The impact of the 1995 TSE corporate governance guidelines on the performance of Canadian companies : a simultaneous equation approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is aimed at testing the impact of the 1995 Corporate Governance Guidelines adopted by the TSE on the performance of Canadian firms. This is accomplished by modeling the joint determination of three alternative internal agency control mechanisms: board composition, ownership structure and debt, together with firm performance in a simultaneous equation framework employing three-stage least-squares methodology. We find that the balance of forces has shifted in the post guidelines period to an increasing monitoring role attributed to boards of directors as both their composition and size become significant determinants of firm performance (as measured by Tobin's Q). Furthermore, the test performed on a 5-year pooled sample, three years from the pre-guidelines period and two years from the post-guidelines period, shows that the proposals in the Corporate Governance Guidelines adopted by the TSE in 1995 had a positive impact on the performance of these firms. Incorporating a dummy variable in the board composition equation that takes on a value of one after the adoption of the guidelines and zero before, the results from a 3SLS system confirm that the adoption in 1995 of the Corporate Governance Guidelines is associated with an increase in outside representation on the boards. An interaction variable between the above mentioned dummy and the percentage of outsiders in the firm performance equation confirms that TSE regulation prompted a rise in outsiders on boards, which consequently led to a significant improvement in their role as corporate monitors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".