Many studies have examined the relationships between board attributes (board independence, CEO duality, board size, and women on boards) and corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD) as a means to improve a firm’s reputation. This research was performed in various international settings and uneven outcomes were obtained. We therefore meta-analyzed 88 studies to summarize scattered evidence and found that CEO duality had a significantly negative relationship with CSRD, while board independence, board size and women representation had a significantly positive relationship with CSRD. These relationships were more significant in countries with low levels of commitment to sustainable goals. Thus, our study revealed differences in the relationship between board attributes and CSRD, and that these differences were conditioned by the institutional contexts in which firms operate. Our research has practical implications for practitioners and policy makers alike as we offer guidelines on the most suitable corporate governance mechanisms to achieve lower capital costs and better access to finance.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine in greater depth the concept of “board capital”, which the authors consider to be a bundle of three types of capital, and believe to be a clear antecedent of the board’s ability to perform its roles, which have positive consequences for the firm’s performance.Design/methodology/approach: Through 83 firms listed on The Madrid Stock Exchange during the period 2005-2010, the authors test empirically the relationships between different dimensions of board capital and firm performance, and specially how internal social capital moderates the relationships between board human capital and external social capital with firm performance.Findings: The results show that certain characteristics of human capital (average board tenure) and external social capital (directors’ interlocks) are positively related to the firm performance. The empirical findings also indicate that the internal social capital, measured by board density, is positively related to the firm performance and moderates these above relationships, increasing the potential of the resources contributed by the board members and influencing to a large extent on a firm’s performance.Practical implications: The results of the investigation will help both executives and scholar in two ways. First, they will assist firms when they have to select board members, as they can now understand how the resources that board members bring with them can affect the firm performance. To be more effective, boards need to have members that have experience as firm’s directors, external connections to other boards and many internal ties among them. Second, in this context, internal social capital is especially relevant, so the firms should look for possible ways of encouraging internal ties between directors. In this paper, the authors have opted for study the participation of directors in committees.Originality/value: The authors propose that these three types of capital (human, external and internal social capital) need to be synergistically combined to create a group of directors with access to a complete set of skills, knowledge and connections, but which can still work as a compact social group when making decisions.

Purpose: This study investigates the relationships between environmental, social, and governance (ESG) controversies and insolvency risk in the insurance sector. Drawing from legitimacy and stakeholder theories, the authors explore the impact of ESG controversies on insurers’ insolvency risk and the moderating effect of ESG practices on this relationship.Design/methodology/approach: This study utilises a dataset comprising 120 stock insurance firms spanning from 2011 to 2022. The authors employed system-GMM estimations to control for potential endogeneity and conducted several robustness checks.Findings: ESG controversy positively influences insurers’ insolvency risk, with ESG practices mitigating these positive effects. The Governance (G) component of ESG practices plays a key role in counteracting the effects of ESG controversies on insurance companies’ insolvency risk.Originality/value: This is the first study to investigate the direct relationship between ESG controversies and insolvency risk in the insurance industry. It underscores the critical influence of stakeholders’ perceptions of the company’s legitimacy, which is determined by the number of ESG controversies undertaken by the insurer company, on its insolvency risk. Additionally, by examining the three components of ESG practices individually, the authors offer insights into how managers can gain a competitive edge, particularly by utilising governance practices as safeguards against the adverse effects of ESG controversies on their financial risk.

This paper explores the effect that the monitoring and the provision of resources board roles have on the relationship between ownership concentration and firm performance. The sample of this study is made up of 579 European firms registered on the STOXX Europe 600 index during the period 2002–2011. The results of this study show that the monitoring provided by the board positively influences the effect that ownership concentration has on performance. The results also highlight that the moderating effect of the provision of resources role has a positive influence on firm performance concerning almost all levels of ownership concentration, diminishing and having slightly negative effects when the concentration levels are extremely high.

Purpose: Using a contingency approach, the purpose of this paper is to study how organizational factors (such as the organizational life cycle, firm size, firm ownership concentration and firm technology) determine the relative importance of the monitoring and provision of resources roles provided by board members.Design/methodology/approach: This paper highlights the importance of contingency factors in carrying out board’s roles using a sample of 579 European firms registered in the STOXX Europe 600 index. The authors used a longitudinal analysis for the period from 2002 through to 2011.Findings: The results show that the monitoring role is more relevant for companies that are large, are operating at the mature and stagnant stages, have a dispersed ownership and are low-technology. However, the provision of resources role is more relevant for companies that are in the growth and stagnant stages, and have a concentrated ownership.Originality/value: The traditional analysis that relates the board’s structure and composition to the board’s roles focuses on determining what board should be the best. It plays little attention to analyzing which organizational factors affect the importance and presence of monitoring or resource dependence roles. In this regard, this work adds significant insights to agency theory and resource dependence theory as, with a contingency framework, the research aims to find what functions the board needs to develop in order to get better firm performance.