Skip to main content
Log in

Board of directors’ effects on financial distress evidence of family owned businesses in Lebanon

  • Published:
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to determine the managerial governance characteristics related to financial distress companies. The boards failed to accomplish their monitoring duties, which seemed to be one of the main reasons behind the actual financial distress and bankruptcy that swept the companies across the planet. Through the analysis of a sample of 178 Lebanese non listed and owned family firms, the results showed that the boards (that have a higher proportion of outside directors) are less inclined to face a financial distress than the boards with a lower proportion. Besides, a different conclusion proves that the board’s size and financial distress are directly linked. The paper highlights the extent to which financial distress is associated with corporate governance from a Euro Mediterranean country. It would be a source of education to Lebanese investors who excessively go for short-term returns and of help for regulatory authorities in the framework of making policies on corporate governance reformation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ali, A. (1993). Management theory in a transitional society: the Arab’s experience. International Studies of Management and Organization, 20(3), 7–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asquith, P., Gertner, R., & Scharfstein, D. (1994). Anatomy of financial distress: an examination of junk-bond issuers. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, 109(3), 625–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, C., & Scott, M. (1983). The resolution of claims in financial distress: the case of Massey Ferguson. Journal of Finance, 38, 505–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baysinger, B. D., & Butler, H. N. (1985). Corporate governance and the board of directors: performance effects of change in board composition. Journal of law, Economics and organization, 1, 101–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beiner, S., Drobetz, W., Schmid, M. M., & Zimmermann, H. (2006). An integrated framework of corporate governance and firm valuation: evidence from Switzerland. European Financial Management Journal, 12, 249–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonn, I., Yoshikawa, T., & Phan, P. H. (2004). Effects of board structure on firm performance: a comparison between Japan and Australia. Asian Business and Management, 3, 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J. (1994). Women on corporate boards of directors: views of Canadian Chief Executive Officers. Women in Management Review, 9, 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K., & Minguez-Vera, A. (2007). The influence of gender on Spanish boards of directors: an empirical analysis. Working Paper, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A., No. 2007–08.

  • Chen, C. R., Guo, W., & Mande, V. (2003). Managerial ownership and firm valuation: evidence from Japanese firms. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 11, 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1994). Bankruptcy and corporate governance: the impact of board composition and structure. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1603–1617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, J. R., Hillier, D., & McColgan, P. (2005). Ownership structure, managerial behavior and corporate value. Journal of Corporate Finance, 11, 645–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22, 20–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1989). CEO governance and shareholder returns: agency theory or stewardship theory. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC.

  • Eisenberg, T., Sundgren, S., & Wells, T. W. (1998). Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 48, 35–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elloumi, F., & Gueyie, J. P. (2001). Financial distress and corporate governance: an empirical analysis. Corporate Governance, 1(1), 15–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahed-Sreih, J. (2006). Lebanon, Handbook of family business and family business consultation: a global perspective. (pp. 203–222). Binghamton: International Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilson, S. C. (1990). Bankruptcy, boards, banks, and blockholders. Journal of Financial Economics, 27, 355–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (1988). The determinants of board composition. The Rand Journal of Economics, 19, 589–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48, 831–880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaserer, C., & Moldenhauer, B. (2008). Inside ownership and corporate performance: evidence from Germany. Review of Managerial Science, 1, 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosnik, R. (1990). Effects of board demography and directors’ incentives on corporate Greenmail Decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 129–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. S., & Yeh, Y. H. (2004). Corporate governance and financial distress: evidence from Taiwan. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12, 378–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipton, M., & Lorsch, J. (1992). A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Business Lawyer, 48, 59–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mak, Y. T., & Kusnadi, Y. (2005). Size really matters: further evidence on the negative relationship between board size and firm value. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 13, 301–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1972). Size and composition of corporate boards of directors: the organization and its environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 218–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rechner, P., & Dalton, C. (1991). CEO duality and organizational performance: a longitudinal analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 155–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salloum, C., & Azoury, N. (2009). Détresse Financière et Gouvernance d’Entreprise, approche empirique. Revue Libanaise de Gestion et d’Economie, 1.

  • Salloum, C., & Azoury, N. (2010). Gouvernance, stress financier et performance des entreprises, cas du Liban. La Revue des Sciences de Gestion, 243–244.

  • Weisbach, M. S. (1988). Outside directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 431–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitaker, R. B. (1999). The early stages of financial distress. Journal of Economics and Finance, 23(2), 123–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yermack, D. (1996). Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics, 40(2), 185–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charbel C. Salloum.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Salloum, C.C., Azoury, N.M. & Azzi, T.M. Board of directors’ effects on financial distress evidence of family owned businesses in Lebanon. Int Entrep Manag J 9, 59–75 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0209-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0209-9

Keywords

Navigation