Search results

This study examines the correlation between ownership structure (OS) and financial reporting integrity (FRI), with emphasis on the impact of earnings quality (EQ) in the Egyptian context.

The study uses data from 472 firm-year observations of Egyptian publicly listed companies between 2014 and 2021 and carried out descriptive statistics, correlation tests, multiple regression analysis and two-stage least squares (2SLS) to test the hypotheses.

The results revealed that blockholders and institutional ownership significantly enhance reporting integrity through effective oversight and monitoring. The findings underscore the vital role of concentrated OS in overseeing reporting practices and mitigating managerial opportunism, thereby improving the transparency and reliability of financial disclosures in Egypt.

The findings enrich the literature on corporate governance and financial reporting quality and have important implications for policymakers, regulators and corporate stakeholders.

This work contributes valuable insights on how OS and EQ can bolster FRI, offering crucial information for combating financial crises and facilitating smooth business operations in Egypt.

It is commonly stated that increased board diversity leads to the heightened financial performance of firms via the impact that it can have on innovation, but the latter association has, thus far, remained empirically controversial. The aim of this paper is to shed light on this unresolved debate and gap in the literature via studying different types of diversity.

A meta-analysis was conducted on the existing empirical evidence on the topic to show whether such an association exists and compare cognitive (expertise and experience) and demographic diversity (gender, nationality and racial/ethnic).

The results show that there is indeed a positive and statistically significant association between board diversity and firm innovation. This association is driven more by cognitive diversity of the board members than by demographic diversity.

Potential publication bias, heterogeneity in the quality of the existing studies and the diversity in operationalising innovation and board diversity remain as limitations to this meta-analysis.

Instead of focussing on selecting board members based on demographic (surface-level) diversity, selections should be based on the interplay of the experience, expertise and background demographic characteristics of the potential candidates. Otherwise, the minority members might face a “token” status.

The results of this paper suggest that there is a positive association between board diversity and firm innovation. Future research should examine why this link exists. Therefore, the paper concludes with a research agenda for the benefit of potential further studies.