Pastra, Aspasia

English

World Maritime University

Dr. Aspasia S. Pastra, World Maritime University, SwedenDr. Dimitrios N.  Koufopoulos, University of London, UKDr. Ioannis Gkliatis, University of Hertfordshire , LondonKonstantinos A. Athanasiadis, Hellenic Observatory of Corporate Governance (HOCG), GreeceThe current study presents the Board Characteristics of all the 40Greek-owned public shipping companies which have been listed inforeign Stock Exchanges (Securities & Exchange Commission, theNew York Stock Exchange, the London Stock Exchange, theNasdaq Stock Market and the Singapore Stock Exchange) for theperiod 2001- 2017.The Board Characteristics examined are: CEO duality, Board Size,Outside Vs Inside Directors, Cross Directorships, Tenure andWomen’s Appointment.The findings are based on the database of the Hellenic Observatoryof Corporate Governance (http://www.hocg.eu/)The Greek Shipping Context:Greece is the first ship owning country in terms of dead-weighttonnage, possessing a market share of 17.3%, followed by Japan at11.7 %, China at 9.6 % and Germany at 5.6 % (UNCTAD, 2018).Greece is one of the leading maritime nations with 4,371 nationaland foreign vessels.There are 597 Greek shipping companies, both listed and non-listed,of which their fleet is expanding fast (Petrofin, 2018).Approximately 52% of the shipping companies listed in NYSE andNASDAQ are owned by Greek nationals.The Board of Directors Board of directors is the elite group of the organisation whichis appointed to monitor the top management team and theoperations of the organisation. The board consists of its Chairman, Chief Executive Officer(CEO) and the Directors (“functional” Board members eitherexecutive or non executive)..Roles of the BOD MONITORING: responsibility of directors to monitor the TopManagement Team and CEO on behalf of shareholders. PROVISION OF RESOURCES: the ability of the board tobring resources to the firm, resources being “anything thatcould be thought of as a strength or weakness of a given firm”.HILLMAN and DALZIEL (2003)Governance Layers of a Shipping OrganisationBoard of DirectorsCEOTop Management TeamOperations Chartering Crew SupplySupply and LogisticsIT and CommunicationAccounting and Finance Technical Fleet A Fleet BHR Internal AuditFindings: Board PositionsFor the period 2001-2017, we found 433 directorships (board positions) created in these 40 listed shipping companies. Findings: CEO Duality “CEO duality” occurs when the same individual holds both theCEO and Chairperson’s positions in a corporation (Rechnerand Dalton, 1991). It is generally accepted in literature that therole of Chairman and CEO should be separated. In our study the CEO duality was examined as of December ofeach year for the period 2001-2017 and we notice an increasedtendency for many companies towards a more concentratingstructure of governance. For 2017, in 68% of the listedshipping companies the CEO and Chairperson positions werein the hands of one person.100%50% 50%33%46%50% 48%57% 56% 55%58%62%68% 67% 65% 65%68%0%50% 50%67%54%50% 52%43% 44% 45%42%38%32% 33% 36% 35%32%CE0 Duality 2001-2017Duality SeparationFindings: Board size Determining the optimal size of a board of directors, one thatmaximizes corporate performance, remains an ongoingchallenge for management scholars. Some researchers havesuggested a ‘sweet spot’ of 8 to 10 members (Lipton & Lorsch,1992) while others suggest that boards should be sufficientlylarge, but not larger than 7 or 8 members (Jensen, 1993). For the period 2001-2017, the average board size was 6.64 andmost companies prefer a board of 7 members.Findings: Outside Vs Inside Directors High proportion of outsiders on the board has been considered a signof good corporate practice. In the literature it is strongly argued thathigh participation of independent (outside) directors can bringdifferent attributes to the boardroom and objectivity in strategicdecision making. Out of the 433 BOD positions that were created in these 17 years,242 seats were occupied by outside directors (external directors).0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%Inside Directors Outside Directors44.2%55.8%Findings: Board TenureLong tenured executives could bring significant advantages to the organization andperform their duties with greater skills and knowledge. Nevertheless, there are findingsthat demonstrated that longer tenure could befriend management at the expense ofshareholders. We noticed that shipping companies have stable boards without many fluctuations intheir composition during the last 17 years. The average Tenure of the whole board was 61.29 months (approx. 5 years) The average Tenure of CEO was 80.76 months (approx. 7 years) As for the average Tenure of the Chairman, we noted that it had an average of 82.24months. The average Tenure of Directors, after excluding the tenure of the Chairman andCEO, was 56.53 months.Findings: Cross directorships  Cross directorships occur when a person affiliated with oneorganization “sits on the board of directors of another organization”(Mizruchi, 1996: 271). For the period 2001-2017, we found 433 directorships (BODpositions) of which 82 were held by 36 directors who possessedsimultaneous positions in two or more listed companies’ boardsduring their tenure. Out of these 36 directors, there were 28 (77.8%) who held positionsin 2 different boards, while 6 (16.7%) directors served in threecompanies.Findings: Women A very interesting finding is the sharp discrepancy that existsbetween men and women in the board composition of shippingcompanies. For the period 2001-2017, 407 out of 433 board positionswere held by men (94%). Respectively, there were only 26directorships held by women (6%). The total number of directors appointed in the 433 positions was 370after excluding mobility and cross directorships. Out of the 370directors, 352 (95.1%) were men; while there were only 19 femaledirectors (4.9%). Only one woman was simultaneously the Chairmanand the CEO of four different maritime companies, who preferredthe duality structure for their governance. Besides, one woman wasthe CEO of the company.Men Women Percentage WomenBoard Positions407 26 6%Directors 352 19 4.9%Findings: WomenCompanies with no female directors 15Companies with one female director 7Companies with two female directors 2Companies with three female directors 1Female directorships and directors 1.1.2017-31.12.2017 in the 25 listed companies Current Stage of Women in the boardrooms around the worldDrastical measures were taken by, Norway back to 2006 whichenforced a 40% female quota law on the board of directors ofpublicly listed companiesOther European countries, such as Iceland and Spain have alsoimplemented type of quota regulations, whereas others, such asUK, have set into place voluntary measures.Deloitte’s research on 7,000 companies in 44 countries foundthat women held 15% of all board positions in 2017; a slightincrease from 2015 when the percentage reached 12%.Why Gender Diversity in the Boardroom should be considered by ship-owners? The shipping community should take into account the largenumber of studies of the last decade which confirm the positiverelation between gender participation in boards and financialperformance and organisational effectiveness.Why Gender Diversity in the Boards should be considered by ship-owners?Dunn (2012) confirmed that when women are appointed intomale dominated groups bring with them specialized knowledgeand skills.Women could break the barriers and contribute in specific areasof the shipping companies where specialized knowledge isneeded. For example they could bring valuable knowledge inareas such as economics, finance and maritime law.Female board members are more likely to set challengingquestions and increase the collaboration capacity of the board.Recent research supports of the magic number of “3” womenon boards (e.g Torchia et al., 2011). Only one female in theboard does not imply that will boost the performance of theorganization. Increasing ratio of women directors is associatedwith decision-making dynamics and a high level of influenceon the decisions of the board.The real obstacle in the appointment of women in leadership positions is the lack of urgency. Referencing list Deloitte Global Center for Corporate Governance (2017) Women in the Boardroom: A Global Perspective, Fifth Edition. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/za/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/za_Wome_in_the_boardroom_a_global_perspective_fifth_edition.pdf. Accessed 21 March 2019 Dunn P (2012) Breaking the boardroom gender barrier the human capital of female corporate directors. Journal of Management & Governance 16: 557-570 Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983) Separation of Ownership and Control. Journal of Law and Economics 26: 301-325 Hellenic Observatory of Corporate Governance. http://www.hocg.eu/. Accessed 20 March 2019 Hillman, A., Dalziel, T. (2003), Boards of Directors and Firm Performance: Integrating Agency and Resource Dependence Perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28 (3): 383-396  Lipton M, Lorsch J (1992) A Modest Proposal for Improved Corporate Governance. Business Lawyer 48: 59-67 Petrofin Research (2018) Greek fleet statistics. https://www.petrofin.gr/petrofin-research/. Accessed 21 March 2019 Torchia M,  Calabro A, Huse M (2011) Women directors on corporate boards: From tokenism to critical mass. Journal of Business Ethics 102: 299-317 UNCTAD (2018) Review of Maritime Transport. https://unctad.org/en/pages/publications/Review-of-Maritime-Transport-(Series).aspx. Accessed 21 March 2019

Women in the board of directors : the case of Greek listed companies

https://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1021&amp;context=maritimewomen2019

Women in the board of directors : the case of Greek listed companies

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

World Maritime University