п»ї

Course Name

Business analysis methods

Task

Research proposal

Ownership Concentration, Corporate Governance and organization Performance in Textile Sector of Pakistan

Submitted to

Dr . Yasir Kamal

Published by

Farhan Akbar

Plan

Msc. Financing

Semester

third

Dated:

sixth of Might 2014

Table of Articles

1 ) Introduction........................................................................................................... three or more 2 . Materials Review………………. ……………………………………………………... 3 several. Objective of Research... ………………………………………………………………. 4 4. Research Methodology……………………………………………………………….. 4 5. 2 Data type and sampling……………………………………………………………... five 5. Examination of data…………………………………………………………………. ……... five 6. References…………………………………………………………………………….. 6

1 ) INTRODUCTION:

The meaning of corporate and business governance may differ from nation to country. For the case of Ls European countries including Germany, the term refers to all of the stakeholders of any firm and for Anglo-American countries corporate governance focuses on creating a fair come back for traders (see Goergen, Manjon and Renneboog, 2005). The corporate governance devices employed to ensure financial efficiency incorporate among others aktionar monitoring, creditor monitoring, professional remuneration agreements, dividend plan and the regulating framework with the corporate legislation regime as well as the stock exchanges. The raising international the use, deregulation and technological expansion and the ensuing challenges will be calling for a review of national company governance devices. Countries which have been in dire need of external funding require more powerful and successful corporate governance systems. Pakistan's failure to draw external fund – several of it by foreign investors – could possibly be largely caused by weak investor protection. The size of relation involving the ownership structure and corporate governance structure is the core issue in the corporate governance literature. Via a firms' perspective, control structure establishes the firms' profitability, enjoyed by different stake-holders. Especially, ownership framework is an incentive device for reducing the agency costs associated with the splitting up of possession and managing, which can be utilized to protect real estate rights with the firm (Barbosa and Louri, 2002)

installment payments on your Literature assessment

Since Berle and Means (1932) the separation of corporate possession from control has bring large books devoted to evolving, refuting or testing it. Hassen (1983) argues that if, while Berle and Mean declare, corporate representatives are promoting their own economic interests in the expense in the shareholders, then your remedy is usually to encourage shareholders to pay out an active role in nominating and choosing directors and therefore influence the selection of the representatives who run the enterprise. When Jensen and Meckling (1976) argue that intro of managerial share ownership may reduce these organization problems, thus aligning the eye of managers and investors. They assert that company value is usually reduced when ever ownership and control happen to be separated due to added costs of monitoring and the managers participate in actions that may not enhance organization value for the owners. Yeh (2003) in Taiwan, Dzieranowski and Tamowicz (2004) in Poland and Cheema et approach. (2003) in Pakistan find that the companies' shares are routine concentrated inside the hand of largest shareholders. When shareholders are too diffused to monitor managers, business assets can be utilised for the advantage of the managers rather than to get maximizing aktionar wealth. Therefore a solution to this problem is to give managers collateral stake inside the firm. This will deal with the ethical hazard issue by aiming managerial hobbies with of shareholders (Himmelberg et al. (1999). Stulz (1988) show that sufficiently high bureaucratic ownership, by allowing managers to block takeover bids, can lower...

Sources: Agrawal, A., and Mandelker, G. 1990. Large Investors and the Monitoring of Managers: the

Case of Antitakeover Charter Changes

Barbosa, D., and Louri, H. 2002. On the determinants of multinationals' ownership tastes:

Evidence coming from Greece and Portugal, International Journal of Industrial Economics twenty:

Berle, A., and Means, G. (1932) The Modern Organization and Private Propert, New York:

Macmillan.

Burkart, Meters., 1997. Huge shareholders, monitoring, and the value of the firm. The Quarterly

Journal of Economics 112 (3), 693–729.

Cheema, A., Bari, Farreneheit., and Saddique, O. 2003. Corporate Governance in Pakistan: Ownership,

Control and the Legislation, Lahore University or college of Managing Sciences, Lahore.

Chibber, L. K., and Majumdar, H. K. 1999, Foreign Control and Earnings: Property Legal rights,

Control, and the Performance of Firms in Indian Sector, The Diary of Law and

Chibber, P. T., and Majumdar, S. E. 1999. Overseas ownership and profitability: house

rights, control and the performance of organizations in American indian industry

Choi, J. J., and Yoo, S. june 2006. Foreign expenditure and firm performance. Dialogue Paper,

Korean language Institute of International Financial Policy.

Chirinko, B., Ees, H. V., Garretsen, L., and Sterken, E. 1999. Firm performance, financial

instititions and corporate governance in the Holland

Claessens, T., Djankov, H., and Pohl, G. mil novecentos e noventa e seis. Ownership and Corporate Governance: Data

from the Czech Republic

twenty three

Claessens, S., and Djankov, S., 99

the Czech Republic. CEPR Discussion Daily news No . 2145.

Claessens, T., Djankov, S i9000., and Lang, L. 2150. The Separation of Possession and

Control in East Asian Companies, Journal of Financial Economics 58: 81-112.

Businesses Ordenence, XLVII of 1984, 1984. G. L. Deb. Publishers, Lahore.

Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. 3rd there’s r., and Rajagopalan, N. the year 2003. Governance through ownership: centuries

of practice, decades of research

Demsetz, H., Lehn, K., 1985. The structure of company ownership: Causes and effects.

Doidge, C., Karolyi, G. A., Lins, K. Sixth is v., and Stulz, R. Meters. 2005. Exclusive benefits of control,

ownership, and the cross-listing decision

Durnev, Art and Elizabeth. Han Betty (2006) To Steal or To not Steal: Organization Attributes, Legal

Environment, and Valuation, Journal of Financial, vol LX(3), 1461-1493.

Dzierzanowski, M and Tamowicz, L. 2004. Control and control of Polish

corporations. Corporate Title and Control 1: 20-30.

Fama, At the., 1980. Agency problems as well as the theory from the firm. Diary of Political Economy 88:

288-307.

Faccio, M., Lang, L. 2002. The ultimate ownership of Western European corporations. Log

of Financial Economics 65: 365– 395.

Feinberg, R. M. 1975. Revenue maximization or utility optimization. Southern Economic Journal

42: 130-134.

Gedajlovic, E. Ur., and Shapiro D. M. 2002. Ownership structure and firm profitability in The japanese.

Tags:

Dr . Martin Luther Full, Jr. Article

Philippine Governmental policies Essay