Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 11, Issue 10, pp 771–778 | Cite as

Board composition and corporate philanthropy

  • Jia Wang
  • Betty S. Coffey


Using agency theory, this study empirically examined the relationship between board composition and corporate philanthropy. Generally, the ratio of insiders to outsiders, the percentage of insider stock ownership, and the proportion of female and minority board members were found to be positively and significantly associated with firms' charitable contributions.


Economic Growth Board Member Agency Theory Corporate Philanthropy Charitable Contribution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander, G. and R. Bucholtz: 1978, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Stock Market Performance’,Academy of Management Journal 21, 479–486.Google Scholar
  2. Arlow, P. and M. Gannon: 1982, ‘Social Responsiveness, Corporate Structure, and Economic Performance’,Academy of Management Review 7, 235–241.Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson, L. and J. Galaskiewicz: 1988, ‘Stock Ownership and Company Contributions to Charity’,Administrative Science Quarterly 33, 82–100.Google Scholar
  4. Bacon, J. and J. F. Brown: 1973,Corporate Directorship Prices: Role, Selection, and Legal Status of the Board (New York: The Conference Board, Inc.).Google Scholar
  5. Baysinger, B. D. and H. D. Butler: 1985, ‘Corporate Governance and the Board of Directors: Performance Effects of Changes in Board Composition’,Journal of Law Economics and Organizations 1, 101–124.Google Scholar
  6. Baysinger, B. D. and R. E. Hoskisson: 1990, ‘The Composition of Boards of Directors and Srategic Control: Effects on Corporate Strategy’,Academy of Management Review 15, 72–87.Google Scholar
  7. Chaganti, R. S., V. Mahajan and S. Sharma: 1985, ‘Corporate Board Size, Composition, and Corporate Failures in Retailing Industry’,Journal of Management Studies 22, 400–417.Google Scholar
  8. Cochran, P. L., R. A. Wood and T. B. Jones: 1985, ‘The Composition of Boards of Directors and Incidence of Golden Parachutes’,Academy of Management Journal 28, 664–671.Google Scholar
  9. Cornell, B. and A. Shapiro: 1987, ‘Corporate Stakeholder and Corporate Finance’,Financial Management 16, 5–14.Google Scholar
  10. Drucker, P. E.: 1973,Management: Tasks, Responsibility, Practices (New York, Harper & Row Publishers).Google Scholar
  11. Eisenhardt, K. M.: 1989, ‘Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review’,Academy of Management Review 14, 57–74.Google Scholar
  12. Elgart, L. D.: 1983, ‘Women on Fortune 500 boards’,California Management Review 24, 121–127.Google Scholar
  13. Fama, E. F.: 1980, ‘Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm’,Journal of Political Economy 88, 288–307.Google Scholar
  14. Fama, E. F. and M. C. Jensen: 1983a, ‘Agency Problems and Residual Claims’,Journal of Law and Economics 26, 327–349.Google Scholar
  15. Fama, E. F. and M. C. Jensen: 1983b, ‘Separation of Ownership and Control’,Journal of Law and Economics 26, 301–325.Google Scholar
  16. Freeman, R. E.: 1984,Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Boston: Ballinger).Google Scholar
  17. Harrigan, K. R.: 1981, ‘Numbers and Positions of Women Elected to Corporate Boards’,Academy of Management Journal 24, 619–625.Google Scholar
  18. Jensen, M. C.: 1986, ‘Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance and Takeovers’,American Economic Review 76, 323–329.Google Scholar
  19. Jensen, M. C. and W. H. Meckling: 1976, ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure’,Journal of Financial Economics 3, 305–360.Google Scholar
  20. Johnson, E. W.: 1990, ‘An Insider's Call for Outside Direction’,Harvard Business Review 68(2), 46–55.Google Scholar
  21. Kesner, I. F.: 1988, ‘Directors' Characteristics and Committee Membership: An Investigation of Type, Occupation, Tenure, and Gender’,Academy of Management Journal 31, 66–84.Google Scholar
  22. Kesner, I. F., B. Victor and B. T. Lamont: 1986, ‘Board Composition and the Commission of Illegal Acts: An Investigation of Fortune 500 Companies’,Academy of Management Journal 29, 789–799.Google Scholar
  23. Kosnik, R. D.: 1987, ‘Greenmail: A Study of Board Performance in Corporate Governance’,Administrative Science Quarterly 32, 163–185.Google Scholar
  24. Lambert, R. A., D. F. Larcker and T. Lys: 1985, ‘Takeover resistance, managerial incentives, and shareholder wealth’ (unpublished manuscript, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania).Google Scholar
  25. Lorsch, J. W. and E. MacIver: 1990,Pawns or potentates: The reality of America's corporate boards (Boston: Harvard Business School Press).Google Scholar
  26. Mace, M. L.: 1972, ‘The President and the Board of Directors’,Harvard Business Review 50(12), 37–49.Google Scholar
  27. McGuire, J. B., A. Sundgren and T. Schneeweis: 1988, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance’,Academy of Management Journal 31, 854–872.Google Scholar
  28. Neff, T.: 1989, ‘Let Directors be Directors’,Wall Street Journal, December 11, 14.Google Scholar
  29. Neter, J., W. Wasserman and M. H. Kutner: 1985,Applied Linear Statistical Models (Homewood, Illinois: Irwin).Google Scholar
  30. Parket, R. and H. Eibert: 1975, ‘Social Responsibility: The Underlying Factors,Business Horizons 18, 5–10.Google Scholar
  31. Pfeffer, J.: 1972, ‘Size and Composition of Corporate Boards of Directors: The Organization and its Environment,Administrative Science Quarterly 17, 218–228.Google Scholar
  32. Schwartz, F. N.: 1980, ‘“Invisible’ Resource: Women for Boards’,Harvard Business Review 58, 6–18.Google Scholar
  33. Singh, H. and F. Harianto: 1989, ‘Management-board Relationships, Takeover Risk, and the Adoption of Golden Parachutes’,Academy of Management Journal 32, 7–24.Google Scholar
  34. Stultz, J. E.: 1979, ‘Madam Director’,Directors and Boards 3(4), 6–19.Google Scholar
  35. Ullmann, A.: 1985, ‘Data in Search of a Theory: A Critical Examination of the Relationships among Social Performance, Social Disclosure, and Economic Performance’,Academy of Management Review 10, 540–577.Google Scholar
  36. Vance, S. C.: 1964,Boards of directors: Structure and Performance (Eugene, Or: University of Oregon Press).Google Scholar
  37. Vance, S. C.: 1983,Corporate Leadership: Boards, Directors, and Strategy (New York: McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
  38. Williams, H. M. and I. S. Shapiro: 1979,Power and Accountability: The Changing Role of the Corporate Boards of Directors (New York: Carnegie-Mellon University Press).Google Scholar
  39. Zahra, S. A. and J. A. Pearce II: 1989, ‘Boards of Directors and Corporate Financial Performance: A Review and Integration Model’,Journal of Management 15, 291–334.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jia Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Betty S. Coffey
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ManagementCalifornai State UniversityFresnoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Management, College of BusinessAppalachian State UniversityBooneUSA

Personalised recommendations