Skip to main content
MENU
Subscribe
  • Sign Up Free
  • LOGIN
  • Subscribe
  • Topics
    • Alternatives
    • Consultants
    • Coronavirus
    • Courts
    • Defined Contribution
    • ESG
    • ETFs
    • Face to Face
    • Hedge Funds
    • Industry Voices
    • Investing
    • Money Management
    • Opinion
    • Partner Content
    • Pension Funds
    • Private Equity
    • Real Estate
    • Russia-Ukraine War
    • SECURE 2.0
    • Special Reports
    • White Papers
  • Rankings & Awards
    • 1,000 Largest Retirement Plans
    • Top-Performing Managers
    • Largest Money Managers
    • DC Money Managers
    • DC Record Keepers
    • Largest Hedge Fund Managers
    • World's Largest Retirement Funds
    • Best Places to Work in Money Management
    • Excellence & Innovation Awards
    • WPS Innovation Awards
    • Eddy Awards
  • ETFs
    • Latest ETF News
    • Fund Screener
    • Education Center
    • Equities
    • Fixed Income
    • Commodities
    • Actively Managed
    • Alternatives
    • ESG Rated
  • ESG
    • Latest ESG News
    • The Institutional Investor’s Guide to ESG Investing
    • ESG Sustainability - Gaining Momentum
    • Climate Change: The Inescapable Opportunity
    • Impact Investing
    • 2022 ESG Investing Conference
    • ESG Rated ETFs
  • Defined Contribution
    • Latest DC News
    • DC Money Manager Rankings
    • DC Record Keeper Rankings
    • Innovations in DC
    • Trends in DC: Focus on Retirement Income
    • 2022 Defined Contribution East Conference
    • 2022 DC Investment Lineup Conference
  • Searches & Hires
    • Latest Searches & Hires News
    • Searches & Hires Database
    • RFPs
  • Performance Data
    • P&I Research Center
    • Earnings Tracker
    • Endowment Returns Tracker
    • Corporate Pension Contribution Tracker
    • Pension Fund Returns Tracker
    • Pension Risk Transfer Database
    • Future of Investments Research Series
    • Charts & Infographics
    • Polls
  • Careers
  • Events
    • View All Conferences
    • View All Webinars
    • 2023 Defined Contribution East
    • 2023 ESG Investing
Breadcrumb
  1. Home
  2. Print
September 20, 2004 01:00 AM

Professors give corporate governance ratings a failing grade

Barry B. Burr
  • Tweet
  • Share
  • Share
  • Email
  • More
    Reprints Print

    PHILADELPHIA — Three Wharton School accounting professors are critical of corporate governance scorecards and ratings.

    "This sort of check-box approach to corporate governance doesn't work," according to a new study by David F. Larcker, Ernst & Young professor of accounting, and Irem Tuna and Scott Richardson, both assistant professors of accounting.

    "Lots of people are coming up with governance scorecards," Mr. Larcker said in a Wharton statement about the study. "They're coming up with best practices and selling this stuff. As far as we can tell, there's no evidence that those scorecards map into better corporate performance or better behavior by managers."

    In a working paper titled "Does Corporate Governance Really Matter?" the three criticize "consultants and ratings services that use formulas — which they typically refuse to reveal — to boil down a company's corporate governance to a single number or grade."

    "Not only are typical governance indicators based on shaky empirical foundations, they even can yield perverse results," according to the Wharton statement about the paper. Dell Inc.'s stock returned 32% over the last two years, compared with 22% for the Dow Jones Total Stock Market index, they noted. "But some corporate-governance raters have criticized (Dell), claiming insiders dominate its board. The list of top-performing firms that have been dinged in these sorts of ratings includes" Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Southwest Airlines Co.

    Enron as example

    Ms. Tuna, in the statement, contrasts Dell with the now-infamous Enron Corp., which got good scores from some raters. Enron had implemented purported good governance practices, such as a separate chairman and chief executive officer and a board stocked with high-profile outsiders. Yet these safeguards didn't prevent executive misconduct.

    The three academics disapprove of the California Public Employees' Retirement System's zero-tolerance campaign this year. The fund withheld proxy votes for any corporate director who was a member of the audit committee that approved allowing the auditor to do non-audit work. As a result, CalPERS, which oversees $166 billion in assets, opposed directors at more than 2,700 companies, they noted.

    That check-box approach branded Warren Buffett "an undesirable board member," they wrote, resulting in CalPERS and other institutions withholding votes on Mr. Buffett's election to the board of Coca-Cola Co., Atlanta. Mr. Buffett, however, won re-election.

    "Companies and their situations are too diverse," according to Mr. Larcker, Ms. Tuna and Mr. Richardson.

    "The recipe book is big, and there's a different recipe for each company," Mr. Richardson noted in the statement.

    The three academics tried to create a magic formula of their own. "But no matter how they sliced and diced governance data — consisting of more than 30 individual measures on more than 2,100 public companies — they couldn't find one," according to the statement.

    Measurement conundrum

    Despite their paper's provocative title, the three think corporate governance matters. But "after puzzling over reams of company numbers, they are not confident that anyone can measure whether one firm's governance is better than another's, at least not by using typical metrics," according to the statement.

    "Our overall conclusion is that the typical structural indicators of corporate governance used in academic research and institutional rating services have a very limited ability to explain managerial decisions and firm valuation," the three said in their paper. By structural indicators, they are referring to whether a company has a lot of insiders on its board or whether a board's chairman is also the company's chief executive officer.

    "In theory, these facts point to ‘bad' governance because they suggest that managers control a firm and can enrich themselves, with impunity, at the expense of outside shareholders," according to the statement.

    "We set the study up to err on the side of, ‘The relationship between governance measures and good performance is there,'" Ms. Tuna said in the statement. "And we can't even find it when we do that. We biased the analysis in favor of finding something. The structural indicators just don't seem to have that much ability to explain whether companies have to do accounting restatements, whether they're selling at a higher multiple, whether they're manipulating earnings and things like that."

    The authors believe that in theory, better-governed firms should perform better. But they believe "it's difficult to use strictly numerical tools to assess what really drives managers' conduct."

    "We believe that if we had some psychological way to go in and assess people — ‘Is this a good person or a bad person? Do they have high ethics or low ethics?' — that that would be extremely useful," Mr. Larcker said in the statement. "Maybe we could develop a psychological map. But virtually all the work done on this by consultants and the preponderance of work by academics uses measures that are a level removed from that."

    "In the absence of effective measurement tools, investors who are trying to assess firms' governance have to do it the old-fashioned way," the authors believe. "That is, they have to do their homework, examining companies one at a time."

    Mr. Larcker, Ms. Tuna and Mr. Richardson evaluated the sorts of indicators perceived by many investors as important in determining a company's external valuation by the market or debt rating agencies.

    Among the indicators, the "appointment of a non-executive director as a lead director is expected to create an additional monitoring benefit on incumbent management," they noted.

    But "no matter how they parsed the data," the authors "didn't uncover any strong, consistent relationship," the Wharton statement noted. "In many cases, they even saw the opposite of what one might expect, finding for example, that companies with big boards report smaller abnormal accounting accruals."

    "This is inconsistent with prior literature that suggests big boards are ‘bad,' " the authors pointed out in their paper.

    ‘Don't do anything rash'

    The professors' advice to companies concerned about their governance: "Don't do anything rash just to appease a ratings service.".

    "A lot of well-known people and consulting companies seem to be espousing, ‘Here are the best practices. Trust me,'" says Mr. Larcker in the statement. "Our message is that there's not much evidence to back up those bold claims and simply benchmarking your governance to best practices isn't going to be that useful."

    Recommended for You
    Read the print edition of P&I
    Read the print edition of P&I
    How low is low? Projections say it's not low enough
    How low is low? Projections say it's not low enough
    Citadel's Ken Griffin gives $125 million to Chicago museum; name will change
    Citadel's Ken Griffin gives $125 million to Chicago museum; name will change
    Research for Institutional Money Management
    Sponsored Content: Research for Institutional Money Management

    Reader Poll

    January 25, 2023
    SEE MORE POLLS >
    Sponsored
    White Papers
    Show Me the Income: Discovering plan sponsor and participant preferences for cr…
    The Future of Infrastructure: Building a Better Tomorrow
    Fulcrum Issues: Equity Returns and Inflation — Choose Your Own Adventure
    What Matters Most in Considering a Private Debt Strategy
    Why pursue direct lending in the core middle market?
    Research for Institutional Money Management
    View More
    Sponsored Content
    Partner Content
    The Industrialization of ESG Investment
    For institutional investors, ETFs can make meeting liquidity needs easier
    Gold: the most effective commodity investment
    2021 Investment Outlook | Investing Beyond the Pandemic: A Reset for Portfolios
    Ten ways retirement plan professionals add value to plan sponsors
    Gold: an efficient hedge
    View More
    E-MAIL NEWSLETTERS

    Sign up and get the best of News delivered straight to your email inbox, free of charge. Choose your news – we will deliver.

    Subscribe Today
    December 12, 2022 page one

    Get access to the news, research and analysis of events affecting the retirement and institutional money management businesses from a worldwide network of reporters and editors.

    Subscribe
    Connect With Us
    • RSS
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn

    Our Mission

    To consistently deliver news, research and analysis to the executives who manage the flow of funds in the institutional investment market.

    About Us

    Main Office
    685 Third Avenue
    Tenth Floor
    New York, NY 10017-4036

    Chicago Office
    130 E. Randolph St.
    Suite 3200
    Chicago, IL 60601

    Contact Us

    Careers at Crain

    About Pensions & Investments

     

    Advertising
    • Media Kit
    • P&I Content Solutions
    • P&I Careers | Post a Job
    • Reprints & Permissions
    Resources
    • Subscribe
    • Newsletters
    • FAQ
    • P&I Research Center
    • Site map
    • Staff Directory
    Legal
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Request
    Pensions & Investments
    Copyright © 1996-2023. Crain Communications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
    • Topics
      • Alternatives
      • Consultants
      • Coronavirus
      • Courts
      • Defined Contribution
      • ESG
      • ETFs
      • Face to Face
      • Hedge Funds
      • Industry Voices
      • Investing
      • Money Management
      • Opinion
      • Partner Content
      • Pension Funds
      • Private Equity
      • Real Estate
      • Russia-Ukraine War
      • SECURE 2.0
      • Special Reports
      • White Papers
    • Rankings & Awards
      • 1,000 Largest Retirement Plans
      • Top-Performing Managers
      • Largest Money Managers
      • DC Money Managers
      • DC Record Keepers
      • Largest Hedge Fund Managers
      • World's Largest Retirement Funds
      • Best Places to Work in Money Management
      • Excellence & Innovation Awards
      • WPS Innovation Awards
      • Eddy Awards
    • ETFs
      • Latest ETF News
      • Fund Screener
      • Education Center
      • Equities
      • Fixed Income
      • Commodities
      • Actively Managed
      • Alternatives
      • ESG Rated
    • ESG
      • Latest ESG News
      • The Institutional Investor’s Guide to ESG Investing
      • ESG Sustainability - Gaining Momentum
      • Climate Change: The Inescapable Opportunity
      • Impact Investing
      • 2022 ESG Investing Conference
      • ESG Rated ETFs
    • Defined Contribution
      • Latest DC News
      • DC Money Manager Rankings
      • DC Record Keeper Rankings
      • Innovations in DC
      • Trends in DC: Focus on Retirement Income
      • 2022 Defined Contribution East Conference
      • 2022 DC Investment Lineup Conference
    • Searches & Hires
      • Latest Searches & Hires News
      • Searches & Hires Database
      • RFPs
    • Performance Data
      • P&I Research Center
      • Earnings Tracker
      • Endowment Returns Tracker
      • Corporate Pension Contribution Tracker
      • Pension Fund Returns Tracker
      • Pension Risk Transfer Database
      • Future of Investments Research Series
      • Charts & Infographics
      • Polls
    • Careers
    • Events
      • View All Conferences
      • View All Webinars
      • 2023 Defined Contribution East
      • 2023 ESG Investing