Methodological issues in governance research: An editor's perspective

• Author: Mike Wright,Igor Filatotchev
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12211
• Published date: 01 November 2017
• Date: 01 November 2017

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Methodological issues in governance research: An editor's

perspective

Igor Filatotchev

1

|Mike Wright

2

1

Cass Business School City, University of

London, UK and Vienna University of

Economics and Business, Austria

2

Imperial College Business School, Imperial

College, UK and ETH, Zürich, Switzerland

Correspondence

Igor Filatotchev, Cass Business School City,

University of London, 106 Bunhill Row,

London EC1Y 8TZ, UK.

Email: igor.filatotchev@city.ac.uk

Abstract

Manuscript type: Review

Research Question/Issue: What can be learnt with regard to methods in corporate gover-

nance research from editorial experience in handling corporate governance manuscripts? We

draw on our experience as editors and guest editors of various journals in highlighting some of

the methodological challenges in corporate governance research. We consider methodological

issues relating to both quantitative and qualitative studies. Within these broad approaches, we

discuss implications of theorizing, ownership and types of firms, governance and institutional

contexts, omission of governance variables, human and social capital of board members,

endogeneity/causality issues, executive remuneration, configurations and interactions of gover-

nance constructs, other governance mechanisms, and data sources. Discussion of these issues

also highlights the need for more theoretical and empirical consideration of contingent factors

influencing governance relationships. We identify possible ways forward and future research

avenues.

Research Findings/Insights: There is a need for corporate governance studies to devote

greater recognition to the heterogeneity of various governance factors such as ownership types

and director expertise. Studies have generally paid insufficient attention to the configurations of

corporate governance.

Theoretical/Academic Implications: Future research needs to address the connections

between the methodological recognition of heterogeneity and configurations and the implica-

tions for theorizing.

Practitioner/Policy Implications: Failure to address these methodological issues implies

that conclusions drawn from corporate governance research for practice and policy could well

be misleading.

KEYWORDS

Corporate Governance, methodology,research

1|INTRODUCTION

Corporate governance research has mushroomed over the last quarter

of a century since the launch of CGIR. From an editor's perspective,

the treatment of governance in papers has improved since the special

issue one of us edited resulting from the impetus to research in this

area arising from the Cadbury Report in 1992 (Keasey & Wright, 1993).

From agency theory underpinnings to much early research, new

domains have also emerged, such as the behavioral view of corporate

governance, institutional theory, and sociology‐grounded approaches.

Corporate governance has become a truly interdisciplinary area

compared to the dominance of economics and finance in the field 25

years ago (Durisin & Puzone, 2009; Judge, 2008).

However, there is always room for improvement, both in terms of

theoretical perspectives and in providing an adequate description of

the methods that authors are adopting in their paper if they want to

reduce the probability of being desk rejected (Kumar & Zattoni,

2015; Zattoni & Van Ees, 2012). Drawing on our experience as general

or associate editors of general management (Journal of Management

Studies;Academy of Management Perspectives), specialist governance

DOI: 10.1111/corg.12211

454 © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Corp Govern Int Rev. 2017;25:454–460.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/corg