{"id":{"repo_id":"lsu-thes","oai_identifier":"oai:repository.lsu.edu:gradschool_dissertations-1866"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/lsu-thes/oai:repository.lsu.edu:gradschool_dissertations-1866","repository":{"repo_id":"lsu-thes","name":"Lousiana State University","base_url":"https://repository.lsu.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Explaining strategic firm responsiveness to institutional processes in the evolution of corporate governance systems : the reform of director remuneration reporting in Germany","abstract":"Due to economic and social globalization processes, the boundaries of national systems of corporate governance have become more permeable for the transfer of ideas and practices from other institutional contexts. I derive hypotheses from a multitheoretical framework to explain strategic firm responsiveness to national level pressures for corporate governance reform. This framework integrates institutional, resource dependence, social network, upper echelon, and organizational learning perspectives and portrays corporate governance reform as institutional change. I test hypotheses derived from this framework in the context of the issuance of the German corporate governance code. The code provision of interest recommends that German firms listed on the Frankfurt stock exchange publish a comprehensive director remuneration report for their management and supervisory boards, a practice that is arguably at odds with the traditional regulative, normative, and cognitive-cultural institutional pillars of the German corporate governance system. A unique longitudinal dataset of 189 stock exchange listed firms is used to explain strategic firm responsiveness to the issuance of this institutionally contested provision. In this context, this dissertation is the first study that (partly) operationalizes Oliver's (1991) continuum of strategic responses to institutional processes. The findings reveal that in contrast to arguments advanced by financial economists and legal scholars, economic market forces do not significantly drive firms' responsiveness to corporate governance reform pressures. Instead, firm ownership type and power, labor representatives, management characteristics, and different intra- and interorganizational learning processes are significant predictors of strategic firm responsiveness to national level corporate governance reform pressures. The findings generally provide support for the developed theoretical framework and help corporate governance research to expand beyond the traditional legal and financial economics perspective.","abstract_html":"Due to economic and social globalization processes, the boundaries of national systems of corporate governance have become more permeable for the transfer of ideas and practices from other institutional contexts. I derive hypotheses from a multitheoretical framework to explain strategic firm responsiveness to national level pressures for corporate governance reform. This framework integrates institutional, resource dependence, social network, upper echelon, and organizational learning perspectives and portrays corporate governance reform as institutional change. I test hypotheses derived from this framework in the context of the issuance of the German corporate governance code. The code provision of interest recommends that German firms listed on the Frankfurt stock exchange publish a comprehensive director remuneration report for their management and supervisory boards, a practice that is arguably at odds with the traditional regulative, normative, and cognitive-cultural institutional pillars of the German corporate governance system. A unique longitudinal dataset of 189 stock exchange listed firms is used to explain strategic firm responsiveness to the issuance of this institutionally contested provision. In this context, this dissertation is the first study that (partly) operationalizes Oliver's (1991) continuum of strategic responses to institutional processes. The findings reveal that in contrast to arguments advanced by financial economists and legal scholars, economic market forces do not significantly drive firms' responsiveness to corporate governance reform pressures. Instead, firm ownership type and power, labor representatives, management characteristics, and different intra- and interorganizational learning processes are significant predictors of strategic firm responsiveness to national level corporate governance reform pressures. The findings generally provide support for the developed theoretical framework and help corporate governance research to expand beyond the traditional legal and financial economics perspective.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Krenn, Mario"],"institution":"Management (Business Administration)","degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Business","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2013-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:58:25Z","subjects":["institutional change; corporate governance"],"languages":[],"rights":["unrestricted","Release the entire work immediately for access worldwide."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["etd-05142013-152834","https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/867"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-05142013-152834","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/867","href":"https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/867","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.867","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Krenn, Mario"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2013-05-06"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2022-05-12T23:10:15Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Business"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Management (Business Administration)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["institutional change; corporate governance"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["unrestricted","Release the entire work immediately for access worldwide."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["etd-05142013-152834","10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.867","https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/867"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Due to economic and social globalization processes, the boundaries of national systems of corporate governance have become more permeable for the transfer of ideas and practices from other institutional contexts. I derive hypotheses from a multitheoretical framework to explain strategic firm responsiveness to national level pressures for corporate governance reform. This framework integrates institutional, resource dependence, social network, upper echelon, and organizational learning perspectives and portrays corporate governance reform as institutional change. I test hypotheses derived from this framework in the context of the issuance of the German corporate governance code. The code provision of interest recommends that German firms listed on the Frankfurt stock exchange publish a comprehensive director remuneration report for their management and supervisory boards, a practice that is arguably at odds with the traditional regulative, normative, and cognitive-cultural institutional pillars of the German corporate governance system. A unique longitudinal dataset of 189 stock exchange listed firms is used to explain strategic firm responsiveness to the issuance of this institutionally contested provision. In this context, this dissertation is the first study that (partly) operationalizes Oliver's (1991) continuum of strategic responses to institutional processes. The findings reveal that in contrast to arguments advanced by financial economists and legal scholars, economic market forces do not significantly drive firms' responsiveness to corporate governance reform pressures. Instead, firm ownership type and power, labor representatives, management characteristics, and different intra- and interorganizational learning processes are significant predictors of strategic firm responsiveness to national level corporate governance reform pressures. The findings generally provide support for the developed theoretical framework and help corporate governance research to expand beyond the traditional legal and financial economics perspective."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Explaining strategic firm responsiveness to institutional processes in the evolution of corporate governance systems : the reform of director remuneration reporting in Germany"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Krenn, Mario"],"dc:date":["2013-05-06"],"dc:date.available":["2022-05-12T23:10:15Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Due to economic and social globalization processes, the boundaries of national systems of corporate governance have become more permeable for the transfer of ideas and practices from other institutional contexts. I derive hypotheses from a multitheoretical framework to explain strategic firm responsiveness to national level pressures for corporate governance reform. This framework integrates institutional, resource dependence, social network, upper echelon, and organizational learning perspectives and portrays corporate governance reform as institutional change. I test hypotheses derived from this framework in the context of the issuance of the German corporate governance code. The code provision of interest recommends that German firms listed on the Frankfurt stock exchange publish a comprehensive director remuneration report for their management and supervisory boards, a practice that is arguably at odds with the traditional regulative, normative, and cognitive-cultural institutional pillars of the German corporate governance system. A unique longitudinal dataset of 189 stock exchange listed firms is used to explain strategic firm responsiveness to the issuance of this institutionally contested provision. In this context, this dissertation is the first study that (partly) operationalizes Oliver's (1991) continuum of strategic responses to institutional processes. The findings reveal that in contrast to arguments advanced by financial economists and legal scholars, economic market forces do not significantly drive firms' responsiveness to corporate governance reform pressures. Instead, firm ownership type and power, labor representatives, management characteristics, and different intra- and interorganizational learning processes are significant predictors of strategic firm responsiveness to national level corporate governance reform pressures. The findings generally provide support for the developed theoretical framework and help corporate governance research to expand beyond the traditional legal and financial economics perspective."],"dc:identifier":["etd-05142013-152834","10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.867","https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/867"],"dc:rights":["unrestricted","Release the entire work immediately for access worldwide."],"dc:subject":["institutional change; corporate governance"],"dc:title":["Explaining strategic firm responsiveness to institutional processes in the evolution of corporate governance systems : the reform of director remuneration reporting in Germany"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Business"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"],"thesis:institution_name":["Management (Business Administration)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:58:25Z"}