The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey

This study investigates the influence of the corporate governance structure on bank performance in Turkey. The framework of this study has been developed by agency theory .Finding of this study support this theory and decision making. Banking sector has seen strong competition and changes in custom...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Omer, Araz Mohammed Rashid
Format:	Thesis
Language:	eng eng
Published:	2011
Subjects:	HG Finance
Online Access:	https://etd.uum.edu.my/3229/1/ARAZ_MOHAMMED_RASHID_OMER.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/3229/2/1.ARAZ_MOHAMMED_RASHID_OMER.pdf
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	my-uum-etd.3229
record_format	uketd_dc
institution	Universiti Utara Malaysia
collection	UUM ETD
language	eng eng
advisor	Mahmood, Rosli
topic	HG Finance
spellingShingle	HG Finance Omer, Araz Mohammed Rashid The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey
description	This study investigates the influence of the corporate governance structure on bank performance in Turkey. The framework of this study has been developed by agency theory .Finding of this study support this theory and decision making. Banking sector has seen strong competition and changes in customer’s expectations over the last few years especially after the world economic slowdown.The importance and increasing attention of the corporate governance in financial institutions tends to be accredited to the socio-political changes that have been arisen. Therefore, evaluating banks’ performance and monitoring their financial positions are important to many parties, such as stockholders, potential investors, creditors, customers, employees, and regulators. The current study focuses on the relationship between stockholders and management, As well as, the research will investigate the banks which are listed in Istanbul stock exchange. Based on a sample of 33 banks listed on Istanbul stock exchange in Turkey over the period 2004 to 2010, this research investigates the influences of corporate governance structure on bank performance in Turkey. Four variables of corporate governance structures which are board size, CEO duality, CEO tenure, and audit committee size, were used in this study. Two measures of bank performance are considered which are returns on assets (ROA) and operating cash flow (OCF). In Turkish banks, the result showed that the corporate governance board size has a positive and significant influence on return on asset. Meanwhile, corporate governance CEO duality, CEO tuner, and size of audit committee had a negative influence with return on asset. In addition, corporate governance board size and CEO tuner had a negative influence on the operating cash flow. Meanwhile, corporate governance (CEO duality and audit committee size) had a positive influence on the operating cash flow. The results of the study are expected to contribute to literatures on bank performance to which knowledge was added, and to the practices of the banks management to make better decision to enhance the bank performance by incorporating the effects of corporate performance structure.
format	Thesis
qualification_name	masters
qualification_level	Master's degree
author	Omer, Araz Mohammed Rashid
author_facet	Omer, Araz Mohammed Rashid
author_sort	Omer, Araz Mohammed Rashid
title	The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey
title_short	The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey
title_full	The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey
title_fullStr	The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey
title_full_unstemmed	The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey
title_sort	influence of corporate governance structure on bank performance in turkey
granting_institution	Universiti Utara Malaysia
granting_department	Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business
publishDate	2011
url	https://etd.uum.edu.my/3229/1/ARAZ_MOHAMMED_RASHID_OMER.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/3229/2/1.ARAZ_MOHAMMED_RASHID_OMER.pdf
_version_	1747827526012502016
spelling	my-uum-etd.32292016-04-19T07:25:18Z The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey 2011-12-27 Omer, Araz Mohammed Rashid Mahmood, Rosli Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business HG Finance This study investigates the influence of the corporate governance structure on bank performance in Turkey. The framework of this study has been developed by agency theory .Finding of this study support this theory and decision making. Banking sector has seen strong competition and changes in customer’s expectations over the last few years especially after the world economic slowdown.The importance and increasing attention of the corporate governance in financial institutions tends to be accredited to the socio-political changes that have been arisen. Therefore, evaluating banks’ performance and monitoring their financial positions are important to many parties, such as stockholders, potential investors, creditors, customers, employees, and regulators. The current study focuses on the relationship between stockholders and management, As well as, the research will investigate the banks which are listed in Istanbul stock exchange. Based on a sample of 33 banks listed on Istanbul stock exchange in Turkey over the period 2004 to 2010, this research investigates the influences of corporate governance structure on bank performance in Turkey. Four variables of corporate governance structures which are board size, CEO duality, CEO tenure, and audit committee size, were used in this study. Two measures of bank performance are considered which are returns on assets (ROA) and operating cash flow (OCF). In Turkish banks, the result showed that the corporate governance board size has a positive and significant influence on return on asset. Meanwhile, corporate governance CEO duality, CEO tuner, and size of audit committee had a negative influence with return on asset. In addition, corporate governance board size and CEO tuner had a negative influence on the operating cash flow. Meanwhile, corporate governance (CEO duality and audit committee size) had a positive influence on the operating cash flow. The results of the study are expected to contribute to literatures on bank performance to which knowledge was added, and to the practices of the banks management to make better decision to enhance the bank performance by incorporating the effects of corporate performance structure. 2011-12 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/3229/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/3229/1/ARAZ_MOHAMMED_RASHID_OMER.pdf application/pdf eng validuser https://etd.uum.edu.my/3229/2/1.ARAZ_MOHAMMED_RASHID_OMER.pdf application/pdf eng public masters masters Universiti Utara Malaysia Abdelkarim,N., & Alawneh,S. (2009).The relationship between corporate governance and the performance of Palestinian firms: An empirical study. The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, 3(2), 105-120. Abdullah,A., & Page,M. (2009). Corporate governance and corporate performance: UK FTSE 350 companies, the Institute of chartered accountants of Scotland, Scotland. Adams,R.B., & Merhan,H. (2005).Corporate performance, board structure and its determinants in the banking industry. EFA 2005 Mosco Meeting. Agrawal,A., & Knoeber,C.R. (1996). Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3), 377-397. Aldamen,H., Duncan,K., Kelly,S., McNamara,R., & Nagel,S. (2011).Audit committee characteristics and firm performance during the global financial crisis. Accounting & Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand (AFAANZ), Darwin, Australia. Allgood,S., & Kathleen A.F. ( 2003). The match between CEO and firm. Journal of Business, 76, 317–341. Amran,N.Z., & Ahmad,A.J. (2010). Corporate governance mechanisms and performance: Analysis of Malaysian family and non-family controlled companies. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 6(2),1-15. Angur,M.G., Nataraajan,R., & Jahera,J.S. (1999). Service quality in the banking industry: an assessment in a developing economy. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 17, 116-23. Ararat,M., & Ugur M. (2002).Corporate governance in Turkey: An Overview and Some Policy Recommendations. Corporate Governance, 3(1), 58-75. Balic,A. (2007). Corporate governance, Turkish Transparency and Disclosure Survey 2007:Pace of Improvement Has Slowed. Available in www.standardandpoors.com/ratingsdirect, Last Accessed on August 5, 2007 Beasley,M. (1996). An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. Accounting Review, 71, 443–465. Bebchuk,L.A., & Jesse,M.F. (2004). Pay without Performance: The Unfulfilled Promise of Executive Compensation (forthcoming, MIT Press). Berge,L.A.AV. & Levrau,A. (2004). Evaluating Board of Directors: What constitutes a good corporate board?. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 12(4), 461-478. Berglof,F., & Thadden,E.L. (1991). The changing corporate governance paradigm: implication for transition and developing countries. Conferences paper, Annual world bank conferences on Development Economics, Washington D.C. Berle,A.A., & Means,G.C. (1932). The modern corporation and private property, New York. Macmillan. Bhagat,S., & Black,B. (2002). The non-correlation between board independence and long-term firm performance. Journal of corporation Law, 27(2), 231-274. Boyd,B.K., (1995). CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model. strategic management Journal, 16, 301-312. Bozec,R., & Dia,M. (2005). Board structure and firm technical efficiency: Evidence from Canadian state-owned enterprises, 19 June 2008, viewed on <http://www.isg.rnu.tn /MOPGP04/abstract/SessionB/B3/27.pdf>. Brickly,C., & Jarrel,B. (1997). Leadership structure: Separating the CEO and chairman of the board. Journal of corporate finance, 3(3), 189-220. Brounen,D., Cools,J.R., & Schweitzer,M. (2001). Information transparency pays: Evidence from European property shares. Real Estate Finance, 18(2),39. Brown,D.L., & Caylor,M.C. (2009). Corporate governance and firm operating performance. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 32(2), 129–144. Brown,W.O., & Maloney,M.T. (1998).Exit, voice, and the role of corporate directors:Evidence from acquisition performance (Working paper).Retrieved from Claremont McKenna College. Bryne,J.A., & Melcher,R.A. (1996).The best and worst boards . Business Week, 25 November. Brynjolfsson,E., & Hitt,L.M. (1996). Paradox lost?. Firm- level evidence on the returns to information systems spending. Management Science, 42(4), 541-558. Business-Roundtable,B. (2005). Principles of corporate governance, A White Paper by, www.businessroundtable.org/, Last Access at January, 8, 2007 Cadbury Committee. (1992). Report of the committee on the financial aspects of corporate governance, Gee: London. Chaganti,R.S., Mahajan,V., & Sharma,S. (1985). Corporate board size, composition and corporate failures in retailing industry. Journal of Management Studies, 22,400-417. Chakravarthy,B., & Zajac,E.J. (1984). Tailoring incentive systems to a strategic context. Planning Review, 12, 30-35 Chalhoub,M.S. (2009). Relations between dimensions of corporate governance and corporate performance:An empirical study among banks in the lebanon. International Journal of Management, 26(3), 476. Chiang,H. (2005).An empirical study of corporate governance and Corporate performance. Journal of American Academy of Business, 95-110. Clark,W., & Demirag,I. (2002). Enron: The failure of corporate governance, greenleaf publishing. Clarke,G.K.C. (2004). Hydraulics of supraglacial outburst floods. American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, CA, Abstracts, F303. Cohen,J., Krishnamoorthy,G., & Wright,M.A. (2002).Corporate governance and the audit process. Contemporary Accounting Research, 19(4), 57-74. Coles,J.L., Bhagat,S., & Bizjak,J. (1997). The shareholder wealth implications of corporate lawsuits. Financial Management, 27, 5– 27. Connelly,J.T.,& Limpaphayom,P. (2004).Board characteristics and firm performance: evidence from the life insurance industry. Chulalongkorn Journal of Economics, 16, 101-124. Conyon,M.J., & Peck,J.I. (1998). Board Size and Corporate Performance: Evidence From European Countries. European Journal of Finance, 4, 291-304. Creswell,J.W.(2005).Educational research:Planning,conducting ,and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Dahya,J., & McConnell,J.J. (2007). Board composition, corporate performance, and the cadbury committee recommendation. Journal of Finance and Quantitative Analysis, 42, 535-564. Daily,C.M., & Dalton,D.R. (1993). Board of directors leadership and structure: Control and performance implications.Entrepreneurship:Theory and Practice,7th,65–82. Daily,C.M., & Dalton,D.R. (1994). Bankruptcy and corporate governance: The impact of board composition and structure. Academy Management Journal, 37, 1603-1617. Dalton,C.M., & Dalton,D.R. (2005). Boards of directors: Utilizing empirical evidence in developing practical prescriptions. British Journal of Management, 16, 91-97. Dalton,D.R., & Kesner,I.F. (1991). Composition and CEO duality in boards of directors: An international perspective.Journal of International Business Studies, 18, 33-42. Dalton,D.R., Daily,C.M., Ellstrand,A.E., & Johnson,J.L. (1998). Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 269-290. Dalton,D.R., Daily,C.M., Ellstrand,A.E., & Johnson,J.L. (1999).Number of directors and financial performance: A Meta-analysis.Academy of Management Journal, 42(6),674-686. Davis,J., Schoorman,F., & Donaldson,L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20-47. Dedman,E. (2000). An investigation into the determinants of UK board structure before and after Cadbury. Corporate Governance International Review, 8, 133-153. Demirag,I. & Serter,M. (2003). Ownership patterns and control in Turkish listed Companies. Corporate Governance, An International Review, 11, 40–51. Demirag,I. (2005). Corporate social responsibility, accountability and governance.Greenleaf publishing,Sheffield ,UK. Education, Inc. Dezoort,F.T. (1998). An analysis of experience effects on audit committee members' oversight judgments. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 23, 1-21. Eisenberg,T., Sundgren,S., & Wells,M.T. (1998).Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms. Journal of financial Economic, 48(1), 35-54. Eisenhardt,K.M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14, 57–74. Encycogov,F. (2005). www.encycogov.com, Last Access at November, 23, 2007. Epps,R.W., & Cereola S.J. (2008). Do institutional shareholder services (ISS) corporate governance ratings reflect a company’s operating performance?. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 19(8), 1135–1148. Erhardt,N., Werbel,J., & Shrader,C. (2003). Board of director diversity and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance, 11(2), 102-111. Fama,E.F., & Jensen,M.C. (1983).Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 25-30. Farooque,O.A., Zijl,T., Dunstan,K., & Karim,A.W. (2007). Ownership structure and bank performance: Evidence from Bangladesh. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, 14, 127–150. Faure,F. (2009).The Turkish banking system: Good resistance to the crisis, the bank for a changing world, Economic Research. Finkelstein,S., & D'Aveni,R.A. (1994). CEO duality as a double-edged sword: How boardsof directors balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1079-1108. Firth,M., Fung,P.M.Y., & Rui,O.M. (2007).Ownership, two- tier board structure, and the in formativeness of earnings, evidence from China. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 26(4), 463-496. Forbes,D.P., & Milliken,F. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding board of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 3, 489–505. Fortune Magazine, (1991). Chief executives as Idi Amin?, July 1, 13.from Canadian state-owned enterprises. European Journal of Operational Research. Golden,B.R., & Zajac,E.J. (2001).When will boards influence strategy? Inclination x power strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 1087-1111. Goyal,V.K., & Park,C.W. (2002). Board leadership structure and CEO turnover. Journal of corporate finance, 8(1), 49-66. Gruszczynski, M. (2006). Corporate governance and financial performance of companies in Poland. International Advances in Economic Research, 12, 251–259. Gul,F.A., & Leung,S. (2002). CEO dominance and voluntary corporate disclosure strategies in Hong Kong annual reports (Working paper). Retrieved from City University of Hong Kong. Haniffa,R., & Hudaid,M. (2006). Corporate governance structure and performance of Malaysian listed companies. Journal of Business finance & Accounting, 33(7-8),1034-1062. Hermalin,B.E., & Weisback,M.S. (2003).Board of director as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of economics literature (Working paper No.3). Retrieved from Center for Responsible Business. Hermalin,B.E. & Weisbach,M.S. (1991). The effects of board composition and direct incentives on firm performance. Financial Management (Winter), 101-112. Hermalin,B., & Klein’s,S. (1998).Endogenously chosen boards of directors and their monitoring of the CEO. American Economic Review, 88, 96-118. Hermalin,B., & Weisbach,M. (1988). The effects of board composition and direct incentives on firm Performance. Financial Management, 20(4), 101-12. Holthausen,R.W., & Larcker,D.F. (1993). Organizational structure and financial performance.Unpublished manuscript. Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia: PA. ICCWBO,(2005), www.iccwbo.org/CorpGov/whycorpgov.asp. Jensen,M.C. (1993).The modern industrial revolution, exit and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of finance, 48(3), 831-880. Jensen,M.C., & Meckling,W.H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360. Kaplan,S.N., & Bernadette A.M. (2006).How has CEO turnover changed?.Increasingly performance sensitive boards and increasingly uneasy CEOs (Working paper). Retrieved from University of Chicago. Karamanou,I., & Vafeas,N. (2005). The association between corporate boards, audit committees, and management earnings forecasts: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting Research, 43,453-486. Kassem,S. (1998). Service marketing: The arabian gulf experience. Journal of Marketing, 3(1),61-71. Keasey,K., & Wright,M. (1993). Issues in corporate accountability and governance. Accounting and Business Research, 23(91), 291-303. Kesner,I.F., & Johnson,R.B. (1990). An investigation of the relationship between board composition and stockholder suit. Strategic Management Journal, 11,327-336. Kiel,G., & Nicholson,G. (2003). Board composition and corporate performance: how the Australian experience informs contrasting. Corporate Governance, 11(3). Klein,A. (1998). Firm performance and board committee structure. Journal of Law & Economics, 41(1), 275-303. Kosnik,R.D. (1987). Greenmail: A study of board performance in corporate governance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 163-185. Kurdoglu,C. (2007). www.iyisirket.com, Last Access at December, 15, 2007 Kyereboah-Coleman,A. (2007). Corporate governance and firm performance in Africa: a dynamic panel data analysis. Studies in economics and econometrics. Kyereboah-Coleman,A., & Biekpe,N. (2005). The link between corporate governance and performance of the Non-Traditional export sector: Evidence from Ghana, Paper presented at the Second African Finance Journal Conference 13-14 July Africa Centre for Investment Analysis Graduate School of Business University of Stellenbosch, Cape Town, South Africa. Kyereboah-Coleman,A., & Biekpe,N. (2008). The relationship between board size, board composition, CEO duality and firm performance: Experience from Ghana. Journal of corporate ownership and control, 4(2), 114-122. Levitt,A. (2000a). Renewing the covenant with investors. Speech at New York University Center for Law and Business. Available on the Web at http://www.sec.gov/news/speeches/spch370. Levitt,A. (2000b). Remarks before the conference on the rise and effectiveness of new corporate governance standards2, available on the web at www.sec.goiv/news/. Lorsch,J.W. (1989). Pawns or potentates: The reality of America's corporate boards. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Lorsch,J.W.,& Zelleke,A.(2005).Should the CEO be chairman?. MIT Sloan Management Review, 46(2), 71-74. Mak,S.,& Yuanto,H. (2003).Board size really matters:further evidence on the negative relationship between board size and firm value. Pulses by Singapore Stock Exchange. Mak,Y.T.,& Li,Y. (2001).Determinants of corporate ownership and board structure: Evidence from Singapore. Journal of corporate finance, 7, 236-256. Mallin,C. (2007). Corporate governance. (2nd ed), Oxford: Oxford University press. Mas-Colell,A., Whinston,M., & Green,J.R. (1995). Micro- economic theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Mashayekhi,B., & Bazaz,M.S. (2008).Corporate governance and firm performance in Iran. Research note of university tehran, tehran, Iran. Mehdi,I.K. (2007). Empirical evidence on corporate governance and corporate performance in Tunisia. Corporate Governance, 15(6), 1429-1441. Miller,R.A. (1991). Job matching and occupational choice. Journal of Political Economy, 92, 1086–1120. Min,S., Song,S., & Keebler,J.S. (2002).An internet mediated market orientation (IMO): Building a theory. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 2, 95-111. Monks,R., & Minow,N. (2008).Corporate governance. (4nd ed), Business & Economics. Morck,R.,& Steier,L. (2004).The global history of corporate governance:An introduction (Working Paper No.21).Retrieved from National Bureau of Economic Research. Morrison,H., Juleff,L., & Paton,C. (2007). Corporate governance in the financial service sector. Corporate Governance: international of Business in Society, 7(5), 623-634. Ogbechie C., Koufopoulos,D., & Argyropoulou,M. (2009).Board characteristic and involvement in strategic decision making. The Nigerian perspective. Management Research News, 32(2), 169. Okike, E.N.M. (2002).Influences on the corporate governance framework and reporting on listed companies in a developing economy: A Nigerian case study. Paper presented at the 3rd International conference for the British Accounting Association Special Interest Group in Corporate Governance, at the Queen’s University, British, 16 December 2002. Oman,C., Fries,S., & Buiter,W. (2003).Corporate governance in developing, transition and emerging market economies. OECD, 45. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(1999) .OECD principles of corporate governance, Paris: OECD. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(2006) .Corporate governance in Turkey: A Pilot Study. http://www.oecd.org/bookshop?9264028633. Parker,S., Peters,G., & Turetsky,H. (2002). Corporate governance factors and auditor going-concern assessments. Preliminary working paper presented at the 2002 AAA Western Regional Meeting, San Diego, CA. Patton,A. & Baker,J.C. (1987).Why do directors not rock the Boat?. Harvard Business Review, 65, 10-18. Peterson,R.A. (2002). A meta-analysis of cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, September. Pfeffer,J. (1972). Size and composition of corporate boards of directors: The organization and its environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 218-229. Pfeffer,J. (1973). Size, composition, and function of hospital boards of directors: A study of organization environment linkage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 349-364. Ramdani,A., & Witteloostuijn,S. (2009).Board independence, ECO duality and firm performance: A quality regression analysis for Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand (Working Papers). Retrieved from University of Antwerp, Faculty of applied Economics. Rechner,P.L., & Dalton,D.R. (1991). CEO duality and organisational performance: A longitudinal analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 155-160. Rechner,P.L., & Dalton.D.R. (1989). The impact of CEO as board chairperson on corporate performance: Evidence vs. rhetoric.The Academy of Management Executive, 3(2),141-143. Saravanan,R., & Rao,K.S.P. (2006). An Analysis of Total Quality Service Dimensions in Service Sector–A Case Study. International Journal of Management and Systems, 22(8), 261-267. Scott,W.R. (1998).Creating organisations, organisations: Rational, natural and open systems. 4th . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Shakir,R. (2008).Board size, executive directors and property firm performance in Malaysia. Pacific Rim Property Research Journal. 14(1). Sharif,N. (2006). Contributions from the sociology of technology to the study of innovation systems. Knowledge, Technology and Policy, 17(34), 83-105. Shleifer,A. & Vishny,R. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance. 737. Shleifer,A., & Vishny,R. (1996). A survey of corporate governance (Working Papers). Retrieved from NBER Working Paper. Simpson,W.G., & Gleason,A.E. (1999). Board structure, ownership, and financial distress in banking firms. International Review of Economics and Finance, 8, 281-292. Smith,A. (1991).Wealth of Nations Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 324. Smith,A. (1991).Wealth of nations. 19th ed., Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books,324.Some Policy Recommendations. Corporate Governance, 3(1), 58-75. Sundaramurthy,C., Mahoney,J.M., & Mahoney,J.T. (1997). Board structure, antitakeover provisions, and stockholder wealth, Strategic Management Journal 18(3), 231-245. The Institute of International Finance, (2005). Corporate Governance in Turkey An Investor Perspective. Task Force Report, www.iif.com, Tsui,J., Jaggi,B., & Gul,F.A. (2001).CEO domination, growth opportunities an their impact on audit fees. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 16(3), 55-67. Ugur,M., & Ararat,M. (2004) Does Macroeconomic Performance Affect Corporate Governance?. Evidence from Turkey. Corporate Governance, 14(4), 325-348. Uzun,H., Samuel S., & Raj,V. (2004).Board composition and corporate fraud. Financial Analysts Journal, 60, 33-43. Vafeas,N. (1999). Board meeting frequency and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 113-142. Vafeas,N. (2000). Operating performance around the adoption of director incentive plans. Economics Letters, 185-190. Vafeas,N., & Theodorou,E. (1998). The relationship between board structure and firm performance in the UK. The British Accounting Review, 30, 383-407. Vanden-Berghe,L., & Levrau,A. (2003).Measuring the quality of corporate governance: In search of a tailor-made approach?. Journal of General Management, 28, 71–86. Vanniarajan,T. (2007). Internal service quality and performance outcomes in commercial banks. Global Management Review, 1(2), 22-31. Wang,J.L., Jeng,V. & Peng,J.L. (2007). The Impact of corporate governance structure on the efficiency performance of insurance companies in Taiwan. Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance: Issues and Practice, 32, 264-282. Weston,J.F., Siu,J.A., & Johnson,B.A. (2001). Takeovers, restructuring, and corporate governance, 3th. New Jersey. Prentice Hall. Yermack,D. (1996).Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics, 40, 185-211. Yermack,D. (1996).Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics, 185-211. Yörükoğlu,A., & Atasoy,H. (2010).The effects of the global financial crisis on the Turkish financial sector. Bank of international settlements papers, 54. Yue,P. (1992).Data envelopment analysis and commercial bank performance: A primer with applications to Missouri banks. Louis Review, 47(1), 31-45. Zahra,S.A., & Pearce,J.A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15(2),291-334.

The Influence of Corporate Governance Structure on Bank Performance in Turkey

Similar Items