Organizational form, ownership structure and corporate performance: a contextual empirical analysis of UK companies

This paper contributes to the literature on organizational form and performance (the performance-conduct paradigm) by examining the impact of two sets of variables that have not been examined previously: measures of environmental uncertainty and alternative forms of controlling separation of ownership from control. The paper first examines the extent to which contextual variables such as perceived environmental uncertainty and age of the organizational form moderate the relationship between organizational form and corporate performance. Next, the paper extends the analysis by examining the possible effects of ownership and control structures on performance. Measures suggested by agency theory, such as conventional ownership proxies (i.e. proportion of shares held by identifiable, homogenous groups), the proportion of non-executive board members and Fama and Jensen's concept of separation of decision management from decision control are used in the analysis. The results indicate that these measures have direct impact on corporate performance in their own right, though the main impact is indirect through interactions with organizational form variables.

[1]  Susan F. Haka,et al.  CAPITAL BUDGETING TECHNIQUES AND FIRM SPECIFIC CONTINGENCIES: A CORRELATIONAL ANALYSIS. , 1987 .

[2]  E. Fama,et al.  Separation of Ownership and Control , 1983, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[3]  The markets and hierarchies framework: A critique of the model's applicability to accounting and economic development , 1983 .

[4]  B. Spicer,et al.  Management accounting systems and the economics of internal organization , 1983 .

[5]  M. Ezzamel,et al.  Divisionalisation in British Industry: a Preliminary Study , 1980 .

[6]  J. Robins,et al.  Organizational Economics: Notes on the Use of Transaction-Cost Theory in the Study of Organizations. , 1987 .

[7]  R. Thompson.  Internal Organization and Profit: A Note [Internal Organization and Profit: An Empirical Analysis of Large UK Companies] , 1981 .

[8]  O. Williamson.  The organization of work a comparative institutional assessment , 1980 .

[9]  David J. Teece,et al.  INTERNAL ORGANIZATION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROFITABILITY OF PRINCIPAL FIRMS* , 1981 .

[10]  R. Coase.  The Nature of the Firm , 1937 .

[11]  J. Cable,et al.  Hierarchies and markets: An empirical test of the multidivisional hypothesis in West Germany , 1983 .

[12]  J. F. Pickering,et al.  DIVISIONALIZATION, DECENTRALIZATION AND PERFORMANCE OF LARGE UNITED KINGDOM COMPANIES 1 , 1986 .

[13]  G. Roberts,et al.  Captive Finance Subsidiaries and the M-Form Hypothesis , 1981 .

[14]  H. Ingham.  Adjustment costs and organizational change , 1992 .

[15]  R. Burton,et al.  A Computer Simulation Test of the M-Form Hypothesis , 1980 .

[16]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[17]  J. Cable,et al.  Internal organisation, business groups and corporate performance: An empirical test of the multidivisional hypothesis in Japan , 1985 .

[18]  Oliver E. Williamson,et al.  Understanding the employment relation: the analysis of idiosyncratic exchange , 1975 .

[19]  C. Hill,et al.  Internal organization and enterprise performance: Some UK evidence , 1985 .

[20]  M. Ezzamel.  On the Assessment of the Performance Effects of Multidivisional Structures: A Synthesis , 1985 .

[21]  Mahmoud Ezzamel,et al.  Corporate governance and financial control , 1992 .

[22]  E. Fama,et al.  Agency Problems and Residual Claims , 1983 .

[23]  D. Teece,et al.  Organizational Structure and Economic Performance: A Test of the Multidivisional Hypothesis , 1978 .

[24]  J. Cable,et al.  INTERNAL ORGANIZATION AND PROFIT: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF LARGE U.K. COMPANIES , 1978 .