dualism, systematization and path dependency.

This paper makes the first attempt to provide a new analytical framework for research on the evolution of China's corporate governance models.

This chapter aims to investigate the driving forces in the creation of knowledge and in the process of innovation and the relevance of the governance model with respect to the free market model or the government model in the regulation of the knowledge and innovation networks.

According to a cognitive approach, a conflict is the result of a closer spatial distance between two actors or firms, leading to a contact stimulus and a reciprocal stimulus, which is perceived as a threat for the respective security or identity. This occurs when the two considered parties are characterised by a too large cognitive distance or a too different mindset or culture, which hinders collaboration.

This chapter highlights that the fragmentation of a modern knowledge economy and the pervasive conflicts between various interest groups, conflicts of interests in the roles of the same actors, bottlenecks, rents and income and power disparity in society require a new form of regulation, that is, multi-level governance and new instruments in innovation policies.

The governance or partnership model is based on the principles of negotiation, exchange and consensus, which are different from the principle of authority as in the planning model and from the principle of competition and survival of the fittest as in the free market model. Governance is an approach to the industrial policy that is more suitable to steer or manage a modern capitalist system and the knowledge and innovation networks that characterise this system.

This review paper aims to compare the various dimensions in the finance literature pertaining to the Anglo-Saxon Model (Stockholder Model) prevalent in the USA and the UK with the German Model (Stakeholder Model) of corporate governance prevalent in Germany and continental Europe. The present study identifies different strands of research on the various dimensions of these models, along with aspects of governance in emerging economies and the phenomenon of the convergence of these governance mechanisms.

The literature review on corporate governance models has been carried out on the themes of internal and external governance mechanisms. The review considers agency theory along with principal–principal (PP) conflicts as the fundamental blocks explaining the need for governance structures.

The traditional models of governance, along with the incorporation of PP conflicts, will result in a hybrid model inculcating the best of both the traditional models. However, convergence in the true sense may not be possible owing to fundamental differences pertaining to cultural, economic, legal and socio-economic aspects of the firm.

This paper proposes a framework incorporating the interplay of managerial talent and controlling shareholders to understand the governance system that may be applicable for firms in emerging economies.

The purpose of this paper is to propose an approach for managing relevant factors and activities for implementing data governance in an organization. The process of assessing the establishment of data governance in an organization is intrinsically imprecise, due to the characteristics of new problem settings, particularly in relation to newly generated alternatives or vaguely defined qualitative assessment criteria.

To reject the inherent subjectiveness and imprecision involved in the evaluation process, the authors use the concept of fuzzy logic in this approach for developing the assessment model and analyzing the model for allocating the management efforts in the most efficient way to improve the data governance deployment level.

This paper identifies relevant factors and activities for implementing data governance in an organization and evaluates the state of data governance based on causal relationships between influential factors. In this study, factors are prioritized for effective allocation of limited management efforts in any improvement plan.

The interrelationships among factors are contextual and based on the perceptions of experts who may be biased as per their background and area of expertise. Meanwhile, lack of a data governance plan may cause failure during its implementation in an organization, as the worth of an organization's data will not be determined precisely. The paper has tremendous practical implications for organizations that intend to implement the data governance program and evaluate its state to design an improvement plan.

The paper proposes an approach for implementing data governance in an organization faced with limited resources for improvement.

In this study, we develop further understanding of how institutional change is created within a mature and local industry. In this pursuit, we examine how a collaborative large project governance model was institutionalized at an industrial sector-level through both industry-level activities and “institutional projects”.

This study builds on the foundations of institutional fields and institutional change, suggesting that projects are not only shaped by their contexts but also produce institutional change themselves. We conducted extensive fieldwork on the institutionalization of a collaborative project governance model in Finland.

The findings illustrate how institutional change in governance of large and complex inter-organizational projects is created at the institutional field level. The institutionalized collaborative project governance model includes aspects of both relational and contractual governance. The change was facilitated by temporal links between the institutional projects as well as vertical links between the institutional projects and the field-level development programs.

This is one of the first studies to address how a collaborative large project governance model becomes the norm at the institutional field level beyond the boundaries of an individual project or organization.

While there has been some convergence in corporate governance codes and securities regulations across the European Union (EU), the remaining areas of divergence are the most contentious as they reflect differences in fundamental societal norms and values. I propose that using the multinational corporation as the referent unit of analysis yields a means for making a qualitative distinction between the two regimes. I suggest that at least for firms with EU‐wide scope, certain critical elements of the German model may be more appropriate, as the neoclassical justifications of the Anglo‐American model are less reliable in such a setting.

This paper wades through the extant corporate governance literature and identifies the existence of four different governance models in practice. Though market‐centric and relationship‐based models have been widely discussed in corporate governance literature, a dearth of two other governance models viz., transition and emerging governance models have not been extensively covered. This paper tries to identify the existence of the transition governance model and also a new governance model that is emerging in some developing countries. An attempt has been made to narrate the way all the four governance models function in different economies, and assumes that understanding the governance quadrilateral would be a pre‐requisite for understanding global corporate governance.

The aim of the present study is to identify the prevalent model of social enterprise governance in South Korea by empirically testing five conceptual models. Theoretical and empirical research on the governance of social enterprises have grown considerably in the past decade, centred primarily on the UK, Europe and the USA. Whilst some articles have discussed the role and growth of social enterprises in Asia, the empirical evidence remains scant, particularly in relation to empirical studies of social enterprise governance in South Korea.

Drawing upon established literature on social enterprise governance, we empirically tested five conceptual models on a sample of 69 South Korean social enterprises collected through an online survey to identify the prevalent model of governance. Such models were found unable to fully explain governance processes observed. Thus, the authors used an innovative statistical technique, latent class analysis, which identifies clusters of associations between key governance variables.

This exercise revealed two opposite models, centralising and interdependent. The latter represent an interesting shift towards widening forms of participation in governance processes in South Korea.

The sample is small and only limited to some social enterprise types. More research needs to be done on larger samples including the growing South Korean co-operative sector.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first published data available on the governance of South Korean social enterprises and the analysis used to identify governance models (i.e. latent class analysis) is novel.

Since enacting Act 8630/93, Brazilian port activities have been going through significant modifications, changing from the public port service management to the landlord model. Act 12815/2013 enforced a new regulatory framework increasing Port Authorities' dependence on the Federal Government. Since 2019, the Government has attempted to elaborate a Port Authorities' identity based on the private port governance model inspired by the Australian and United Kingdom ones. This paper assesses Brazilian's Port Authorities management models from 1993 to 2020 and considers the Australian, the United Kingdom and Antwerp port governance models as benchmarks.

This paper adopts a two-step methodological approach, namely a combined desk and field research methodological approach and considers three essential resources: government legislative acts and published data available online; ports' data and information issued by governments' agencies, academic papers and national and international ports' websites; and a semi-structured questionnaire survey targeting the leading associations representing port users, foreign trade and stevedoring companies.

The outcome shows that the solutions to overcome the existing Brazilian Port Authority governance problems remain in the Federal Government's hands by (1) removing its control through bureaucracy, (2) preventing the party-political influence following in the public ports and (3) decentralising port management by chief executive officers named by Port Authority Councils.

This paper does not explore the regulatory frameworks underlying the “Lease Terminal” and “Private User Terminal”.

This paper assesses the management models that led Brazilian's Port Authorities from 1993 to 2020, comparing them with the UK and Australian private service port and Antwerp landlord model.

Large companies are the dominant forms of wealth creation in society today. As well as providing jobs and export income, they are key influences on social cohesion. We ignore how companies are run at a peril to us all. However, today investors are increasingly concerned about the ethical behaviour of those who run companies. Regular disclosures that directors and executives have behaved unethically reflect badly on the corporate sector as a vehicle for investor funds. By comparison, Australian company directors are increasingly stating that there is already too much concentration on the mechanisms of corporate governance, indicating that they will happily tick the boxes, but do little more.

In the latter part of the 20th century, companies discovered mission. The key elements of any mission must include the major corporate participants – investors, suppliers, customers, employees and society. The role of management is to develop a structure that can operationalise the mission. Such an approach puts ethics – how we treat other people – at the core of a company's activities. Trust is a critical element in how the interests of these stakeholders are taken up in decision-making and embedded in strategy, plans and action on the ground.

In the aftermath of significant corporate collapses in the 1980s and then again at the start of this century, companies also discovered corporate governance. According to the much referenced Cadbury Committee in the U.K., corporate governance is the system by which companies are directed and controlled, i.e., a the system of checks and balances for effective resolution of conflicts and control over the exercise of managerial power.

This paper suggests that an alternative “professional” approach to governance is likely to be more effective. Today, the role of management is to “add value” and contribute to the “good” of society. This good is the collective set of stakeholder interests entrusted to the governing board to look after. A governance model that integrates the human good with the operations of ‘mind’ in terms of learning and leadership highlights eight distinctive “products,” the eighth being valued products and by-products delivered to each stakeholder. The model is structured around the person's capacity to ask four categories of questions, including those that provide orientation and direction.

The model is used to examine a contemporary governance issue experienced by the board of directors at the National Australia Bank Limited.