An Exploratory Study on Current Corporate Governance among Practitioners in Malaysian Public Listed Companies – An Introduction to Quantum Governance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/ccemnw26Keywords:
Corporate governance, perception and quantum scienceG3, L20, C25, C35O16, M14, G3, M14O16, L20C25, C35Research article.Abstract
Over the last decade, corporate governance was heightened by many incidences that questioned the governance of corporations globally. Simultaneously, Malaysia has also taken measures to address corporate governance issues within corporations. These measures have indeed borne much fruit and have helped in the improvement of governance structure in Malaysian companies, especially public listed firms. There have been several studies globally and domestically addressing some issues in corporate governance. However, there were hardly any relevant studies pertaining to the perceptions of corporate governance by senior managers of public listed companies in Malaysia who are the practitioners. This study undertakes to explore the perception of the current corporate governance structure in Malaysia and to a large extent, to discover their understanding of the corporate governance mechanism within Malaysian public listed companies.As this study is an exploratory study with a realism and a positivist philosophical stance, a qualitative research methodology was used. Face-to-face in-depth interview with an interview guide and focus groups were used, which were effective means in acquiring the perspectives and the paradigms of the participants. For the purpose of this study, participants who are working in public listed companies in the Main Board of Bursa Malaysia, holding the position of senior managers and above, were selected as the population, as they are practitioners in a variety of industries. The findings revealed that the respondents perceived corporate governance as a mechanical stance, from a stand point of legal (law), system (methodology) and guide (set of frameworks) through which decisions were made. The respondents agreed that corporate governance regulations were merely “cut and pasted” from an external source, which means that the form supersedes the substance in corporate governance. Thus, the respondents revealed that it has resulted in a mismatch. This study reveals the necessity to address the fundamentals of corporate governance.
Downloads
References
1. Armour.J,Hansmann.H, Kraakman.R, (2009). Agency Problems, Legal Strategies and Enforcement. Harvard M.Olin Center of Law, Economics and Business. ISSN 1936- 5357. Harvard Law School, Cabridge, MA 02138
2. Armstrong,A, (2005). Ethical Challenges to Governance Practices of Corporate Leaders in 21st Century. Australian Journal of Professional and Applied Ethics. Volume 6 (2).
3. Ary,D., and Jacobs,T.C. (1996). Introduction to research in education. Orlando, Florida: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
4. Asian Productivity Organization, (2007). The 2007 Best Practices in Asian Corporate Governance. Viewed on 28 April 2008. http://www.apo-tokyo.org/00ebooks/IS- 20_BP_AsianCorpGov/IS-20_BPAsianCorpGov.pdf.
5. Bartlett, Kortrlik and Higgins (2001). Organisational Research: Determining Appropriate Sample Size in Survey Research. Information Technology Learning and Performance Journal, Volume 19.
6. Bernard, Taylor. May, (2006). Shell Shock; Why do Good Companies do Bad Things: Blackwell Publishing, Volume 14, No3.
7. Bogden, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc.
8. Bryman and Bell, (2007). Business Research Methods. Oxford University Press
9. Cadbury, Sir A, (1992). Committee on Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance, HMSO.
10. Cadbury Code., (1992). Report of the committee on the financial aspects of corporate governance: The code of best practice. London: Gee Professional Publishing.
11. “CG Watch 2007 – Market Rankings”. Asian Corporate Governance Association (ACGA).
12. “CG Watch 2014 – Market Rankings. Asian Corporate Governance Association (ACGA). www.acga-asia.org/public/files/CG_Watch_2014_Key_Charts_Extract.p
13. Charles, C. M. (1995). Introduction to educational research (2nd ed.). San Diego, Longman.
14. Cipriano., (2002). "Survey research in operations management: a process-based perspective", International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Volume. 22, n. 2, pp. 152-194.
15. Clark.T., (1998). The Stakeholder Corporation: A Business Philosophy for The Information Age. Long Range Planning.Pub.
16. Coper.J., (2007). Cognitive Dissonance-Fifty Years of a Classical Theory. Sage Publications.
17. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
18. Davis.G.F., (2005). New Directions in Corporate Governance. Annu Rev.School:31:143- 62.
19. Erkkila.T., (2004). Governance and Accountability – A Shift in Conceptualisation. Annual Conference of European Group of Public Administration.
20. Filatotchev,I., & Wright,M., (2010). Agency Perspective on Corporate Governance of Multinational Enterprises. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2), Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
21. Friedman,M., (1970). The Social Responsibility of a Business is to Increase Profits. New York Times. Sept 3rd
22. Friedman.T., (2005).The World is Flat-A Brief History of The Globalised World in the 21st Century. Penguin Publications.
23. Gibbs. (2007). Analysing Qualitative Data. Sage Publications. London.
24. Hampel Report., (1998). The Committee on Corporate Governance and Gee Publishing Ltd. January 1998.
25. Heugens and Otten., (2007). Beyond the Dichotomous Worlds Hypothesis: Towards a plurality of Corporate Governance Logics. Wiley Publications, Volume 15, Issue 6
26. High Level Finance Committee on Corporate Governance (HLFC)., (2000). Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance. Kuala Lumpur: Securities Commission
27. ICMG (International Capital Markets Group)., (1995). International Corporate Governance: Who’s Hold the Reins?. London.
28. International Finance Corporation, (2011)- Survey of Corporate Governance Matters to Investors in Emerging Market Companies by Vikramaditya Khanna and Roman Zyla.
29. Jeyasigam, J., (2004). Eric Chia CBT trial: Perwaja given exemption. New Straits Times, 21 September 2004.
30. Khanna, Vikramaditya and Zyla, Roman., (2011). Annual Corporate Governance Survey, International Finance Corporation.
31. Krishnan, J., Wen, Y., & Zhao, W., (2011). Legal expertise on corporate audit committees and financial reporting quality. The Accounting Review, 86(6), 2099- 30.
32. La Porta,R.,and Shleifer,A., (2000). Investor Protection and Corporate Governance. Journal of Financial Economics, Volume 58, No 1.
33. La Porta.R, Lopez-de-Silanes.F, Shleifer.A., (2006) “What Works in Securities Laws,” Journal of Finance, February 2006.
34. Liew,P.K., (2007). Corporate governance reforms in Malaysia: The key leading players’ perspective. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(5), 724-740.
35. Maleske, R. T. (1995). Foundations for gathering and interpreting behavioral data. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
36. Meon and Weill., (2005). Does Better Governance Foster Efficiency? An Aggregate Frontier Analysis. Econ.Gov 6:75-90.
37. Merriam, S.B., (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38. Mitton,T., (2002). A Cross-Firm Analysis of the Impact of Corporate Governance on the East Asian Financial Crisis. Journal of Financial Economics, Volume 64. Morse. (1994). Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods. Sage Publications.
39. Nkomo, S.M. & Cox Jr., (1996). Diverse Identities in Organizations, Thousand Oaks,Sage, CA.
40. Norwani,M.N., Mohamad,Z.Z, and Chek,I.T., (2011). Corporate Governance Failure and Its Impact on Financial Reporting Within Selected Companies. International Journal of Business and Social Science, Volume 2, No.21.
41. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development., (2004). Corporate Governance: A Survey of OECD Countries. ISBN 92-64-10605-7. OECD Publication Services, France.
42. Pik K.L., (2006). The Roles of Corporate Governance Reform in Malaysia: The view of Corporate Practitioners. University of Essex, Volume 8, 455-482.
43. Potocan and Mulej, (2009). Toward a holistical perception of the content of business ethics, Kybernetes, Volume. 38.Pricewaterhouse (PWC) Annual Corporate Directors Survey., 2012.
44. Putrajaya Governance Committee (PGC)., (2006). Transformation Programme Manual. Kuala Lumpur: Putrajaya Governance Committee
45. Rayman-Bacchus.L., (2003). Contextualising Corporate Governance. Emerald Publishing, Volume 18.
46. Ritchie, Jane; Lewis, Jane & Elam, Gillian., (2003). Designing and selecting samples. In Jane Ritchie & Jane Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice. A guide for social science students and researchers (pp.77-108) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Roe,M,J., (2003). Political Determinants of Corporate Governance. Oxford University Press, New York.
48. Romlah, J., Takiah, M. I., and Jusoh@Nordin, M., (2002). An Investigation of Environmental Disclosures: Evidence from Selected Industries in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Society, 3(2): 55-68.
49. Salant, & Dillman (1994). How to conduct your own survey. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
50. Saleh.A and Ahmad.A., (2008). Human Governance: A Paradigm Shift in Governing Corporations. MPH Group Publishing.
51. Saunders,M., Lewis,P. and Thornhill,A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students. 4th Edition. FT Prentice Hall
52. Security Commission., (1999). Capital Market Masterplan. Kuala Lumpur: Securities Commission..
53. Security Commission., (2000). The Malaysian code on corporate governance. Kuala Lumpur: Securities Commission.
54. Security Commission., (2007). The Malaysian code on corporate governance (Revised 2007). Kuala Lumpur:Securities Commission.
55. Sekaran,(2007). Research Methods for Business ; A Skill Building Approach, 4th Edition. Wiley India Pvt Ltd.
56. Senthil Kumar, A., & Easwaran Iyer (2019). An Industrial IoT in Engineering and Manufacturing Industries – Benefits and Challenges. International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development, 9(2), 151-160. doi:10.24247/ijmperdapr201914
57. Seranmadevi, R., & Kumar, A. (2019). Experiencing the effect of demonetization on service sectors in India. Management Science Letters, 9(3), 389-398. doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2018.12.010
58. Shim, Simon., (2006). Governance in Markets: The Malaysian Perspective. Journal of Financial Crime. Volume 13. No3.
59. Singh,M.,Yusof,M., and Jain, K.K., (2007). Relationship Between Psychological Characteristics and Entrepreneurial Inclination: A Case Study of Students at UNITAR. Journal of Asian Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, Volume 3, Issue 2.
60. Solomon & Hanson., (1983). Above the Bottom Line – An Introduction to Business Ethics: HBJ Inc. New York
61. Stapp,H.P., (1995). Why classical mechanics cannot naturall accommodate consciousness but quantum mechanics can. PSYCHE, 2(5) (May)
62. Stenbacka, Caroline. (2001). Qualitative research requires quality concepts of its own. Management Decision. 39. 551-556.
63. Stokes, D. and Bergin, R. (2006) 'Methodology or "methodolatry"? An evaluation of focus groups and depth interviews', Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Volume 9.
64. Webb,J,W., (2007). A Cross-Disciplinary Exploration of Entrepreneurship Research. Journal of Management, December 2007, vol. 33 no. 6, pg 891-927
65. Westfall, R.S., (1995) Cev. Ismail Hakki Duran, Modern Bilimin Olusumu, Tubitak Populer Bilim Kitaplari Dizisi No. 4, Ankara, Turkey.
66. Willis.A., (2005). Corporate Governance and Management of Information and Records. Records Management Journal. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
67. Wood G., (2002). A partnership model of corporate ethics. Paper presented at the International Centre for Corporate Governance Research. Victoria University (8th August 2002).
68. Wood, G., (2002), "A partnership model of corporate ethics", Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 40 pp.61-73.
69. World Bank – Report on Observance of Standards and Codes (ROSC), Corporate Governance. Country Assessment, Malaysia., (2005). http://www.worldbank.org/ifa/rosc_cg.html.
70. Zikmund.G.W. (1997). Business Research Methods. The Dryden Press Series
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
