The motivation of firms seeking for optimum corporate governance score : evidence from listed companies in Thailand | |
| Author | Sutee Tantivanichanon |
| Call Number | AIT Diss no. DBA-SOM-15-05 |
| Subject(s) | Business enterprises -- Thailand Corporate governance-- Thailand |
| Note | A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Business Administration, School of Management |
| Publisher | Asian Institute of Technology |
| Abstract | The quality of corporate governance (CG) is currently important and interesting to listed companies. Most firms try to use CG as a control mechanism to monitor their management, board and firm performance. With this in mind, those firms also employ their optimum corporate governance score (CGS) obtaining benefits from their investment and trade-off what they can retrieve in reciprocals. However, there is rare previous research concerning to those points. In this thesis, we have initially conducted three preliminarily empirical studies from the CFOs’ forum, the pilot case and forty-listed companies to set the questions whether the dimensions of firm’s motivation is relevant, and to analyze the real motivation that influence those Thai-listed companies in seeking the uttermost CG. From the findings of these studies, we find the motivation’s measurement is presently disguised in the forms of firm compositions. Those compositions are defined to investigate the relationship between firms’ compositions and CGS. We have refined dimensions of research framework and designed hypothesis of testing by using overall data collection of 502 companies from the 2010 Stock Exchange Database and conducted CGS by using Ananchotikul scoring as dependent variable and using factor analysis to extract the relevant 29 out of 35 determinants as independent variables. The scope of analysis is defined to investigate in six panels; (1) the relationship between CGS and firm compositions (2) the difference of firm compositions’ mean among CGS rankings (3) the difference of mean of CGS among types of ownership (4) the difference of mean of CGS among sizes of asset (5) the difference of mean of CGS among types of industries and (6) the difference of mean of CGS between Non-issuing and Issuing bond companies. We have used statistic techniques such as Multiple Regression Analysis, ANOVA and t-testing to analyze data settings for those six panels. Based on three preliminary empirical studies, we can conclude that listed companies enjoy the optimal quality of CG with many reasons; (1) cost of debts reduction (2) perform the incremental of firm profitability (3) encourage firm value and stock price and (4) create the confidence of insiders and trust of outsiders. In practice, firms try to trade-off the costinvestment of CG quality in exchanging with the benefits. In order to prove the linkage, we have performed the statistic testing and explore results that (a) there are five determinants that are positively related to CGS, two determinants negatively related to CGS, and three determinants are irrelevant. (b) Size of firm is positively related to CGS. Mean of CGS among sizes of asset is totally different; firm with vary-large size of asset has the highest CGS, following to large size, and medium size and small size. (c) Degree of ownership is positively related to CGS, state enterprise has the highest CGS, following to public company, private company and family business, as mean of private company is equity to family business. (d) Type of industries is positively related to CGS. There are six different patterns of the difference of mean of CGS among types of industries. Finance section has the highest CGS, followed by resource, technology, service, property & construction, agriculture & food, manufacturing, SME, and consumer product. (e) Mean of CGS of bond-issuing companies is significantly different and greater than those non bond-issuing companies. These findings can draw a generalization that some determinants may affect corporate governance score, and may broadly predict the quality corporate governance. |
| Year | 2015 |
| Type | Dissertation |
| School | School of Management (SOM) |
| Department | Other Field of Studies (No Department) |
| Academic Program/FoS | Doctor of Philosophy in Business Administration (Publication code = DBA-SM, SM) |
| Examination Committee(s) | Winai Wongsurawat;Donyaprueth Krairit;Chotchai Charoenngam;Vatcharapol Sukhotu; |