




































43 

 

Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis 
Volume 7 Issue 1, 2025 

http://faba.bg/       
ISSN  2603-5324 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37075/FABA.2025.1.04  

 

Risk Management and the Financial Performance of Listed Real 

Estate/Construction Companies in Nigeria: The Moderating Role of 

Board Structure 
 

Asimiyu Kolawole Adegoke 1*   Akinwumi Olusegun Akinola 2  

  
Department of Banking and Finance, Achievers University Owo, Ondo State, Nigeria 1 

Department of Accounting, Emmanuel Alayande University of Education, Oyo, Nigeria 2 

* Corresponding author 

 

Info Articles   Abstract 
 

History Article: 

Submitted 12 October 2024 

Revised  21 February 2025 

Accepted 15 March 2025 
 

 Purpose: The study explored the moderating effect of board structure 

(board size and gender diversity) on the nexus of operational risk, market 

risk and financial performance of listed real estate and construction 

companies in Nigeria. 

Design/Methodology/Approach: The study implemented ex-post facto 

research design to analyze the variables on a panel data of audited annual 

reports of selected companies. The sample size was the population size 

consisting using the census sampling method. The study used the 

secondary data retrieved from corporate annual reports and corporate 

websites of the companies listed on Nigeria exchange group between 

2014 and 2023.  The data was analyzed using panel least square method. 

Findings: Market risk exhibited a positive significance with ROA, while 

the negative relationship with Tobin’s Q was statistically insignificant. 

Operational risk exerts an insignificant negative and positive effect on 

ROA and Tobin's Q, respectively. Board structure has a favourable but 

insignificant moderating effect on the connection between market risk 

and ROA. However, board structure showed a significantly negative 

moderating effect on the link between market risk and Tobin's Q. Lastly, 

board structure showed positive but insignificant moderating effect on 

the relationship between operational risk and financial performance. 

Practical Implications: 

Companies should invest in more reliable risk management systems to 

effectively detect, evaluate, and reduce operational and market risks. 

This can lessen the detrimental effects of these risks on financial 

performance indicators like Tobin's Q and ROA. It is important to 

improve board governance procedures because board structure has a 

major moderating effect on the link between market risk and Tobin's Q.  

Originality/Value: Firstly, the study examined the influence of 

operational and market risks on financial performance. The study further 

explored the moderating effect of board structure (board size and gender 

diversity) on the nexus of operational risk, market risk and financial 

performance in the context of real estate and construction companies in 

Nigeria. 

Paper Type:  Research Paper 

 

Keywords:  

Board Size, Gender 

Diversity, Financial 

Performance,  

Market Risk, Operation 

Risk 
 

 

JEL: G3, M14, M41  

* Address Correspondence:   

E-mail: kolaadegoke@ymail.com1 

 akinwumiolusegunakinola@gmail.com2 

 

  

http://faba.bg/
https://doi.org/10.37075/FABA.2025.1.04
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2265-8105
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8470-2613


Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

44 

 

INTRODUCTION 
 

This study explored how board structure moderates the influence of risk management on the financial 

performance of listed construction and real estate companies in Nigeria. Financial performance is crucial to 

corporate efficiency, and business plan efficacy influences stakeholder trust and sustainability. Financial 

statements, which show the company's capacity to develop and maintain stakeholder interest, are commonly 

used to evaluate performance (Osevwe-Okoroyibo and Emeka-Nwokeji 2021; Harken and Taurgurt 2023). 

Financial performance depends on risk management, which tackles issues including but not limited to credit, 

market, liquidity, and operational risks. However, ineffective information sharing and openness hampered 

the need to improve effective risk management strategies (Malahim 2023). 

Businesses require more capacity to implement risk management strategies due to the detrimental 

impact on business operations caused by ineffective control of the openness of an entity's information 

disclosure (Mesrawati et al. 2022). By concentrating on liquidity, market, and operational risks, risk 

management might lead to enough reserves, allowing companies to survive future economic distress (Tan et 

al. 2019). Effective risk management strategies are often associated with better financial outcomes. Proactive 

risk management is linked to better cash flow, higher profitability, and improved company financial health 

(Muhammad et al. 2022). The agency model states that effective risk management reduces information 

asymmetry and aligns the interests of managers and shareholders, which leads to better business outcomes 

(Ali et al. 2024). Similarly, the contingency hypothesis asserts that the organisational setting affects how 

successful risk management techniques are. In order to maximise financial success, businesses must modify 

their risk management plans to match their unique environment and set of circumstances (El-Chaarani and 

Abraham 2022). 

Corporate performance is greatly influenced by corporate governance, which is evident in the 

composition and duties of the board of directors. Directors supervise performance appraisals, offer advisory 

assistance, and distribute required resources to guarantee operational effectiveness. Effective corporate 

governance increases transparency, accountability, and stakeholder trust, reducing financial misstatements 

and promoting confidence (Guizani and Abdalkrim 2022). The Nigerian Securities and Exchange 

Commission has implemented rules to enhance risk management systems in various sectors, such as real 

estate and construction. This research also underscores the impact of market risk, which refers to financial 

losses resulting from price fluctuations in commodities, equities, interest rates, and foreign exchange. Both 

anticipated and unexpected risks can majorly impact financial results, especially in uncertain economic 

conditions. Thus, it is crucial for the sustainability and performance of construction companies on the stock 

exchange to manage operational and market risks effectively (Najat and Elsadig 2022; Yousef et al. 2023). 

Financial factors frequently result in operational challenges and poor outcomes for real estate and 

construction companies in Nigeria, significantly impacting their performance (Ayininuola et al. 2018). The 

financial aspects mentioned are a lack of liquid project funds, excessive debts, ineffective asset handling, and 

poor profit margins (Akapan et al. 2024). Increased competition in the sector worsens these difficulties even 

more. Although risk management failures have been extensively documented in various industries, such as 

the financial sector, these failures are frequently a result of deficiencies in corporate governance. Boards 

often need to acknowledge or deal with companies' risks, indicating a need for more efficient risk oversight 

and management mechanisms (Judith et al. 2022; Eni-Egwu et al. 2022).  

Additionally, past research (Olaniyan and Adegoroye 2024; Oladokun et al. 2020; Okoye et al. 2022; 

Martin and Marcel 2020; Widhaistuti et al. 2019) has pointed out the effects of financial elements on the 

underperformance of construction companies, yet they offer minimal understanding of how risk 

management and board structure interact to affect financial results. The financial performance is 

significantly impacted by operational and market risks, with governance factors like board size and gender 

diversity potentially reducing these effects. This study assesses how the board structure affects the link 

between risk management and financial performance in Nigerian listed real estate and construction 

companies. The study aims to uncover how governance can improve financial outcomes, enhance risk 

mitigation strategies, and promote long-term sustainability by analysing the moderating roles of board size 

and gender diversity. 

Therefore, the study examined the influence of operational and market risks on financial 

performance. The study further explored the moderating effect of board structure (board size and gender 

diversity) on the nexus of operational risk, market risk and financial performance of listed real estate and 

construction companies in Nigeria between 2014 and 2023. The choice of 2014 as the foundational year is 

based on the economic and regulatory environment of Nigeria's real estate and construction industries. 2014, 

the Nigerian government introduced important policies and reforms to enhance the financial and 

construction industries. These changes were intended to tackle systemic risks, strengthen corporate 

governance, and boost the financial stability of publicly traded firms. 



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

45 

 

This study has important academic, practical, and policy implications as it explores a vital gap in 

understanding how board structure influences the relationship between risk management and financial 

performance in publicly listed construction and real estate firms in Nigeria. This research enhances the 

existing understanding of corporate governance by examining how board characteristics, particularly board 

size and gender diversity, can moderate the impact of operational and market risks on financial performance. 

This research analyzes the impact of board structure on the effectiveness of risk management, offering 

practical guidance for boards and executives to create governance frameworks that strengthen risk 

supervision, reduce operational difficulties, and boost financial results. For the construction and real estate 

industries that are especially susceptible to financial difficulties like insufficient liquidity, low profit margins, 

and significant market fluctuations (Buzaubayeva et al. 2024). This research presents tailored strategies for 

different sectors to bolster governance systems, guaranteeing resilience to risks and improving 

competitiveness. The results will guide regulators, including the Nigerian Securities and Exchange 

Commission, regarding the significance of board structure in advancing transparency, accountability, and 

sustainable risk management approaches. By highlighting the importance of gender diversity and the size of 

boards, the research aligns with international corporate governance trends and offers evidence-backed 

suggestions to enhance governance structures in Nigeria. 

 
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT 

 

Theoretical Background  
The study is established on agency and stakeholder theories. Agency theory highlights the distinction 

between ownership (principals) and management (agents), noting that conflicts emerge since agents 

frequently prioritise their interests over those of shareholders, leading to heightened expenses like 

monitoring, control, and losses stemming from unfavourable choices (Jensen and Meckling 1976; Fama and 

Jensen 1983; Berle and Means 2017). The board of directors acts as a governance tool to address agency 

issues by monitoring managerial behaviour, lowering agency expenses, and improving organisational 

effectiveness. The board's composition, such as its size and gender diversity, enhances its effectiveness in 

overseeing and ensuring that managers' actions align with the interests of shareholders (Eisenhardt 2018). 

According to the theory, smaller and more diverse boards can enhance oversight and decision-making, 

ensuring that risk management strategies successfully improve financial performance. Through establishing 

distinct performance standards and implementing accountability via governance frameworks, boards 

function as "cost-effective tools" to synchronise risk management with the organisation's profitability (Dong 

et al. 2022). 

Stakeholder theory expands agency theory by shifting the focus from just shareholders to encompass 

all parties impacted by organisational decisions, including employees, customers, suppliers, and the 

community (Freeman, 1983). Efficient governance frameworks, like properly formed boards, are essential 

for reconciling varied stakeholder interests while meeting financial objectives. Gender diversity on boards 

brings in different viewpoints. It improves decision-making by considering the issues of a broader range of 

stakeholders, while the ideal board size facilitates efficient teamwork without making decisions overly 

complex (Wirawan and Willim 2024; Zaid et al. 2020). A varied and suitably sized board tackles operational 

and market risks, aiding in managing stakeholder expectations and reducing adverse effects, thereby 

enhancing financial performance (Judita et al. 2022). This underscores the board's balancing function in 

ensuring that risk management strategies correspond with maximising shareholder wealth and addressing 

stakeholder interests.  

In general, the theoretical framework suggests that the composition of the board (size and diversity in 

gender) influences the connection between risk management (operational and market risks) and financial 

performance by improving oversight and decision-making. Agency theory highlights the board's function in 

minimising agency issues and enhancing performance. In contrast, stakeholder theory focuses on its capacity 

to balance and meet the demands of various stakeholders, thereby establishing a comprehensive approach 

to governance and risk management. Collectively, these theories establish a basis for comprehending how 

board structure can enhance the relationship between risk management and financial performance in 

dynamic, risk-sensitive sectors. 

 

Risk Management and Financial Performance 
Risk is an intrinsic element in every organisation; variability in returns is a key indicator. Although 

risks can lead to adverse results, they can also be handled, embraced, or allocated to others. In financial 

management, risk is vital in maximising shareholder wealth by navigating the risk-return tradeoff, as 

increased risks frequently align with greater possible returns (Abdic et al. 2024). Businesses encounter 

various kinds of risks, such as credit, market, operational, and liquidity risks, making risk management an 

expert field. Efficient risk management necessitates skilled individuals overseen by impartial managers, 



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

46 

 

rendering it essential for organisational achievement. The capital asset pricing model (CAPM) and arbitrage 

pricing theory (APT) claim a positive correlation between risk and anticipated returns, establishing the basis 

of financial economics in investment evaluation (Ajagbe et al. 2024; Ali et al. 2024).  

This research thus concentrates on operational risk and market risk due to their influence on financial 

performance. Operational risk refers to losses arising from insufficient or failed internal processes, 

individuals, systems, or external occurrences, encompassing legal risks while omitting strategic or 

reputational threats (Ayodele and Onyekachi 2020). The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision classifies 

operational risk into three types: nominal risk- which involves frequent, repetitive losses related to regular 

activities; ordinary risk- which results in less frequent but significant losses that are not critical for financial 

institutions; and exceptional risk- characterised by rare, large-scale threats that jeopardise the institution's 

existence. Operational risk is becoming more important because of the growing complexity of financial 

services, stressing the necessity for strong governance and efficient risk management (Yousef et al. 2023; 

Yusuf and Adeoye 2020).  

Market risk involves possible financial or non-financial losses resulting from fluctuations in market 

elements, such as interest rates, currency exchange rates, stock prices, and commodity prices. The African 

Development Bank recognises four categories of market risks: currency risk- associated with changes in 

exchange rates; interest rate risk- impacts companies' capital expenses and operations; liquidity risk- emerges 

from liquidity shortages caused by inadequate management; counterparty credit risk- connected to the 

handling of assets and liabilities (Asaba 2024). Shifts in market elements like interest rates and stock prices 

directly impact company performance and profits. As per arbitrage pricing theory, market risk factors such 

as interest rates, inflation, and currency fluctuations impact stock returns by changing expected cash flows 

and discount rates. This theory highlights a strong connection between risk and return, consistent with the 

primary principle of finance, which states that investors demand more reward for accepting increased risks 

(Chitta and Soni 2023; Buzaubayeya et al. 2024). 

 

Risk Management and Financial Performance: Moderating Role of Board structure  
This study focuses board size and gender diversity, as essential board structure variables. In an 

organisational setting, the board operates as a team working together to reach strategic objectives, with 

normative and prescriptive roles (Hasan & Mohammed 2023). Researchers have discussed the influence of 

board size on company performance. Lipton and Lorsch (1992) claimed that smaller boards are more 

efficient since larger boards may need help in decision-making and coordination. Conversely, Hermalin and 

Weisbach (2018) proposed that bigger boards could improve alignment and decrease agency costs. However, 

they might also restrict involvement in decision-making. Than (2018) observed that boards with an average 

size of seven enhance monitoring capacity and positively affect earnings per share. 

Moreover, Dalton et al. (2018) highlighted that the link between board size and company 

performance differs based on unique firm characteristics and national institutional settings. Gender diversity 

is viewed as a way to enhance board efficiency and financial outcomes. Adebobola (2023) highlighted that 

varied boards prevent the dominance of any individual or faction, ensuring equitable representation of 

stakeholders and improving resource reliance. Researchers such as (Safieddine and Daouk 2021; Burke 

2021; Van der Walt and Ingley 2021) analysed the impact of gender diversity on the lack of women on 

boards, the factors contributing to this underrepresentation, and the experiences and views of women 

directors. In general, scientists concur that greater diversity enhances governance by utilising a wider range 

of talent and viewpoints, resulting in improved decision-making and organisational performance. 

Research on operational risk indicates that weak internal controls, low employee morale, or external 

disruptions can result in inefficiencies, higher expenses, and loss of revenue, adversely affecting financial 

results (Malahim 2023). Concerning market risks, variations in interest rates, exchange rates, and 

commodity prices greatly influence profitability, as elevated volatility creates difficulties for companies to 

maintain consistent financial results (Muhammad et al. 2022). Smaller boards tend to be more nimble and 

effective in making decisions. In contrast, larger boards can offer varied viewpoints and enhanced 

supervision. An ideal board size balances the intricacy of risk management and the capacity to make prompt 

and effective decisions. Bigger boards can enhance financial performance by strongly supervising risk 

management measures (Lipton and Lorsch 1992; Hermalin and Weisbach 2018).  

Varied boards boost creativity, problem-solving, and decision-making by integrating different 

viewpoints, experiences, and skills. Gender-diverse boards question management assumptions more often, 

enhancing the effectiveness of risk identification, assessment, and mitigation tactics. This subsequently 

improves financial performance by lessening vulnerability to unmonitored risks (Biggins 2021; Adebobola 

2023).  Kafidipe et al. (2021) looked at risk management in deposit money banks, corporate governance, and 

the extent to which operational issues in Nigerian banks have been repressed. The outcome indicates that 

the bank's financial results have been adversely affected, however significantly. A good business governance 

framework, on the other hand, improves bank sustainability and loan competitiveness. The number of board 



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

47 

 

committees has a favourable influence on Tobin Q, while the size, independence, directors' shareholdings, 

and meetings of the board were all negative. In contrast, the ROE (Return on Equity) is positively connected 

with board size, executive autonomy, and board committees.  

Igbinosa et al. (2024) explored board diversity in Nigerian firms and analyses whether the effect of 

board structure on financial performance (return on equity and return on capital employed). The Ordinary 

Least Squares (OLS) regression was adopted and findings revealed that there is strong positive association 

between board size and corporate financial performance. There is a positive association between external 

executives and corporate financial performance. However, a negative association was observed between 

directors’ ownership and firm performance. The study reveals a negative association between ROE and CEO 

duality, while a strong positive association was observed between ROCE and CEO duality.  

Hassan (2023) examined corporate governance across Asian nations through secondary data, finding 

that it correlates with the prevailing culture of the area. Udoh (2022) examined market risk in Nigerian 

deposit money banks, finding that interest rates positively impact profitability. In contrast, exchange rates 

and commodity prices exhibit negative correlations. Fenty Chandra and Hanifah (2023) investigated credit 

risk, liquidity risk, and operational risk in public commercial banks of Indonesia, emphasising that corporate 

governance was ineffective in moderating these risks, while profitability was more affected by external 

influences. Likewise, Allen et al. (2020) discovered that operational risk adversely affects return on assets 

(ROA) and return on equity (ROE) in banks operating in Tanzania. Peter et al. (2021) investigated market 

risk within Kenyan microfinance institutions, discovering that interest rates and financial leverage enhance 

financial performance, whereas foreign exchange risk adversely impacts it. Finally, Martin and Marcel 

(2020) showed that better corporate governance practices significantly improve financial performance in 

non-financial publicly traded companies in the United Kingdom. 

Arising from the discussions made above, the study formulates the following hypotheses: 
H01: Market risk has no significant effect on financial performance. 

H02: Operational risk has no significant influence on financial performance.  

H03: Board structure does not moderate the interaction between market risk and financial performance. 

H04: Board structure has no moderating effect on the interaction between operational risk and financial performance.  

 

Research Gap 
There has been considerable research on corporate governance, risk management, and financial 

performance. However, a notable knowledge gap remains about how board structure affects the relationship 

between risk management and financial performance in Nigeria's real estate and construction industry. 

Previous research has concentrated on different areas, sectors, or overall governance structures without 

tackling the unique risks and governance issues encountered by companies in Nigeria. For instance, Hassan 

(2023) and Fenty et al. (2023) investigated corporate governance in Asia and Indonesia yet overlooked the 

analysis of particular industries or the moderating effect of board structure. Udoh (2022), Allen et al. (2020), 

and Peter et al. (2021) examined operational and market risks but restricted their study to financial 

institutions, omitting non-financial sectors such as real estate and construction. Martin and Marcel (2020) 

examined corporate governance, yet they still need to consider industry-specific dynamics and types of risk. 

This research addresses this gap by examining how board size and gender diversity influence the connection 

between operational and market risks and financial performance, offering insights specific to the distinct 

governance and risk management issues in Nigeria's real estate and construction industry. 

 

METHODS 

 

This study used an ex-post facto research design to analyse the dependent, moderating and 

independent variables on panel data of audited annual reports of selected companies. The study population 

comprised nine listed real estate and construction companies in Nigeria. The sample was the population 

size, and the census sampling method was used. The study used secondary data retrieved from annual 

corporate reports and corporate websites of the companies listed in the Nigerian exchange group between 

2014 and 2023. The data was analysed using the panel least square method. The study conducted the 

Hausman specification test to specify whether the fixed effect and random effect models were appropriate 

for analysing the panel data (Creswell & Creswell 2018).  

 

Empirical Model  
The mathematical model stated below was to examine the moderating effect of board structure on 

risk management and financial performance.  



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

48 

 

Y= f(OR, MR, BS, BGD) (1) 

Where Y = financial performance, OR = operational risk, MR = market risk, BS= board size and BGD= 

board gender diversity  

Regarding financial performance, some studies have used accounting-based measures, such as return 

on assets (Willey et al., 2023; Martin & Marcel 2020) or market-based measures, such as Tobin's Q 

(Mesrawati et al. 2022). Based on this variation, this study adopts ROA and Tobin's Q. The justification for 

combining ROA and Tobin's Q was to ensure a comprehensive assessment by integrating internal 

operational efficiency and external market valuation. ROA is less sensitive to market volatility, while Tobin's 

Q captures market dynamics and growth potential. Both reduce bias and provide a more balanced 

performance evaluation (Nguyen & Tran 2023). Risk management indicators were operational and market 

risks because operational and market risks capture critical internal and external uncertainties affecting 

financial stability and success (Patrick, 2024). Their inclusion in the empirical model aligns with studies 

(Suratman et al. 2024; Pervetica and Ahmeti 2023), emphasising the importance of managing risks in 

achieving financial goals. Operational risk represents the ratio of total cost to income of firms in a financial 

year. In contrast, market risk is measured as the rate of change in equity price, commodity price, interest 

rate and foreign exchange rate in a financial year (Musa & Tahir 2024). Board size and gender diversity were 

used as a proxy for board structure. Both board size and gender diversity are central components of corporate 

governance, influencing strategic decisions, oversight functions, and firm performance (Mustapha et al., 

2024). Board size was measured as the total number of board members (Obaje and Ogirima, 2022) while 

gender diversity was spelt as the ratio of female directors to the number of directors (Slama et al., 2019).   

 

As a result, the multivariate models were specified as follows: 

ROAit= ∂0 + ∂1ORit + ∂2MRit + ∂3BSIZE*BGEND*OR it + ∂4 BSIZE*BGEND*MR + µ it (2) 

QTit= ∂0 + ∂1ORit + ∂2MRit + ∂3BSIZE*BGEND*OR it + ∂4 BSIZE*BGEND*MR + µ i (3) 

Where: 

ROA= Return on Asset for firm i in year t 

QT= Tobin’s Q for firm i in year t 

OR= Operational Risk for firm i in year t 

MR= Market Risk for firm i in year t 

BSIZE= Board Size for firm i in year t 

BGEND= Board Gender Diversity for firm i in year t 

µ = Error term. 

 

Table 1. Description of Variables  

Variables Type Measurements Source 

Tobin’s Q Endogenous This is the ratio of (Price Market value of shares + 

Book value of liabilities) to the book value of asset 

of. 

Mesrawati et al. 

(2022) 

Return on 

Assets 

Endogenous The ratio of net income to total assets in a financial 

year. 

Martin and 

Marcel (2020) 

Operational 

risk 

Exogenous The cost to income ratio of firms in a financial year. Ajagbe et al. 

(2024) 

Market risk Exogenous Rate of change in equity price, commodity price, 

interest rate and foreign exchange rate 

Ajagbe et al. 

(2024) 

Board Size Moderator The  total number of directors on the corporate 

board 

Obaje and 

Ogirima (2022) 

Gender 

diversity 

Moderator The percentage of female directors on a corporate 

board. 

Slama et al. 

(2019) 

Source: Author's Compilation (2025) 

  



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

49 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

 

Descriptive Analysis  

Table 2. Results from Descriptive Statistics 

 BGEND BSIZE MKR OPR ROA QT 

 Mean  0.193611  9.875000  1.059292  0.172500  0.105000  0.094444 

 Median  0.180000  8.000000  1.021000  0.190000  0.070000  0.050000 

 Maximum  0.600000  17.00000  1.460000  0.350000  1.090000  1.070000 

 Minimum  0.000000  4.000000  0.550000  0.000000 -1.800000  0.000000 

 Observations  90  90  90  90  90  90 

Source: Research Output, 20245 

 

The average Tobin's Q for publicly traded real estate and construction companies throughout the 

research period is -0.555. A Tobin's Q value under 1 suggests that the market assesses the firms' assets at a 

lower value than their replacement cost. In this instance, a value of 0.09 indicates that the market perceives 

the conglomerate's assets as valued at merely 9.4% of their replacement cost. Investors may interpret the 

average Tobin's Q value of 0.09 as an indication that the valuation of the company's assets is low. A low 

Tobin's Q may suggest that the company's management could use its assets more efficiently to create value. 

This may result from inadequate operational effectiveness, unfruitful investments, or management 

shortcomings.   

The average ROA value of 0.105 indicates that, on average, the evaluated companies or assets are 

producing a return of 10.5 per cent on their overall assets. A 10.5 per cent ROA indicates that the company 

makes 10.5 cents in profit for every dollar of assets. This is a positive return, reflecting efficient management 

and utilisation of resources. This figure can act as a standard for evaluating the performance of various firms 

in the same sector. Companies with a notably above 10.5% ROA may demonstrate greater efficiency, 

whereas those with a lower ROA might exhibit reduced efficiency. 

Gender diversity showed an average of 0.19, indicating that women comprise 19% of the board. The 

figure indicates a significant gender disparity and a lack of gender diversity. The low average value suggests 

a potential area for enhancement. Companies that lack significant gender diversity might consider 

implementing measures and policies designed to enhance gender equality and inclusiveness. As a result, an 

average value of 0.19 could suggest an opportunity to more effectively leverage the benefits of gender 

diversity in enhancing creativity and business success. 

The typical count of members on the boards of directors for the companies being examined is 

approximately 10, as shown by the average board size of 9.8. A board with ten or more members is 

considered a good size. It is perfectly sized, facilitating a balance among various perspectives and effective 

decision-making. This board size might function properly. Typically, they are sufficiently large to provide a 

range of viewpoints and areas of knowledge yet compact enough to make decisions swiftly. Having ten 

members allows for directors with diverse backgrounds, experiences, and skill sets. This diversity may 

enhance the board's ability to tackle complex issues and make sound decisions.  

An average market risk value (beta) of 1.059 offers perspectives on these firms' comparative volatility 

and risk characteristics about the general market. A beta of 1.059 suggests that, on average, real estate and 

construction firms are 5.9% more unstable than the general market. If the market index shifts by 1%, the 

stock prices of these firms are anticipated to alter by around 1.059%. This beta level indicates that real estate 

and construction firms face a greater market risk than the typical company. This implies that the stock prices 

of these companies will typically change in line with the market but with increased volatility. 

With a mean operational risk of 0.172500, these businesses could be more efficient at generating profit 

because expenses only account for 17.25% of their revenue. In general, this indicates effective cost control. 

Businesses that have a lower operational risk ratio are more resilient to changes in revenue or expense 

increases. A higher number indicates that businesses are more susceptible to changes in revenue or cost 

increases. The comparatively low operational risk ratio could result from reasonable governance procedures, 

such as cost-cutting initiatives, proper use of resources, or the executives' strategic monitoring. Outcomes 

also revealed that all the parameters have 90 observations, which can be ascribed to data accessibility on the 

study variables. 

  



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

50 

 

Correlation Analysis  

Table 3. Correlation matrix of real estate and construction firms 

Correlation BGEND  BSIZE  MKR  OPR  ROA  QT  

BGEND  1.000000      

BSIZE  0.157897 1.000000     

MKR  0.253003 0.331240 1.000000    

OPR  0.135573 -0.144167 -0.288506 1.000000   

ROA 0.088406 -0.035874 0.201784 -0.051539 1.000000  

QT  -0.002616 0.254287 0.072338 0.038746 0.026260 1.000000 

Source: Research Output, 2025 

 

Table 3 provides a concise overview of the interrelationship among the variables. Tobin's Q shows a 

positive correlation with board size (0.254), market risk (0.072), and operational risk (0.039). This indicates 

that modifying the explanatory variables will lead to an equivalent rise in Tobin's Q by 25 per cent, 7 per 

cent, and 4 per cent, respectively. Only board gender diversity exhibits a negative correlation (0.0026) with 

Tobin's Q, suggesting that an alteration in gender diversity results in a 0.2 per cent decrease in firm value. In 

addition, ROA has a positive correlation with gender diversity (0.089) and market risk (0.201). This indicates 

that an alteration in the explanatory variables will lead to a corresponding rise in ROA by 9 per cent and 20 

per cent, respectively. The board size (-0.036) and operational risk (-0.05) exhibit a negative relationship 

with ROA, indicating that alterations in board size and operational risk reduce ROA by 4 per cent and 5 per 

cent, respectively. The table thus indicates that the correlations among independent variables could be 

stronger, suggesting a lack of multi-collinearity typically linked to time series data. 

 

Unit Root Test 
The Levin, Lin and Chu T unit root test was conducted on each of the series under study. 

 

Table 4. Results of Unit Root Test 

 Variables  Levin, Lin and Chu T 

  Intercept Intercept and Trend None 

BGEND  0.2637 0.0000** 0.1609 

BSIZE  0.7216 0.0001** 0.3257 

MKR  0.9964 0.0000** 1.0000 

OPR  0.0003** 0.2643 0.3399 

ROA 0.2538 0.0000** 0.0274** 

QT  0.0003** 0.7315 0.2173 

**5% level of significance  

Source: Research Output, (2025) 

 

Table 5. Summary of Unit Root Test Results 

Levin, Lin and Chu T 

Variables Level I(d) 

BGEND  0.0000** I(0) 

BSIZE  0.0001** I(0) 

MKR  0.0029** I(0) 

OPR  0.0062** I(0) 

ROA 0.0000** I(0) 

QT  0.0003** I(0) 

Source: Extract from Table 4 

 

The study used the Levin, Lin and Chu T-test to test the unit root among the series. The null theory 

was 'presence of unit root test (i.e. no non-stationarity) against the alternative proposition 'series is 

stationary'. If the computed p-value exceeds the benchmark p-value (0.05), then the null hypothesis is 

accepted, and it is concluded that data variables are non-stationary and vice-versa. Results from Tables 4 

and 5 showed that all the parameters are stationary at their level form indicated as I (0). This implies that 

there is no form of co-integration relationship among the variables.  

 

 



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

51 

 

Analysis of Hausman Specification Test 

Table 6. Results of Hausman Specification Test  

Correlated Random Effects - Hausman Test  

Test Summary (Panel A) Chi-Sq. Statistic Chi-Sq. d.f. Prob.  

Period random 3.485252 6 0.7459 

Test Summary (Panel B) Chi-Sq. Statistic Chi-Sq. d.f. Prob.  

Period random 6.455354 6 0.3742 

Source: Research Output, (2025) 

 
Panel A's results revealed a probability value of 0.7459, below the standard 0.05 significance level, 

indicating that the null hypothesis was accepted and the result was insignificant. Consequently, the outcome 

indicated that the random effect model was suitable and was used to analyse the research data. Because 

Panel B's statistical analysis resulted in a probability value of 0.3742, below the standard 0.05 level of 

significance, the null hypothesis was accepted, and the result was deemed inconsequential. Consequently, 

the outcome indicated that the random effect model was suitable and was used to analyse the research data. 

 

Regression Analysis 

Table 7. Regression Results 

Dependent Variable: ROA    

Method: Panel EGLS (Period random effects)  

Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.   

MKR 0.578955 0.202693 2.856313 0.0057 

OPR -0.406877 0.497689 -0.817532 0.4166 

MKR*BGEND*BOARD_SIZE -0.095102 0.060727 -1.566064 0.1222 

OPR*BGEND*BOARD_SIZE 0.216195 0.247078 0.875008 0.3848 

C -0.449244 0.239139 -1.878593 0.0648 

Dependent Variable: QT   

Method: Panel EGLS (Period random effects)  

Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.   

MKR 0.075458 0.115201 0.655012 0.5148 

OPR 0.095661 0.303493 0.315200 0.7536 

MKR*BGEND*BOARD_SIZE -0.044474 0.020633 -2.155453 0.0348 

OPR*BGEND*BOARD_SIZE 0.038798 0.095454 0.406456 0.6857 

C -0.144857 0.128402 -1.128150 0.2634 

Source: Research Output (2025) 

 

Market Risk and Financial Performance 

The regression analysis on market risk and financial performance showed varied outcomes; market 

risk exhibited a positive significance with ROA, while the negative relationship with Tobin’s Q was 

determined to be statistically insignificant. These results contradict the findings of Najat and Elsadig (2022) 

and Peter et al. (2021); however, the outcome is consistent with those of Akpan et al. (2024), Ajagbe et al. 

(2024), Udoh (2022). In financial management, a common principle is that increased risk is linked to the 

possibility of greater returns. Real estate and construction firms that embrace greater market risk might 

implement more assertive growth tactics or allocate resources to risky, high-reward ventures. Companies 

with strong risk management strategies may be more capable of taking advantage of such high-risk scenarios, 

transforming potential dangers into lucrative opportunities. Under specific market conditions, increased 

market volatility may present opportunities for these companies to achieve greater returns if they can 

effectively manage the associated risks. 

Conversely, the association with Tobin's Q suggests that fluctuations in market risk do not 

significantly influence Tobin's Q, and any detected correlation is weak. As a result, investors in real estate 

and construction companies in Nigeria may need to respond more vigorously to fluctuations in market risk 

when assessing the company's value of its assets. This may be due to their perception that the company's 

inherent value remains consistent regardless of market changes.  
 

Operational Risk and Financial Performance 

The regression results indicated that operational risk exerts a negative and insignificant positive effect 

on ROA and Tobin's Q, respectively. The negative insignificant indicates that ROA generally declines 

slightly as operational risk rises; this connection lacks statistical significance. The results align with (Abdic 

et al. 2024; Jagirani et al. 2023; Abebe et al. 2022; Mesrawati et al. 2022). This suggests that the influence of 

operational risk on ROA is minimal for real estate and construction firms in Nigeria, possibly resulting from 



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

52 

 

random fluctuations rather than a genuine underlying effect. Certain real estate firms may concentrate more 

on risks affecting ROA and other important performance metrics. Regardless, companies should continually 

manage operational risk to avert major losses, and resources may be directed more towards managing risks 

that critically affect financial performance. 

Moreover, the outcome of Tobin's Q indicated that with a rise in operational risk, Tobin's Q appears 

to increase marginally. Nonetheless, this connection does not possess sufficient strength to be considered 

statistically significant. Like the ROA situation, firms could invest resources to handle operational risks 

efficiently, but they must also consider additional elements that demonstrably influence Tobin's Q.  

 

Market Risk, Board Structure and Financial Performance 
Board structure has a favourable but insignificant moderating effect on the connection between 

market risk and ROA. This indicates that although there could be likelihood for board structure to affect the 

link between market risk and ROA positively, the noted effect is insufficient to form significant conclusions. 

However, board structure has a significantly negative moderating effect on the link between market risk and 

Tobin's Q. This negative influence indicates that specific features of board structure, including board size 

and gender diversity, lessen the impact of market risk on Tobin's Q. Furthermore, this effect is statistically 

significant, implying it is improbable to occur by random chance. The notable moderating effect suggests 

that the connection between market risk and Tobin's Q varies across different board structures. This 

emphasizes the significance of governance practices in influencing how businesses manage and react to 

market uncertainties. 

 

Operational Risk, Board Structure and Financial Performance 

In this regard, board structure showed positive but insignificant moderating effect on the relationship 

between operational risk and financial performance. The influence is positively oriented, suggesting that a 

specific type or arrangement of board structure correlates with a distinct outcome related to operational risk 

and financial performance. Nonetheless, this impact is statistically negligible, indicating it cannot be reliably 

ascribed to an actual relationship because of randomness or other variables. The minor, positive moderating 

effect indicates that although board structure may influence the relationship between operational risk and 

financial performance, the impact seen is not substantial enough to be deemed significant statistically. 

Various board structures can exhibit different levels of efficiency in addressing or alleviating operational 

risks, which subsequently may affect financial results. 

 

CONCLUSION 

 

The results demonstrate the importance of board structure in determining how businesses handle 

market risks and how those decisions affect their bottom line. Although it is still unclear how board structure 

affects operational risk, its substantial impact on market risk and Tobin's Q highlights the importance of 

good corporate governance in boosting company valuation in the face of market uncertainty. In order to 

reduce financial risks and enhance performance, the study emphasises the necessity of strong risk 

management systems and efficient corporate governance procedures. It also implies that further research 

may shed more light on other board traits that improve risk management and financial results for 

construction and real estate firms in Nigeria.  

 

Based on the conclusion drawn from the study, the study made the following recommendations: 

In order to effectively detect, evaluate, and reduce operational and market risks, real estate and 

construction companies should invest in more reliable risk management systems. This can lessen the 

detrimental effects of these risks on financial performance indicators like Tobin's Q and ROA. It is important 

to improve board governance procedures because board structure has a major moderating effect on the link 

between market risk and Tobin's Q. This entails boosting the board's diversity and experience, maintaining 

independence, and encouraging efficient leadership frameworks to control market risks better.  

Boards must be regularly educated and trained on risk management procedures and their sector's particular 

hazards. This will enable board members to properly supervise the company's risk management plans and 

make better-informed judgements. 

 

REFERENCES 

 
Abdić, A., A. Rovčanin, and A. Abdić. 2024. The impact of the enterprise financial risk management 

function on financial performance in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Financial Internet Quarterly, 20(1): 

64–80.  

Abebe Z. B., A. A. Abebe, and S. W. Bezabih. 2022. Corporate governance and financial performance in 



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

53 

 

the emerging Economy: The case study of Ethiopian Insurance company. Cogent Economics and 

Finance, 1- 18. 

Adebobola, A., 2023. Gender diversity and board efficiency: A review of corporate governance practices. 
Journal of Business Governance, 12(3): 45-60. 

Ajagbe, S. T., T. S. Jubril, and I. A. Kareem. 2024. Impact of financial risk management on performance of 
Nigerian commercial banks. Journal of Management and Social Science Research, 5(1): 37–55.  

Akpan, D.C., P.E. Inwang, and P. D.Akinniyi. 2024. Risk disclosures and market value of listed 
construction/real estate companies in Nigeria. ICONIC Research and Engineering Journals, 7(8):314-

327 

Ali, F., Khan, M. A., Z. Zahid, and K. Hussain. 2024. Does board diversity influence idiosyncratic risk: 
Empirical evidence from Chinese listed firms. Investment Analysts Journal, 1–19.  

Allen, S., G. Makaka, and F. Mwinuka. 2020. Effects of operational risk on the financial performance of 

banks in Tanzania. Journal of Banking and Finance Studies, 15(2): 45–60. 

Asaba, M., 2024. Working capital management, risk management and financial performance of secondhand 

car trading companies in Kampala district, Uganda. In Metropolitan Journal of Business & Economics, 

3–8, 662–757 

Ayininuola, G. M., A. M. Jaffar, and M. M. Famiye. 2018. Barriers to sustainability practices in Nigeria's 
construction industry: Consultants' perspective. Civil Engineering Journal, 4(11): 2635-2649. 

Burke, R., 2021. Women on corporate boards of directors: Views and experiences. Corporate Governance: 
An International Review, 19(2): 104-115. 

Buzaubayeva, P., A. Orazbayeva, G. Alina, Z. Baimagambetova, and G. Kenges. 2024. Enhancing financial 
performance and risk management in Kazakhstan’s banking sector. Banks and Bank Systems, 19(1): 

157–169.  

Chitta, S., and H. Soni. 2023. The impact of financial risk management on firm performance: a study in 
financial management practices. Revista De Gestão E Secretariado (Management and Administrative 

Professional Review), 14(10): 18095–18110.  

Creswell, J. W., and J. D. Creswell. 2018 Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods 

Approaches. Sage, Los Angeles. 

Dalton, D.R., C. M. Daily, J. L. Johnson, and A. E. Ellstrand. 2018. Board size and corporate performance: 
A meta-analytic review and research agenda. Strategic Management Journal, 30(3): 125-146. 

Dong, Y., C. Liang, and Z. Wanyin. 2022. Board diversity and firm performance: impact of ESG activities 

in China. Ekonomska Istraživanja/Ekonomska Istraz ̌Ivanja, 36(1): 1592–1609.  

El-Chaarani, H., and R. Abraham. 2022. The impact of corporate governance and political connectedness 
on the financial performance of Lebanese Banks during the final crisis of 2019- 2021. Journal of Risk 

and Financial Management, 15(5): 203-220. 

Eni-Egwu, C. O., C. J. Madukwe, and C. B. Ezeilo. 2022. Impact of Selected Corporate Governance 
variable on the financial performance of selected quoted Deposit money bank in Nigeria. Journal of 

Social Science and Humanities, 2(1): 32-40. 

Fenty, C., and M. Hanifah. 2023. Impact of credit risk, liquidity risk, operational risk, and good corporate 
governance on profitability of public commercial banks listed on IDX. Asian Journal of Finance and 

Accounting, 11(1): 78–95. 

Guizani, M., and G. Abdalkrim. 2022. Does gender diversity on boards reduce the likelihood of financial 
distress? Evidence from Malaysia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 15(2): 287–306.  

Harken, A. and T. Taurgut. 2023. Effect of corporate governance on financial performance: evidence from 
a shareholder oriented system. Iranian Journal of Management Studies, 16(1): 79-95. 

Hasan, I. and F. Mohammed. 2023. Corporate governance: Roles and characteristics of the board. 
International Journal of Corporate Studies, 15(2): 50-67. 

Hassan, M. 2023. Corporate governance mechanisms and their importance in Asian countries. International 

Journal of Corporate Governance and Culture, 9(3): 23–35. 

Hermalin, B. E. and M. S. Weisbach. 2018. The determinants of board composition. The RAND Journal of 

Economics, 29(4):589-606. 

Jagirani, T. S., L. C. Chee, and Z. B. Kosim. 2023. Relationship between financial risks and firm value: A 
moderating role of capital adequacy. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 20 (1): 69-78.  

Jensen M. C., and H. W. Meckling. 1976. Theory of firm: Managerial behavior, Agency Cost and 
Ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economic, 3(4): 305-360. 

Judita A., S. Daila, and R. Kristina. 2022. The impact of social responsibility on corporate governance 
financial performance in the energy sector: Evidence from Lithuania. Corporate social responsibility 

and Environmental Management, 1-14. 

Kafidipe, A., U. Uwalomwa, O. Dahunsi, and F. O. Okeme. 2021. Corporate governance, risk management 



Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

54 

 

and financial performance of listed deposit money bank in Nigeria, Cogent Business & Management, 

8 (1): 1-14, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1888679 
Lipton, M., and J. W. Lorsch. 1992. A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Business Lawyer, 

48(1): 59-77. 

Malahim, S. S. 2023. The Relationship between the Risk Disclosure and Risk Management Committee on 
Banks Value: Empirical Evidence From Jordan. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 

8(3): e0572. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i3.572 

Martin, A., and Marcel, B. 2020. Corporate governance and firm performance: Evidence from non-financial 
listed firms in the United Kingdom. European Journal of Corporate Governance 6(4): 50–67. 

Mesrawati, M., S. Selly, S. Sherlytan, S. M. Natalia and R. Apryanisaragih. 2022. The effect of DAR, CR, 

ROA, & CG mechanism on financial distress in BUMN companies public on Bei Year 2016-2020. 

Journal Research of Social Science, Economic and Management, 1(7): 954-967. 

Muhammad, H., S. Migliori, and S. Mohsni. 2022. Corporate governance and firm risk-taking: the 
moderating role of board gender diversity. Meditari Accountancy Research, 31(3): 706–728. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-07-2020-0949.  

Musa, H. M., and M. D. Tahir. 2024. Risk management committee attributes and financial performance of 
listed financial service firms in Nigeria. Fuoye Journal of Finance and Contemporary Issues, 6(1): 110-

127. 

Mustapha, F. G., I. A. Adamu, and Z. Abdullahi. 2024. Why is Gender Diversity Important for Corporate 
Boards? Journal of Comprehensive Business Administration Research, 1-7.  

Najat, S. M., and M. A. Elsadig. 2022. Mediating effects of Risk Management practice in Iraqi private Banks 
Financial performance, Journal of Financial Service Marketing, 6(4): 34-45. 

Nguyen, T. H. H., and K. L. Tran. 2023. Institutional investors, corporate governance and firm performance 
in an emerging market: evidence from Vietnam, Cogent Economics & Finance, 11(1): 1-20. 

Obaje, F. O., and A. Ogirima. 2022. Board size, board gender diversity and firms’ financial performance. 

Yamtara-Wala Journal of Arts, Management and Social Sciences (YaJAMSS), 2 (1): 45-58. 

Okoye, P. U., J. C. Anosike, and I. F. Asiegbu. 2022. Sustainable construction and development in Nigeria: 

Issues, challenges, and prospects. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 3(14): 1-20.  

Oladokun, V., S. O.Ajayi, A. O. Afolabi, and T. O. Gbadamosi. 2020. Assessing the level of sustainable 

construction adoption in Nigeria's construction industry. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 

12, e00302.  

Olaniyan, O. R., and A. Adegoroye. 2024. Bridging Development and Sustainability: An Analysis of the 
Nigerian Real Estate Sector. European Journal of Theoretical and Applied Sciences, 2(2): 809-823. 

Osevwe-Okoroyibo, E. E., and N. A. Emeka-Nwokeji. 2021. Examining the effect of audit committee 
attributes on firm performance: evidence from listed food and beverage firm in Nigeria. European 

Journal of Accounting, Auditing and finance Research, 9 (8): 26-43. 

Patrick, T. 2024. The role of risk management on the financial performance of organizations: A Case Of 
Study Centenary Bank Ibanda Municipality Western Uganda [Article]. Metropolitan Journal of 

Business & Economics (MJBE), 763–779.  

Peter, T., M. Otieno, and K. Achieng. 2021. Managing market risk for financial performance: Experience 
from microfinance institutions in Kenya. African Journal of Financial Management, 12(3): 112–129. 

Safieddine, A., and H. Daouk. 2021. Challenges to gender diversity on boards in emerging markets. 

Governance Review, 10(4): 85-98. 

Slama, R. B., A. Ajina, and F. Lakhal. 2019. Board gender diversity and firm financial performance in 

France: Empirical evidence using quantile difference-in-differences and dose-response models. 
Cogent Economics and Finance, 7(1): 1–25.  

Suratman, A., A. Erlangga, and A. Budiarti. 2024. The impact of risk management, transformational 
leadership on corporate financial performance in the global era. In Journal of Studies in Management 

and Finance Economics,  8(7): 540-549  

Tan, Z., F. Samuel, and G. Ding. 2019. Impact of financial risk indicator on banks financial performance in 
Ghana: Business and Economic Research, 9(4): 2162-4860. 

Than, C., 2018. Optimizing board size for effective corporate governance. Corporate Finance Review, 17(1): 

23-32. 
Udoh, E. J. 2022. Market risk and profitability of deposit money banks in Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of 

Financial Analysis,  8(2): 56–73. 

Van der Walt, N. and C. Ingley. 2021. Diversity and board dynamics: The impact of gender on decision-
making. Journal of Corporate Leadership, 8(2):77-91. 

Widhaistuti R., A. Nurkhin, and Susilowati. 2019. The role of financial performance in mediating the effect 
of good corporate governance on financial distress. Journal Economia, 15(1): 34-47 

https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1888679
https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i3.572
https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-07-2020-0949


Asimiyu K. Adegoke, Akinwumi O. Akinola / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025 

 

55 

 

Willey T., Y. Bhagwat, and M. Deburuine. 2023. An Investigation of the Altman Z-Score measure and the 
return on equity of firm in the energy industry: Archives of Business Research, 11(2): 149-155. 

Wirawan, J., and A. P. Willim. 2024. The effect of board diversity and financial stability on financial 
performance of Banking Sector in Indonesian Stock Exchange. Journal of Asian Multicultural Research 

for Economy and Management Study, 4(4): 8–18.  

Yousef, A. N., R. Taha, and S. N. Muhmad. 2023. Operational risk and financial performance of banks in 
the Middle East and North Africa. Journal of International Studies, 19(2), 93-118. 

Yusuf, A. A., and J. O. Adeoye. 2020. Financial performance and risk management in the healthcare sector: 
Evidence from Nigeria. Journal of Finance and Healthcare, 8(4): 201-215. 

Zaid, M. A. A., M. Wang, M. Adib, A. Sahyouni., and S. T. F. Abuhijleh. 2020. Boardroom nationality 
and gender diversity: Implications for corporate sustainability performance. Journal of Cleaner 

Production 251, 119652. 


