2008•Corporate Governance An International ReviewOpen access

Institutions and Voluntary Compliance: The Disclosure of Individual Executive Pay in Germany

Amon Chizema

Open full text 92 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Manuscript Type: Empirical Research Question/Issue: This study seeks to understand why the disclosure of individual executive compensation, as recommended by the German Code of Corporate Governance, met with resistance in some firms while being a welcome innovation for others. Employing the theoretical perspective of institutional inertia and change, this paper identifies the characteristics of a firm likely to embrace or resist a management practice imported from an Anglo‐American system of corporate governance. Research Findings/Results: Using data on large German firms for the years 2002 through 2005, the study shows that institutional ownership, dispersed ownership, state ownership, prior adoption of shareholder value‐oriented practices, and firm size are positively and significantly associated with the disclosure of individual executive compensation. On the other hand, the size of the supervisory board and firm age are negatively and significantly associated with individual disclosure of executive compensation. Theoretical Implications: This study provides empirical support for the institutional inertia or change perspective at the national level for the adoption of contested management practices, taken from the Anglo‐American system and translated to the German model. As such, it adds to the argument on convergence/divergence in comparative corporate governance literature, as well as support for the neo‐institutional perspective in helping to further understand institutional change. Practical Implications: This study offers insights to policy makers who aim to create an institutional environment that accepts corporate governance practices translated or negotiated from a different variety of capitalism. In addition, it provides a useful synthesis of the relevance and effectiveness of codes of corporate governance, thus helping policy makers to recommend continuation with the current elements of the code or to make such provisions compulsory.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

ABSTRACT Manuscript Type: Empirical Research Question/Issue: This study seeks to understand why the disclosure of individual executive compensation, as recommended by the German Code of Corporate Governance, met with resistance in some firms while being a welcome innovation for others. Employing the theoretical perspective of institutional inertia and change, this paper identifies the characteristics of a firm likely to embrace or resist a management practice imported from an Anglo‐American system of corporate governance. Research Findings/Results: Using data on large German firms for the years 2002 through 2005, the study shows that institutional ownership, dispersed ownership, state ownership, prior adoption of shareholder value‐oriented practices, and firm size are positively and significantly associated with the disclosure of individual executive compensation. On the other hand, the size of the supervisory board and firm age are negatively and significantly associated with individual disclosure of executive compensation. Theoretical Implications: This study provides empirical support for the institutional inertia or change perspective at the national level for the adoption of contested management practices, taken from the Anglo‐American system and translated to the German model. As such, it adds to the argument on convergence/divergence in comparative corporate governance literature, as well as support for the neo‐institutional perspective in helping to further understand institutional change. Practical Implications: This study offers insights to policy makers who aim to create an institutional environment that accepts corporate governance practices translated or negotiated from a different variety of capitalism. In addition, it provides a useful synthesis of the relevance and effectiveness of codes of corporate governance, thus helping policy makers to recommend continuation with the current elements of the code or to make such provisions compulsory.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 92 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

ABSTRACT Manuscript Type: Empirical Research Question/Issue: This study seeks to understand why the disclosure of individual executive compensation, as recommended by the German Code of Corporate Governance, met with resistance in some firms while being a welcome innovation for others. Employing the theoretical perspective of institutional inertia and change, this paper identifies the characteristics of a firm likely to embrace or resist a management practice imported from an Anglo‐American system of corporate governance. Research Findings/Results: Using data on large German firms for the years 2002 through 2005, the study shows that institutional ownership, dispersed ownership, state ownership, prior adoption of shareholder value‐oriented practices, and firm size are positively and significantly associated with the disclosure of individual executive compensation. On the other hand, the size of the supervisory board and firm age are negatively and significantly associated with individual disclosure of executive compensation. Theoretical Implications: This study provides empirical support for the institutional inertia or change perspective at the national level for the adoption of contested management practices, taken from the Anglo‐American system and translated to the German model. As such, it adds to the argument on convergence/divergence in comparative corporate governance literature, as well as support for the neo‐institutional perspective in helping to further understand institutional change. Practical Implications: This study offers insights to policy makers who aim to create an institutional environment that accepts corporate governance practices translated or negotiated from a different variety of capitalism. In addition, it provides a useful synthesis of the relevance and effectiveness of codes of corporate governance, thus helping policy makers to recommend continuation with the current elements of the code or to make such provisions compulsory.

Key concepts: Corporate governance, Accounting, German model, Executive compensation, Business, German, Argument (complex analysis), Empirical research

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Institutions and Voluntary Compliance: The Disclosure of Individual Executive Pay in Germany — Research Paper | ScholarLens