Purpose: The paper aims at providing insights on the relationship between capital structure and performance of the firm by employing meta-analytical approach to obtain a synthesized result out of controversial studies as well as the sources for such inconsistency.Design/methodology/approach: Using secondary data, the analysis is divided into two main parts with concerns to the overall strength of the relationship, the effect size and the potential paper-specific characteristics influencing the magnitude of impacts between leverage and firm performance (moderators of the relationship). Overall, a total number of 32 journals, reviews and school presses were selected besides online libraries and publishing platforms. There were 50 papers with 340 studies chosen from 2004 to 2019, of which data range from 1998 to 2017.Findings: Using Hedges et al. (1985,1988), descriptive and quantitative analysis have been conducted to confirm that corporate performance is negatively related to capital decisions, which inclines toward trade-off model with agency costs and pecking order theory. The estimation induces rather small effect size that implies sufficiently large sample size to be effectively investigated. In terms of moderator analysis, random-effects meta-regression models of three different techniques are used to increase the robustness in research findings, showing statistically significant elements as publication status, factor of industry and proxy of firm performance.Originality/value: This paper is one of the first papers presenting meta-analysis in capital structure and performance for two languages, Vietnamese and English, providing a consistent result with previous worldwide papers.

This study aims to investigate and evaluate factors related to the knowledge management model at universities in Hanoi, Vietnam. Based on the system literature review (SLR) approach, the study follows descriptive and inductive approach results of the document review process. Eight factors were synthesized with the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) to evaluate the priority order. Ten experts from seven universities participated in the survey. The results rank as follows: (1) knowledge sharing factor (this also has the highest best nonfuzzy performance (BNP) and average multiplier weight (GM)); (2) knowledge management with big data systems; (3) knowledge creation; (4) knowledge use; (5) knowledge gathering; (6) leadership; (7) knowledge rating; and (8) knowledge storage. Discussions, conclusions, limitations of the study, and suggestions for future studies are also mentioned in this study.

Our study investigates the interlink between liquidity, corporate governance and firm value with the adoption of meta-analysis. The final sample consists of 428 studies extracted from 55 papers, covering 632,196 firm-year observations in a worldwide scope. The diversity in data is believed to reduce possible homogeneity due to regional or time period concentration. Using random-effects model, it is reported that both illiquidity factors (Spread and Amihud illiquidity) can significantly worsen the performance of a firm, while the corporate governance-firm value connection is significantly positive via three out of four factors (Corporate governance index, Board size and Institutional ownership). Besides studying the overall relationship direction, the paper also looks into its heterogeneity. The existence of heterogeneity is confirmed in both liquidity-firm value and governance-firm value relationships. The running of meta-regression indicates that both illiquidity factors are significantly moderated by most of the examined paper characteristics, whilst only two out of four corpor ate governance indicators (Corporate governance index and Institutional ownership) are significantly altered.

This research provides a systematic picture on the topic of “How corporate governance influences on firm performance?” through the application of meta-analysis on over 251 studies covering 24,867 businesses of 37 distinguished published papers. Using meta-analysis, by proceeding HOMA procedure, it is statistically evidenced that better corporate governance index and more board independence significantly enhance firm performance. By contrast, business’ financial value would be harmed as raise management shares proportion. Not only providing a general relationship direction, the paper also contributes an insight of potential sources of heterogeneity among collected samples as endogeneity problems; and selection of financial performance base. Moreover, significant changes through the sampling period are investigated in the connection of business’ worth and board size, board independence (declining trend); state ownership and institutional ownership (rising tendency).