The Role of the Board of Directors in the Capital Budgeting Process - Evidence from S&P 500 Firms

We study the role of the board of directors of S&P 500 firms in the capital budgeting process. We find that boards, through their committees, play four main roles in this process. They review and approve large capital requests that the CEO brings, they review and approve annual budgets, they review and approve merger and acquisition transactions, and they monitor the performance of approved projects. We also find that the capital allocation process often involves allocating initial spending limit and reviewing any request beyond that limit. Boards establish committees to review capital requests and annual budgets in cash-rich firms and in low-growth industries, and the characteristics of these committees suggest that they have a monitoring role. These findings support the theoretical predictions of Harris and Raviv (1996, 1998), that firms should audit capital requests when the auditing costs are low and when the overinvestment problems are severe. Boards are more likely to establish committees to review merger and acquisition proposals in high growth industries, and the characteristics of these committees suggest that they have an advisory role rather than a monitoring role. Thus, our results suggest that capital budgeting mechanisms have a dual role: to alleviate conflicts of interest between agents and principals and to communicate principals' information to agents.

[1]  Artur Raviv,et al.  A Theory of Board Control and Size , 2008 .

[2]  A. Mariño,et al.  Decision Processes, Agency Problems, and Information: An Economic Analysis of Capital Budgeting Procedures , 2005 .

[3]  Daniel Ferreira,et al.  A Theory of Friendly Boards , 2007 .

[4]  Renée B. Adams What Do Boards Do? Evidence from Board Committee and Director Compensation Data , 2003 .

[5]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems , 1993, A Theory of the Firm.

[6]  Antonio E. Bernardo,et al.  Capital Budgeting in Multi-Division Firms: Information, Agency, and Incentives , 2002 .

[7]  Jiang Luo,et al.  Capital Budgeting and Compensation with Asymmetric Information and Moral Hazard , 2000 .

[8]  Benjamin E. Hermalin,et al.  Boards of Directors as an Endogenously Determined Institution: A Survey of the Economic Literature , 2000 .

[9]  K. R. Jones The capital budgeting process. , 1999, Seminars for nurse managers.

[10]  Ronen Israel,et al.  Current version: , 2008 .

[11]  Artur Raviv,et al.  Capital Budgeting and Delegation , 1997 .

[12]  Guochang Zhang Moral Hazard in Corporate Investment and the Disciplinary Role of Voluntary Capital Rationing , 1997 .

[13]  Brad M. Barber,et al.  Detecting Long-Run Abnormal Stock Returns: The Empirical Power and Specification of Test Statistics , 1997 .

[14]  Artur Raviv,et al.  The Capital Budgeting Process: Incentives and Information , 1996 .

[15]  D. Yermack Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors , 1996 .

[16]  Jay W. Lorsch,et al.  Pawns or Potentates: The Reality of America's Corporate Boards , 1989 .

[17]  R. Taggart ALLOCATING CAPITAL AMONG A FIRM'S DIVISIONS: HURDLE RATES VS. BUDGETS , 1987 .

[18]  Bengt Holmstrom,et al.  Managerial Incentives and Capital Management , 1986 .

[19]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers , 1999 .

[20]  Marc Ross,et al.  Capital Budgeting Practices of Twelve Large Manufacturers , 1986 .

[21]  Gary D. Eppen,et al.  Capital Rationing and Organizational Slack in Capital Budgeting , 1985 .

[22]  David F. Scott,et al.  Capital Budgeting Practices in Large American Firms: A Retrospective Analysis and Synthesis , 1984 .

[23]  Stanley B. Block,et al.  A SURVEY OF MULTINATIONAL CAPITAL BUDGETING , 1984 .

[24]  Lawrence J. Gitman,et al.  A Survey of Capital Budgeting Techniques Used by Major U.S. Firms , 1977 .