* Where is the cover page and its contents? Had it been there I might have commented on ur full title. * Long paragraphs are observed. Pls put different ideas in different paragraphs. * Be consistent in the use of terms for your variables.
* I read three critical sections in the interest of time: Methodology, Problem statement and objective. The purpose of such partial reading is not to stop ur progress. U can collect data, analyze it and write the whole thesis. I will read the other sections later when I get sufficient time…..Before I start to follow such partial reading strategy, I read and commented your background of the study. * I see many irrelevant materials in your methodology section. * You have a significant problem of not quoting source for information taken from the literature. Avoid this behavior when you are a researcher. * You seems confused on which theory of CG you will follow i.e. shareholders vs. stakeholders theory. * I see much literature in the methodology section. Especially you discussed the relationship between each of your IV and DV in the methodology section. But this should have finished in LR section. Why u make your writing redundant? * You better add many other board characteristics variables as IVs in your model. Besides add other internal governance mechanisms like CEO compensation, debt policy, management ownership etc as IVs…..In general read more literature and add many IVs to have real contribution beyond simple studies that use small number of IVs. * Don’t use the words I, my, we, our etc because they make it personal witting. What is needed is professional writing whereby the researcher is detached from the research work. This is sensible in quantitative studies like yours. * If you see three dots enclosed by white box at the end a comment (as in Comment No T-9 in the problem statement etc), you click the box and then you will get additional comment at the left side of MS-Word. * Since there is no special section for “Gap in Literature” according to different formats, I can’t read it. Some put it in the introduction part, others at the end of Literature Review (LR) and still others in Significance of the study. But I want to know about this issue because it is very critical. Many examiners ask you the contribution of your study to the literature…..If there is no gap in literature and you are repeating what is already known; there is no need for your study totally….Believe me this! So please think seriously about this issue and please show to the readers the gap in literature and how you are going to fill that gap. You can find gap in literature if there is some form deficiency in different literatures (International, Ethiopian, or ANRS specific literatures). *
1.1 Background of the Study
Corporate governance has become a prominent topic in Ethiopia in last couple of decades due to reforms which brought market economy, privatization of state-owned enterprises and openings in the financial system. The term ‘governance’ derives from the Latin gubernare, meaning ‘to steer’, usually applying to the steering of a ship, which implies that corporate governance involves the function of direction rather than control (Solomon and Solomon, 2004: 1). the term “corporate governance” derives from an analogy between the government of cities, nations or states and the governance of corporations (Becht, Bolton and Röell, 2005 pp.2).
There is no single, accepted definition of corporate governance (Solomon and Solomon, 2004 pp.12). There are significant differences in definition according to the country considered. Some of the definitions are narrower or shareholder-oriented approach emphasizing only to the basic role of corporate governance of aligning the interest of shareholders with the interest of mangers. Some other are broader or stakeholder-oriented approach in that corporate governance...
References: Ameer R., Ramli F. and Zakaria H. (2010). A new perspective on board composition and firm performance in an emerging market. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN, 10, 647-661.
Andres Pablo de, Azofra V. and Lopez F. (2005). Corporate Boards in OECD Countries: size, composition, functioning and effectiveness. Corporate Governance, 13 (2), 197-210.
Bhattacherjee Anol (2nd Ed.).(2012). Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. A free textbook published under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Barnhart S. W., Marr M. W. and Rosenstein S. (1994). Firm Performance and Board Composition: Some New Evidence. Managerial and Decision Economics, 15(4), 329-340.
Brooks C. (2nd Ed). (2008). Introductory Econometrics for Finance. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Creswell J. W.(2nd Ed). (2003). Qualitative, Quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Ellstrand, A. E., and Johnson, L. J.(1998). Meta- Analytic Review of Board Composition, Leadership Structure and Financial Performance, Strategic Management Journal, 19 (3), 269-290.
Fama, Eugene F., and Jensen, Michael C. (1983). Separation of Ownership and Control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301–25.
Fekadu Petros G. (2010). Control in Ethiopian Share Companies:Legal and Policy Implications. Mizan Law Review 4 (1), 1-30.
Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (2003). Board of Directors as an Endogenously Determined Institution: A Survey of the Economic Literature, Economic Policy Review, 9 (1), 7-26.
Hillman A. J. and Dalziel T. (2003). Boards of Directors and Firm Performance: Integrating Agency and Resource Dependence Perspectives. The Academy of Management Review, 28, 383-396.
Imperial Ethiopian Government (1960). Commercial code of Ethiopia. Berhanena Selam Printing Press, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Jackling B. and Johl S. (2009). Board Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence from India’s Top Companies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(4): 492–509.
Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour, agency costs, and ownership structure, Journal of Financial Economics, 4, 305-60.
Klein A. (1998). Firm Performance and Board Committee Structure. Journal of Law and Economics, 41(1), 275-304.
Kothari, C.R. (2nd Ed). ( 2005). Research Methodology- Methods and Techniques, New Delhi, Wiley Eastern Limited.
Muth M.M. and Donaldson L. (1998). Stewardship Theory and Board Structure: a Contingency Approach. Scholarly Research and Theory Papers, 6(1), 5-28.
Nicholson, Gavin J and Kiel, Geoff C (2003) Board Composition and Corporate Performance: How the Australian Experience Informs Contrasting Theories of Corporate Governance. Corporate Governance: An International Review 11(3), 189-205.
Peng M. W. (2004). Outside Directors and Firm Performance during Institutional Transitions. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 453–471.
Perry T. and Shivdasani A. (2005). Do Boards Affect Performance? Evidence from Corporate Restructuring. The Journal of Business, 78(4), 1403-1432.
Rashid A., De Zoysa A., Lodh S. and K. Rudkin (2010). Board Composition and Firm Performance: Evidence from Bangladesh. Australasian Accounting Business and Finance Journal, 4(1), 76-95.
Rhoades Dawna L., Rechner Paula L. and sundaramurthy Chamu (2001). A Meta-analysis of Board Leadership Structure and Financial Performance: are “two heads better than one”?. Emperical Research-based and Theory-building Papers, 9, 311-319.
Rhoades Dawna L., Rechner Paula L. and sundaramurthy Chamu (2000). Board Composition and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis of the Influence of Outside Directors. Journal of Managerial Issues, 12, 76-91.
Solomon Jill and Solomon Aris (2004). Corporate Governance and Accountability. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, the Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England.
Uadiale O. M. (2010). The Impact of Board Structure on Corporate Financial Performance in Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(10), 155-166.
Vafeas N. (2003). Length of Board Tenure and Outside Director Independence. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 30(7) & (8), 1043-1063.
Yermack, David (1996).Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics 40:185–212.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document