Skip to main content

The relationship between the CEO and the chairman of the board of directors

Elsewhere on this blog I have already argued that improving corporate governance is not as simple as increasing the number of independent, non-executive directors on the board. In some instances, increasing board independence may cause more harm than good as some firms may require friendlier boards, with an emphasis on providing advice rather than monitoring.

In a new study I have published in the Journal of Corporate Finance (the pre-publication version can be obtained from here) and which is co-authored with Peter Limbach and Meik Scholz from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, we find that the age difference between the CEO and the chairman of the board of directors also matters. We argue that greater age dissimilarity between the CEO and the chair is likely to increase cognitive conflict between the two, which likely results in more scrutinising by the chair of the decisions proposed  by the CEO. Such cognitive conflict is likely to be greatest when there is a generational gap, i.e. 20 years or more, between the two. Indeed, individuals from different generations have had different experiences and therefore tend to hold different attitudes and opinions.

In line with the above arguments, we find that firms with greater age dissimilarity between the CEO and the chairman tend to hold significantly more board meetings, likely reflecting the greater monitoring intensity by the board of directors. Importantly, a greater age difference between the CEO and the chair creates value in firms with a greater need for monitoring, such as firms without a large shareholder and those in more traditional industries with few intangible assets. In contrast, it destroys value in firms that require advice rather than monitoring from the board.

Again, this suggests that it is naive at best to consider that the effectiveness of the board of directors can be reduced to board independence. Relations within the boardroom are much more complex than the balance between executive and non-executive directors would suggest.


Legal disclaimer: This blog reflects my personal opinion and not necessarily that of my employer. Any links to external websites are provided for information only and I am neither responsible nor do I endorse any of the information provided by these websites. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Corporate Governance. A Global Perspective

Philosophy of the Book Existing textbooks on corporate governance tend to have a strong focus on UK and/or US corporate governance. This focus is somewhat surprising as the UK and US corporate governance systems have features which clearly set them apart from pretty much the rest of the world. Indeed, the typical British and American stock-market listed firm is widely held (held by many shareholders) and control therefore lies with the management rather than the shareholders. In contrast, most stock-exchange listed firms from the rest of the world have a large shareholder whose control is substantial enough to have a significant influence over the firm’s affairs. Given these marked differences in ownership and control, corporate governance issues emerging in non-UK and non-US firms tend to be very different from those that may affect British and American companies. Hence, it is important for a textbook to bear in mind the diversity of ownership and control a

DMGT Plc - Not your typical UK Plc

I haven't posted any of these corporate governance case studies for a while. As the updated version of my corporate governance textbook is about to be published on 11 March 2018, I thought it was a good time to investigate the corporate governance of another interesting company. The company I have chosen is the Daily Mail and General Trust Plc ( DMGT Plc ), a UK company. This is a media company which owns a.o. the tabloid The Daily Mail  and the free newspaper Metro . It also has a holding in Euromoney Institutional Plc and Zoopla . An example of a Daily Mail  front page An example of a Metro  front page I chose DMGT Plc as it is  not  your run-of-the-mill UK stock-market listed Plc. The typical example of a UK exchange-listed corporation would be a Plc with dispersed ownership and weak control (see Section 3.3 of my textbook  International Corporate Governance   or its updated version  Corporate Governance. A Global Perspective ). This is what I call combination A