Suchergebnisse

Purpose
This study aims to investigate the relationship between social impact, corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting and firm performance in the context of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) banking industry, providing insight into CSR-performance nexus debate, especially for non-environmentally sensitive industry (NESI).


Design/methodology/approach
We use a sample of 27 publicly listed banks in five ASEAN member countries (i.e. Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines and Thailand), with the period of observations ranged from 2011 to 2019 year. This study also carefully accounts for endogeneity issues and the dynamics of social impact – CSR reporting – bank financial performance relationship.


Findings
The results show that social impact (performance) and CSR reporting negatively associate with bank performance, either measured by accounting performance or market performance. The negative association between social performance and bank financial performance also persists in a longer-term relationship. This result implies that social performance and CSR might not have the expected result for banks in ASEAN developing countries and the expected effect also does not manifest in the following periods.


Practical implications
The negative association between social performance and financial performance implies that banks' CSR in ASEAN might be misstargeted or that it takes more time to manifest the expected outcome. Therefore, banks should be able to foresee if social investment will finally offset the opportunity cost from diverting financial resources away from their core activities. On the other hand, policymakers must standardize the reporting related to social activities for banks and should bring the environmental and social issues to the depositors' attention to show that these issues are also relevant in the banking industry.


Originality/value
To the best of the authors' knowledge, this study is among the first to provide empirical evidence on the direct relationship between social impact, CSR reporting and firm performance in the context of ASEAN's NESI. The results should be of potential interest value to ASEAN's banks, regulators and shareholders.

The research investigates ownership structure in Indonesia in context of agency theory for non-financial firms listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange for 2000-2007 periods.The uniqueness of characteristic of ownership structure in Indonesia, which is dominated by large institutional shareholders motivated researcher to examine the impact and its relationship to agency conflict and balancing off agency theory in Indonesian companies.In this condition, it is certainly indicating that the existing conflict is not between managers and owners but majority and minority. The study argues that in low level ownership, controlling institutional shareholder expropriates the minority shareholders. However, when the ownerships comes to higher level, the controlling shareholder will make agency conflict lower since monitoring hypothesis becoming relevant in such level. In other words, the study argues that nonlinear relation between agency conflict which is proxied by firm's performance ratios and controlling institutional ownership exist. Nevertheless, the study argues that debt and dividend policy can also be used to reduce the conflict. Thus, the study also examines the simultaneous relationships among the mechanisms used to reduce agency conflict.The result indicates that when controlling institutional shareholder has significant amount of shares, they will actively monitor the manager to ensure them making value.However, when the ownership is insignificant, controlling shareholder will harm firm value due to expropriation of controlling shareholder. Therefore, nonlinear relationshipexists between controlling institutional shareholder and agency conflict. Second, debt policy and dividend policy can be used to reduce the conflict. The last, it is found thatbalancing off agency theory is not applied among all policies. The only bidirectional relationship is between institutional ownership and debt policy.Keywords: controlling institutional ownership, agency theory, balancing off agency theory, debt policy, dividend policy