Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 236

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Governance Bundles, Firm Performance, and the Substitutability and Complementarity of Governance Mechanisms

Ward, Andrew J., Brown, Jill A., Rodriguez, Dan·2009·Corporate Governance: An International Review

Abstract

Manuscript Type: Conceptual Research Question/Issue: This paper extends the theory of bundles of corporate governance mechanisms to address agency issues within the Anglo‐Saxon system of corporate governance. The focus of our study is to detail the role of firm performance as a key determinant of how the governance mechanisms of monitoring and incentive alignment serve as complements or substitutes in addressing agency issues. Previous research has looked at these mechanisms in isolation from each other, with limited regard for the contingencies of firm performance and external monitoring. We propose that it is best to look at these mechanisms as a bundle of mechanisms to protect shareholder interests, and that firm performance is a key determinant of the composition of this bundle. Research Findings/Insights: We introduce firm performance as a critical contingency that heightens shareholders' concerns over governance issues as they seek to retain control over adverse selection and moral hazard problems. We propose that when firms are performing poorly, outside monitoring by institutional investors can complement internal monitoring by boards of directors. Theoretical/Academic Implications: We examine governance bundles under both agency and stewardship theoretical lenses to tie together previous empirical research and advance theory. In specifying the role of firm performance in determining the mix of mechanisms within the governance bundle, we reconcile prior disparate findings as to whether or not these governance mechanisms act in a complementary or substitutable fashion. Practitioner/Policy Implications: The conceptualization of these governance mechanisms has practitioner merit in analyzing the challenges that board members face managing agency conflicts through the mix of governance mechanisms, given different levels of firm performance. Our research also shows that, under conditions of poor performance, shareholders can provide effective external monitoring that can improve the overall governance effectiveness of the firm.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-8683.2009.00766.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 236

Metadata

Authors
Ward, A. J., Brown, J. A., & Rodriguez, D.
Venue
Corporate Governance: An International Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-09
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
646-660
ISSN
  • 0964-8410 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8683
OpenAlex
W2001672374
Cited by
236
References
4
FWCI
20.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Governance Bundles, Firm Performance, and the Substitutability and Complementarity of Governance Mechanisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2009.00766.x
The paper
Ward, A. J., Brown, J. A., & Rodriguez, D. (2009). Governance Bundles, Firm Performance, and the Substitutability and Complementarity of Governance Mechanisms. Corporate Governance: An International Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2009.00766.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.