Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 81, Issue 2, pp 401–412 | Cite as

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002: Has It Brought About Changes in the Boards of Large U. S. Corporations?

  • Alix ValentiEmail author


The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 is considered by many to have made the most sweeping changes affecting corporate governance since the Securities and Exchange Acts of 1933 and 1934. About 4 years after its passing, however, many governance experts question whether the time and expense of compliance engender any real reforms. This article examines whether corporations have restructured their boards in response to the enactment of Sarbanes-Oxley and finds evidence that companies are implementing changes that should strengthen the monitoring ability of their boards.


corporate governance, boards of directors, Sarbanes-Oxley, board committees, board composition, board structure 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arfken D. E., Bellar S. L., Helms M. M. (2004) The Ultimate Glass Ceiling Revisited: The Presence of Women on Corporate Boards. Journal of Business Ethics 50, 177–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aronson N. H. (2002) Preventing Future Enrons: Implementing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Stanford Journal of Law, Business and Finance 8, 127–153Google Scholar
  3. Baysinger B. D., Hoskisson R. E. (1990) The Composition of Board of Directors and Strategic Control: Effect on Corporate Strategy. Academy of Management Review 15, 72–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bazerman M. H., Schoorman F. D. (1983) “A Limited Rationality Model of Interlocking Directorates. Academy of Management Review 8, 206–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beresford D. R. (2005) Take a Seat in the Boardroom. Journal of Accountancy 200(4), 104–107Google Scholar
  6. Bilimoria D. (2000) Building the Business Case for Women Corporate Directors. In: Burke R.J., Mattis M.C. (eds) Women on Corporate Boards of Directors. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 25–40Google Scholar
  7. Boeker W. (1992) Power and Managerial Dismissal: Scapegoating at the Top. Administrative Science Quarterly 37, 400–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boeker W., Goodstein J. (1991) Organizational Performance and Adaptation: Effects of Environment and Performance on Changes in Board Composition. Academy of Management Journal 34, 805–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyd B. K. (1994) Board Control and CEO Compensation. Strategic Management Journal 15, 335–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown J. R. Jr. (2004) The Irrelevance of State Corporate Law in the Governance of Public Companies. University of Richmond Law Review 38, 317Google Scholar
  11. Bumiller E. (2002) Bush Signs Bill Aimed at Fraud in Corporations. N.Y. Times, July 31, A1Google Scholar
  12. Burgess A., Tharenou P. (2002) Women Board Directors: Characteristics of the Few. Journal of Business Ethics 37, 39–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cahan S. F., Wilkinson B. R. (1999) Board Composition and Regulatory Changes: Evidence from the Enactment of New Companies Legislation in New Zealand. Financial Management 28(1), 32–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Catalyst (2002) 2001 Catalyst Census of Women Board Directors. Catalyst, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Catalyst (2003) The 2002 Catalyst Census of Women Board Directors of the Fortune 500. Catalyst, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Catalyst (2005) 2005 Catalyst Census of Women Board Directors of the Fortune 500. Catalyst, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. CFO Research Services (2005) Sarbanes-Oxley and the Boardroom. CFO Publishing CoGoogle Scholar
  18. Conyon M., Peck S. I. (1998) Board Control, Remuneration Committees, and Top Management Compensation. Academy of Management Journal 41, 146–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cunningham L. A. (2003) The Sarbanes-Oxley Yawn: Heavy Rhetoric, Light Reform (And It Just Might Work). Connecticut Law Review 35, 915–988Google Scholar
  20. Daily C. M., Certo S. T., Dalton D. A. (1999) A Decade of Corporate Women: Some Progress in the Boardroom, None in the Executive Suite. Strategic Management Journal 20, 93–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Daily C. M., Dalton D. R. (1995) CEO and Director Turnover in Failing Firms: The Illusion of Change. Strategic Management Journal 16, 393–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Daily C. M., Dalton D. R. 2004 Corporate Governance Digest. Business Horizons 47(3), 2–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Daily C. M., Dalton D. R., Certo S. T. (2004) Women as Directors: The Inside Story. Directors & Boards 29(1), 36–39Google Scholar
  24. Dalton, D. R., Dalton, C. M. and Certo, S. T.: 2006, ‹Women and Boards of Directors after Sarbanes-Oxley: Participation, Position, and Promise’. Paper presented at the annual Academy of Management meeting, Atlanta, GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
  25. DeFond M. L., Hann R. N., Hu X. (2005) Does the Market Value Financial Expertise on Audit Committees of Boards of Directors?. Journal of Accounting Research 43, 153–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. DiMaggio P. J., Powell W.W. (1983) The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48, 147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Engel E. (2005) Discussion of: Does the Market Value Financial Expertise on Audit Committees of Boards of Directors. Journal of Accounting Research 42, 195–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Finkelstein S., D’Aveni R. A. (1994) CEO Duality as a Double Edged Sword: How Boards of Directors Balance Entrenchment Avoidance and Unity of Command. The Academy of Management Journal 37, 1079–1108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gulati R., Westphal J. D. (1999) Cooperative or Controlling? The Effects of CEO-Board Relations and the Content of Interlocks on the Formation of Joint Ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly 44, 473–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Harrison J. R., Torres D. L., Kukalis S. (1988) The Changing of the Guard: Turnover and Structural Change in the Top-Management Positions. Administrative Science Quarterly 33, 211–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hambrick D. C., D’Aveni. R. A. (1992) Top Team Deterioration as Part of the Downward Spiral of Large Corporate Bankruptcies. Management Science 38, 1445–1466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hennessey R., Whitman J. (2002) “After Enron, Companies Confront a Dearth of Willing Board Members. The Wall Street Journal May 8, B9Google Scholar
  33. Herman E. S. (1981) Corporate Control, Corporate Power. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Hillman A. J., Dalziel T. (2003) Boards of Directors and Firm Performance: Integrating Agency and Resource Dependence Perspectives. Academy of Management Review 28, 383–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hoi C. K, Lessard J., Robin A. (2000) The Effect of State Anti-Takeover Laws on Board Composition. American Business Review 18, 9–18Google Scholar
  36. Investor Relations (2001) Board Diversity Needs Improving: Companies Turn Equal Access into a Free-for-All. Investor Relations January 8, 1–14Google Scholar
  37. Johnson J. L., Daily C. M., Ellstrand A. E. (1996) Boards of Directors: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Management 22, 409–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johnson K. L. (2002) Symposium: Enron and Its Aftermath: Rebuilding Corporate Boards and Refocusing Shareholders for The Post-Enron Era. St. John’s Law Review 76, 787–799Google Scholar
  39. Klein A. (2002) Economic Determinants of Audit Committee Independence. Accounting Review 77, 435–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Korn/Ferry International (2000) 27th Annual Board of Directors Study. Korn/Ferry International, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Kosnik R. D. (1990) Effects of Board Demography and Directors’ Incentive on Corporate Greenmail Decisions. Academy of Management Journal 33, 129–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kuehner-Herbert K. (2006) Governance: Going Above and Beyond Compliance. American Banker 171(83), 6AGoogle Scholar
  43. Luoma P., Goodstein J. (1999) Stakeholders and Corporate Boards: Institutional Influences on Board Composition and Structure. Academy of Management Journal 42, 553–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mace M. L. (1986) Directors, Myth and Reality. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  45. Mallette P., Fowler K. L. (1992) Effects of Board Composition and Stock Ownership on the Adoption of ‹Poison Pills’. Academy of Management Journal 35, 1010–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McDonnell, B. H.: 2004, SOX Appeals. 2004 Michigan State Law Review 505–534Google Scholar
  47. McGee, S.: 2005, The Great American Corporate Director Hunt. Institutional Investor April, 1–5Google Scholar
  48. Mitchell L. E. (2003) Lessons From Enron, How Did Corporate and Securities Law Fail? The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the Reinvention of Corporate Governance. Villanova Law Review 48:1189–1215Google Scholar
  49. Palmer D. A., Jennings P. D., Zhou X. (1993) Late Adoption of the Multidivisional Form by Large U.S. Corporations Institutional, Political, and Economic Accounts Administrative Science Quarterly, 38:100–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pfeffer J., Salancik G. R. (1978) The External Control of Organizations. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. Rechner P. L., Sundaramurthy C., Dalton D. R. (1993) Corporate Governance Predictors of Adoption of Anti-Takeover Amendments: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Business Ethics 12:371–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ribstein L. E. 2002: “Market vs. Regulatory Responses to Corporate Fraud A Critique of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Journal of Corporation Law 28:1–67Google Scholar
  53. Romano R. (2005) “The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the Making of Quack Corporate Governance. Yale Law Journal 114:1521–1604Google Scholar
  54. Shapiro-Snyder L. (2002) The Glass Boardroom Ceiling. Modern Healthcare 32(39): 21Google Scholar
  55. Sheridan A. (2001) A View from the Top: Women on the Boards of Public Companies. Corporate Governance 1(1):8–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shivdasani A., Yermack D. (1999) CEO Involvement in the Selection of New Board Members An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Finance 54:1829–1954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Staw B. M., Epstein L. D. 2000 “What Bandwagons Bring: Effects of Popular Management Techniques on Corporate Performance, Reputation, and CEO Pay. Administrative Science Quarterly 45:523–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Suchman M. C., Edelman L. B. (1997) Legal Rational Myths: The New institutionalism and the Law and Society Tradition. Law and Social Inquiry 27:903–941Google Scholar
  59. Tosi H. L., Gomez-Mejia L. R. (1994) CEO Compensation and Firm Performance. Academy of Management Journal 37:1002–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wade J., O’Reilly C. A., Chandratat I. (1990) Golden Parachutes: CEOs and the Exercise of Social Influence. Administrative Science Quarterly 35:587–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Westphal J. D. (1999) Collaboration in the Boardroom: Behavioral and Performance Consequences of CEO-Board Social Ties. Academy of Management Journal 42:7–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Westphal J., Zajac E. J. (1995) Who Shall Govern? CEO/Board Power, Demographic Similarity, and New Director Selection. Administrative Science Quarterly 40:60–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Williams K. (2003) SEC Expands Financial Expert Definition. Strategic Finance 84(8): 21–24Google Scholar
  64. Zahra S. A., Pearce J. A. (1989) Boards of Directors and Corporate Financial Performance: A Review and Integrative Model. Journal of Management 15:291–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zajac E. J., Westphal J. D. (1994) The Costs and Benefits of Managerial Incentives and Monitoring in Large U.S. Corporations When Is More Not Better?. Strategic Management Journal 15:121–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zajac E. J., Westphal J. D. (1996) Director Reputation, CEO-Board Power, and the Dynamics of Board Interlocks. Administrative Science Quarterly 41:507–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zucker L. G. (1987) Institutional Theories of Organization. Annual Review of Sociology 13:443–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Administrative SciencesUniversity of Houston Clear LakeHoustonU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations