Skip to main content
Log in

Corporate diversification and dividend policy: empirical evidence from Malaysia

  • Published:
Journal of Management and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study examined the impact of corporate diversification on dividend policy. It locates the investigation in Malaysia, using 712 firms listed on the main market of Bursa Malaysia for a 5-year period from 2010 to 2014. The results show that industrially diversified firms pay low dividends as the firms could not leverage economies of scope by diversifying into different industries. The firms’ motive to conduct industrial diversification activities may not be related to the enhancement of firm performance and shareholders’ wealth. In contrast, geographical diversification positively influences dividend policy and this relationship is in relation to the resource-based view hypothesis that discusses the efficient use of resources through the internal capital market. This study contributes towards our understanding of the impact of the different nature of diversification on firm-level dividend policies.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Type 1 agency problem refers to the agency problem between the shareholder and the manager while Type 2 refers to the agency problem between the owners themselves, i.e. between the controlling shareholders and minority shareholders.

References

  • Akhtar, S. (2015). Dividend pay-out determinants for Australian multinational and domestic corporations. Accounting and Finance, 55(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Maskati, N., Bate, A. J., & Bhabra, G. S. (2015). Diversification, corporate governance and firm value in small markets: Evidence from New Zealand. Accounting and Finance, 55(3), 627–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aw, B. Y., & Batra, G. (1998). Firm size and the patterns of diversification. International Journal of Industrial Organisation, 16(3), 313–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayoib, C. A., Nor-Aziah, A. M., & Zuaini, I. (2003). Corporate Governance, ownership structure and corporate diversification: Evidence from the Malaysian Listed Companies. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 8(2), 67–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beleska-Spasova, E., & Glaister, K. W. (2010). Geographic orientation and performance. Management International Review, 50(5), 533–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, S. J., Wasiuzzaman, S., Mokhtarinia, H., & Rezaie, N. N. (2016). Family ownership and dividend pay-out in Malaysia. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 12(3), 314–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertrand, M., Johnson, S., Samphantharak, K., & Schoar, A. (2008). Mixing family with business: A study of Thai business groups and the families behind them. Journal of Financial Economics, 88(3), 466–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bokpin, G. A. (2011). Ownership structure, corporate governance and dividend performance on the Ghana Stock Exchange. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 12(1), 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boone, A. L., Field, L. C., Karpoff, J. M., & Raheja, C. G. (2007). The determinants of corporate board size and composition: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 85(1), 66–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, R. W., & Child, T. B. (2013). Changes to the ownership and control of East Asian corporations between 1996 and 2008: The primacy of politics. Journal of Financial Economics, 107(2), 494–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. J., & Yu, C. M. J. (2012). Managerial ownership, diversification, and firm performance: Evidence from an emerging market. International Business Review, 21(3), 518–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J., & Lang, L. (2001). The pattern and valuation effects of corporate diversification: A comparison of the United States, Japan, and other East Asian economies (No. 2001/127). WIDER Discussion Papers//World Institute for Development Economics (UNU-WIDER).

  • Dawar, N., & Frost, T. (1999). Competing with giants: Survival strategies for local companies in emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 77(1), 119–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doaei, M., Anuar, M. A., & Ismail, Z. (2014). Diversification and financial performance in Bursa Malaysia. International Journal of Management and Business Research, 4(4), 309–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doukas, J., & Pantzalis, C. (2003). Geographic diversification and agency costs of debt of multinational firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 9(1), 59–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duchin, R. (2010). Cash holdings and corporate diversification. The Journal of Finance, 65(3), 955–992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elshandidy, T., & Neri, L. (2015). Corporate governance, risk disclosure practices, and market liquidity: Comparative evidence from the UK and Italy. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 23(4), 331–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdorf, S., Hartmann-Wendels, T., Heinrichs, N., & Matz, M. (2013). Corporate diversification and firm value: A survey of recent literature. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 27(2), 187–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenn, G. W., & Liang, N. (2001). Corporate pay-out policy and managerial stock incentives. Journal of Financial Economics, 60(1), 45–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, M. Z., & Goyal, V. K. (2003). Testing the pecking order theory of capital structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 67(2), 217–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galván, A., Pindado, J., & Torre, C. D. L. (2007). Diversification: value-creating or value-destroying strategy? Evidence from using panel data. Working Paper No. DT04/07, Universidad de Salamanca.

  • Gaur, A. S., & Kumar, V. (2009). International diversification, business group affiliation and firm performance: Empirical evidence from India. British Journal of Management, 20(2), 172–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, R., & Kabir, R. (2012). Heterogeneity in business groups and the corporate diversification-firm performance relationship. Journal of Business Research, 65(3), 412–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghee, W. Y., Ibrahim, M. D., & Abdul-Halim, H. (2015). Family business succession planning: Unleashing the key factors of business performance. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 20(2), 103–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, M., Guzmán, A., Pombo, C., & Trujillo, M. A. (2014). Family involvement and dividend policy in closely held firms. Family Business Review, 27(4), 365–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granger, C. W. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 37(3), 424–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2009). Basic econometrics (5th ed.). Boston: Mc Graw-Hill International Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Trasobares, A., & Galve-Górriz, C. (2015). Does concentration of ownership and family control affect specialisation/diversification business strategies? E + M Ekonomie a Management, 18(4), 78–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoechle, D., Schmid, M., Walter, I., & Yermack, D. (2012). How much of the diversification discount can be explained by poor corporate governance? Journal of Financial Economics, 103(1), 41–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Y., & Izumida, S. (2008). Ownership concentration and corporate performance: A causal analysis with Japanese panel data. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(4), 342–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kali, R., & Sarkar, J. (2011). Diversification and tunnelling: Evidence from Indian business groups. Journal of Comparative Economics, 39(3), 349–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, K. H., & Lee, S. (2014). The moderating role of brand diversification on the relationship between geographic diversification and firm performance in the US lodging industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 38(1), 106–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T., & Yafeh, Y. (2007). Business groups in emerging markets: Paragons or parasites? Journal of Economic Literature, 45(2), 331–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V., Gaur, A. S., & Pattnaik, C. (2012). Product diversification and international expansion of business groups. Management International Review, 52(2), 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. T., Hooy, C. W., & Hooy, G. K. (2012). The value impact of international and industrial diversifications on public-listed firms in Malaysia. Emerging Markets Review, 13(3), 366–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lins, K. V., & Servaes, H. (2002). Is corporate diversification beneficial in emerging markets? Financial Management, 31(2), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo, A. W., Wong, R. M., & Firth, M. (2010). Can corporate governance deter management from manipulating earnings? Evidence from related-party sales transactions in China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(2), 225–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, T. B., Barney, J. B., & Dotson, J. P. (2017). Corporate diversification and the value of individual firms: A Bayesian approach. Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 322–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. D., & Sayrak, A. (2003). Corporate diversification and shareholder value: A survey of recent literature. Journal of Corporate Finance, 9(1), 37–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, A., & Akbar, M. (2007). Parenting advantage in business groups of emerging markets. Vision, 11(3), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nachum, L. (2004). Geographic and industrial diversification of developing country firms. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 273–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocasio, W. (1997). Towards an attention based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18(1), 187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandey, I. M. (2003). Corporate dividend policy and behaviour: The Malaysian evidence. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 8(1), 17–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, K., & Jang, S. (2013). Capital structure, free cash flow, diversification and firm performance: A holistic analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33(1), 51–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, J. A., & Robinson, R. B., Jr. (2011). Strategic management: Formulation, implementation and control (12th ed.). New York: McGraw- Hill/Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phung, D. N., & Mishra, A. V. (2016). Ownership structure and firm performance: Evidence from Vietnamese listed firms. Australian Economic Papers, 55(1), 63–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramli, N. M. (2010). Ownership structure and dividend policy: Evidence from Malaysian companies. International Review of Business Research Papers, 6(1), 170–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravichandran, T., Liu, Y., Han, S., & Hasan, I. (2009). Diversification and firm performance: Exploring the moderating effects of information technology spending. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(4), 205–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R. P. (1982). Diversification strategy and profitability. Strategic Management Journal, 3(4), 359–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Securities Commission. (2017). Malaysian code on corporate governance 2012 (MCCG 2012). Available at http://www.sc.com.my/eng/html/cg/cg2012.pdf. November 10, 2017.

  • Setia-Atmaja, L., Tanewski, G. A., & Skully, M. (2009). The role of dividends, debt and board structure in the governance of family controlled firms. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 36(7–8), 863–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soo, K. G., & Khoi, N. W. (2010). Malaysia’s outward FDI: The effects of host market size and home government policy. Discussion paper, (No. 33/10), Monash University, Department of Economics.

  • Subramaniam, V., Tang, T. T., Yue, H., & Zhou, X. (2011). Firm structure and corporate cash holdings. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17(3), 759–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villalonga, B. (2004). Diversification discount or premium? New evidence from the business information tracking series. The Journal of Finance, 59(2), 479–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yap, J. (2012). Malaysia among the highest in dividend. The Borneo Post Journal, 9(3), 145–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi, T., & Lavie, D. (2013). Intra-industry diversification and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 34(8), 978–998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vasanthan Subramaniam.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Subramaniam, V., Wasiuzzaman, S. Corporate diversification and dividend policy: empirical evidence from Malaysia. J Manag Gov 23, 735–758 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-018-9440-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-018-9440-x

Keywords

Navigation