{"title":"‘When in Rome, do as the Romans do’? A call for more context sensitive research on boards of directors","authors":"Jonas Gabrielsson, Wafa Khlif, S. Yamak","doi":"10.4337/9781786439758.00006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Boards of directors have been the focus of many studies in the last few decades. A convergence to the Anglo-American corporate governance system has long been emphasised within this stream of research and by transnational organisations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD; Clarke, 2017). The convergent system has dominating features such as ‘outsider’ control of management by investors, a focus on shareholders as the main beneficiary of business returns and calls for independent directors that can monitor managerial behaviour and firm performance (e.g., Thomsen, 2003; Toms and Wright, 2005; Goergen et al., 2008). However, in recent years we are witnessing a growing number of studies that investigate the particularities of the context and its consequences for boards of directors. For example, rising concerns about climate change and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in many parts of the world affect conceptions and expectations about the social contract of corporations and to whom board members are responsible (e.g., Mackenzie, 2007; Prado-Lorenzo and Garcia-Sanchez, 2010; Michelon and Parbonetti, 2012). Moreover, contemporary issues such as economic protectionism, social turmoil and political instability in many countries across the world lead to strategic uncertainties and operational risks that companies and their boards must deal with (e.g., Ellstrand et al., 2002; Hillman, 2005; Kolb and Schwartz, 2009). In a recent study, Useem (2015) points to the rising complexity in company decisions since the millennium, which resulted in the reinforcement of governing boards to serve as partners in those decisions with the company top management team. This in turn shifts the emphasis from monitoring to a focus on company background and on how boards are organised and can collaborate with the executives. Therefore, an active attention on the changing dynamics of the boards is needed. Adding to this, the ongoing digital transformation of society is gradually spreading across industries, with a significant impact on workforce automation, employment relations and the strategising of boards (e.g., Bankewitz et al., 2016). Given these diverging and often conflicting occurrences, corporate governance systems and boards of directors are to be understood within historical, spatial, political and societal contexts (Huse, 2018), as these layers concurrently provide boundaries for the actions and behaviours of corporate governance actors and decision makers both inside and outside the boardroom (Aguilera et al., 2008; Yokishawa et al., 2014). Even if it is generally acknowledged in scholarly research that boards of directors are a context-bound phenomenon, we can observe that the understanding of the role of context in the academic literature on boards in many ways is limited. In part, this has to","PeriodicalId":385910,"journal":{"name":"Research Handbook on Boards of Directors","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Handbook on Boards of Directors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439758.00006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Boards of directors have been the focus of many studies in the last few decades. A convergence to the Anglo-American corporate governance system has long been emphasised within this stream of research and by transnational organisations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD; Clarke, 2017). The convergent system has dominating features such as ‘outsider’ control of management by investors, a focus on shareholders as the main beneficiary of business returns and calls for independent directors that can monitor managerial behaviour and firm performance (e.g., Thomsen, 2003; Toms and Wright, 2005; Goergen et al., 2008). However, in recent years we are witnessing a growing number of studies that investigate the particularities of the context and its consequences for boards of directors. For example, rising concerns about climate change and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in many parts of the world affect conceptions and expectations about the social contract of corporations and to whom board members are responsible (e.g., Mackenzie, 2007; Prado-Lorenzo and Garcia-Sanchez, 2010; Michelon and Parbonetti, 2012). Moreover, contemporary issues such as economic protectionism, social turmoil and political instability in many countries across the world lead to strategic uncertainties and operational risks that companies and their boards must deal with (e.g., Ellstrand et al., 2002; Hillman, 2005; Kolb and Schwartz, 2009). In a recent study, Useem (2015) points to the rising complexity in company decisions since the millennium, which resulted in the reinforcement of governing boards to serve as partners in those decisions with the company top management team. This in turn shifts the emphasis from monitoring to a focus on company background and on how boards are organised and can collaborate with the executives. Therefore, an active attention on the changing dynamics of the boards is needed. Adding to this, the ongoing digital transformation of society is gradually spreading across industries, with a significant impact on workforce automation, employment relations and the strategising of boards (e.g., Bankewitz et al., 2016). Given these diverging and often conflicting occurrences, corporate governance systems and boards of directors are to be understood within historical, spatial, political and societal contexts (Huse, 2018), as these layers concurrently provide boundaries for the actions and behaviours of corporate governance actors and decision makers both inside and outside the boardroom (Aguilera et al., 2008; Yokishawa et al., 2014). Even if it is generally acknowledged in scholarly research that boards of directors are a context-bound phenomenon, we can observe that the understanding of the role of context in the academic literature on boards in many ways is limited. In part, this has to
在过去的几十年里,董事会一直是许多研究的焦点。长期以来,这一研究流派以及经济合作与发展组织(OECD)等跨国组织一直强调与英美公司治理体系的趋同。克拉克,2017年)。趋同制度具有主导特征,如投资者对管理的“外部”控制,关注股东作为商业回报的主要受益者,并呼吁独立董事可以监督管理行为和公司绩效(例如,Thomsen, 2003;汤姆斯和赖特,2005;Goergen et al., 2008)。然而,近年来,我们看到越来越多的研究调查了背景的特殊性及其对董事会的影响。例如,在世界许多地方,对气候变化和企业社会责任(CSR)的日益关注影响了对企业社会契约的概念和期望,以及董事会成员对谁负责(例如,Mackenzie, 2007;普拉多-洛伦佐和加西亚-桑切斯,2010;Michelon and Parbonetti, 2012)。此外,世界上许多国家的经济保护主义、社会动荡和政治不稳定等当代问题导致了公司及其董事会必须应对的战略不确定性和运营风险(例如,Ellstrand et al., 2002;希尔曼,2005;科尔布和施瓦茨,2009)。在最近的一项研究中,Useem(2015)指出,自千禧年以来,公司决策的复杂性不断上升,这导致了管理委员会在与公司最高管理团队的决策中作为合作伙伴的加强。这反过来又将重点从监督转移到关注公司背景以及董事会如何组织以及如何与高管合作。因此,需要积极关注董事会不断变化的动态。除此之外,社会正在进行的数字化转型正逐渐蔓延到各个行业,对劳动力自动化、雇佣关系和董事会战略制定产生重大影响(例如,Bankewitz等人,2016年)。鉴于这些分歧和经常冲突的事件,公司治理系统和董事会必须在历史、空间、政治和社会背景下理解(house, 2018),因为这些层面同时为董事会内外的公司治理参与者和决策者的行动和行为提供了边界(Aguilera等人,2008;Yokishawa et al., 2014)。即使在学术研究中普遍承认董事会是一种情境约束现象,我们也可以观察到,在许多方面,关于董事会的学术文献中对情境作用的理解是有限的。在某种程度上,这是必须的