CEO Succession Choosing Between Family Member or Outsider

Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting 06/2012; 4(2):263-276. DOI: 10.5296/ajfa.v4i2.2355


Studies discussing on having a family chief executive officer (CEO) or outsider to manage
family companies are widely discussed in overseas but little research that actually taking
place in Malaysia. Thus, this study examines the relationship between the choices of family
or outside CEO with company performance. The sample size of this study was 888 family
companies listed on Bursa Malaysia from 2003 to 2007. Interestingly, the findings indicate as
expected that family CEO enhanced company performance greater than outside CEO. Within
the family company, CEO-successor enhanced the firm value greater than the CEO-founder.
More importantly, family companies prefer to have family CEO to manage the company
because of strong family cultures, high sense of family unity and belongings within the

Download full-text


Available from: Noor Afza Amran, Oct 04, 2015
35 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We use instrumental variables methods to disentangle the effect of founder-CEOs on performance from the effect of performance on founder-CEO status. Our instruments for founder-CEO status are the proportion of the firm's founders that are dead and the number of people who founded the company. We find strong evidence that founder-CEO status is endogenous in performance regressions and that good performance makes it less likely that the founder retains the CEO title. After factoring out the effect of performance on founder-CEO status, we identify a positive causal effect of founder-CEOs on firm performance that is quantitatively larger than the effect estimated through standard OLS regressions. We also find that founder-CEOs are more likely to relinquish the CEO post after periods of either unusually low or unusually high operating performances. All in all, the results in this paper are consistent with a largely positive view of founder control in large US corporations.
    Journal of Empirical Finance 02/2009; 16(1):136-150. DOI:10.1016/j.jempfin.2008.05.002 · 0.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We provide measures of absolute and relative equity agency costs for corporations under different ownership and management structures. Our base case is Jensen and Meckling's (1976) zero agency-cost firm, where the manager is the firm's sole shareholder. Utilizing a sample of 1,708 small corporations from the FRB/NSSBF database, we find evidence supporting several predictions of agency cost theory. Agency costs are found to be: i) significantly higher when an outsider rather than an insider manages the firm; ii ) inversely related to the manager's ownership share; iii) increasing with the number of non-manager shareholders, and iv) to a lesser extent, lower with greater monitoring by banks. Agency Costs and Ownership Structure The seminal contributions of Jensen and Meckling (1976) on agency costs have called into attention the social and private costs of an agent's actions due to the incomplete alignment of the agent's and owner's interests. Agency theory has also brought the roles o...
    The Journal of Finance 03/1999; 55(1). DOI:10.1111/0022-1082.00201 · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined how chief executive and top management team characteristics interact with organizational performance to influence strategic change. Results indicate that poor performance, long chief executive and top management team tenures, and high diversity in top management team tenure are associated with greater levels of strategic change. In addition, poor performance moderated the relationship between managerial characteristics and strategic change, increasing the likelihood of the latter.
    The Academy of Management Journal 02/1997; 40(1). DOI:10.2307/257024 · 5.61 Impact Factor
Show more