Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 79 Volume and Issues Obtainable at Center for Sustainability Research and Consultancy Review of Economics and Development Studies ISSN:2519-9692 ISSN (E): 2519-9706 Volume 4: No. 1, June 2018 Journal homepage: www.publishing.globalcsrc.org/reads Investigating the Influence of Shareholder Mechanisms on the Perceived Performance of Listed Firms in Nigeria 1 Mohammed Nuhu, 2 Halilu Bello Rogo, 3 Mohammed Umar Danladi ¹School of Business Management, Universiti Utara Malaysia.mohammed.nuhu12@yahoo.com ²Department of Economics and Management Science Kano, Nigerian Police Academy Wudil ³Department of Business Administration, University of Abuja-Nigeria ARTICLEDETAILS ABSTRACT History Revised format: May 2018 AvailableOnline: June 2018 The current debate on the issues of shareholder rights to firm performance has grown as a topic of research both in the developed and emerging economy. There is serious concern regarding the effectiveness of the board transparency and accountability, company image and the rights of the shareholders in recent times. This paper investigated the influence of shareholders mechanisms on the perceived performance of listed firms in Nigeria. The study is guided byagency theory and supported by the stewardship theory. The questionnaire was used as an instrument for data collection. 247 questionnaires were administered with 117 duly completed and returned. Hence, the number of completed valid questionnairesis 114. However, data were analysed using Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Empirical findings showed that board transparency/accountability and shareholder right were significantly and positively related to perceived firm performance. Whilethe company image did not show any significant link to perceived firm performance.Hence, based on the researches knowledge, this is the first of its kind to adopt primary data to investigate the influence of shareholders’ rights mechanisms on the perceived performance of listed firms in Nigeria. Therefore, the findings of this study,provide researchers, policymakers, firms, stakeholders, and the agencies of the government with a better picture of the transparency and accountability and the right of the shareholder. The study recommends that listed firms in Nigeria should adhere to professional ethics and best business practices such as financial prudence and accountability to their board of directors. © 2018 The authors, under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 Keywords Transparency, accountability, company image,shareholder rights, firm performance JEL Classification C10, F10, G12 Corresponding author’s email address: mohammed.nuhu12@yahoo.com Recommended citation: Nuhu, M., Rogo, H.B., Danladi, M.U., (2018). Investigating the Influence of Shareholder Mechanisms on the Perceived Performance of Listed Firms in Nigeria. Review of Economics and Development Studies, 4 (1) 79-89 DOI: 10.26710/reads.v4i1.283 1. Introduction Lack of code of best practices of many companieshas become a topic of debate both in the developed and developing countries in the recent time. Since early 1990’s scandals to date, has exposed many multinational companies both in the developed and emerging economies as a result of manipulation of http://www.publishing.globalcsrc.org/reads mailto:mohammed.nuhu12@yahoo.com mailto:mohammed.nuhu12@yahoo.com Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 80 financial statement unexpected corporate failures by the managing directors (Nuhu & Ahmad, 2017; Sanusi, 2012; Samaduzzaman et al, 2015). The findings of many studieshave suggested that the malpractices at high profile firms, especially Enron, WorldCom, Tyco and many more corporate bodies in the United Kingdom and the USare as a result of losses of more than USD 7 trilling of contributors/investors (Lawal, 2016). Again, Lehman Brothers scandals alone stood at USD 14.5 trilling (Lawal, 2016; Nuhu and Ahmad, 2017). In Africa, especially Nigeria has seen the collapsed of high notable leading financial services(Finbank, Savannah Bank, Habib Bank, Bank PHB, Lion Bank, Bank of the North, Inland Bank, Afribank, Oceanic Bank, African Continental Bank and Intercontinental Bank) (Nuhu and Ahmed, 2017). The scandals are as a result of the lack of a code of best practices and corruptions, reckless loan provision,and manipulation of the financial statementwhere is still found operating in the financial services firm in Nigeria (Sanusi, 2012). Hence, this was the period, Nigeria market capitalization fell/dropped from 12 trillion Naira to 9 trillion Naira (Lawal, 2012, 2016; Nuhu and Ahmad 2017).This prompted the issue of shareholder mechanisms representative into board members have become a topic of debate, but stills, the issues, challenges and problems it tried to addresses/resolve remain inconclusive (Nuhu and Ahmad, 2017). The objectives of this paperare to reconcile the inconsistencies, inconclusive and mixed finding from previous studies, by bringing new research approach to investigate the causal/relationship between shareholder right mechanisms on the performance of quoted/listedcompanies in Nigeria. This study is structured into the following heading; introduction, study literature reviews follow bythe methodology. Also, the paper further contains findings/results,conclusion,and recommendations. 2. Literature Review Shareholder Rights and Firm Performance From empirical investigation in recent time by many scholars, there is mixed argument and conflicting finding between the shareholders right (the owner) and the managers right (the agent) which has generated a lot of conflict between the principal (owner) and agent (employee) (Armour et al., 2017;Lawal, 2016; Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017). Despite numerous empirical investigations, the agency problem remains an unresolved issue in corporate governance. Hence, many types of research supported by numerous theories have been investigated to find the lasting solution to the conflict between the owner (principal) and the manager (agent). But, however, none of these studies could fully answer the question of why firms keep on diminishing that affect their shareholders’ capital (Ararat et al., 2016). Lawal, (2016) argued that famousto the decline of family-owned businesses and the increase of pleased managers and managers. The independence of directors and managers was as a result of the advent of the high multi-divisional companyoperatesrendering to the staff. In the study of Gómez-Bezares et al, (2016), examines the effect of integrating sustainability into corporate strategy on numerousparts of shareholder right creation and financial performance in the context of British capital market. The data from FTSE 350 companies from the period 2006–2012. Using t-statistics and F-tests from ANCOVA. The results support that companythat found to haveincorporated sustainability problems into their various business operations are mostly controlled by their leverage andresources, strongerthat influence performance and shareholder right creation than other firms. In another stream of research, evidence showed that the rights of shareholdersareinverse to the probability to firm diversify (Lawal, 2016; Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017). This is in line with the believed of agency theory viewpoint, (Lawal, 2016) studyvalidates that restrictive CGcode enables managers to pursue corporate strategies that are not consistent with shareholder wealth maximization. Hence, the debate on the shareholder right will continue to be and remain an interesting area of research (Lawal, 2016). The study attempts to investigate the relationship between shareholders right and the perceived performance of financial servicesfirms in Nigeria. Hence, the study hypothesized that: Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 81 Hypothesis 1: There is a significant and positive relationship between shareholder rights and the perceived performance of financial servicesof listed firms in Nigeria. Board Accountability and Transparency and Firm Performance Since early scandals, researchers, policy maker, investors and corporate stakeholders have severally called for managing directors and management accountable and transparent to their shareholders (Naaraayanan& Nielsen, 2016; Nuhu and Hussaini, 2017). However, managing directors and management accountable and transparent to their shareholders is regarded as important and critical mechanisms to resolve the bottleneck between the shareholder and the agent (Keay, 2016; Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017). The recent studies have argued that managing directors and management accountable and transparent to their shareholders is in relation to a count head or the number of components that boards members must account and answerable to their owners (Keay, 2016). In the work of Krishnamurti et al, (2016), their study population of 97 companies within eight Asian countries, while there studied is on the relationship between CLSA (Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia)transparency as independent variable and business performance measure with Tobin's Q which is dependent variable found that transparency dimension has a positive relationship and has a positive effect on firm performance. Contrary, Amar (2001), found a negative relationship in examining the relationship between corporate management principles and business performance in the context of Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia (CLSA's) research population of 495 firms in 25 developing countries. However, none of these recent researches discussions about direct relations between accountability and transparency and firm performance. Hence, based on the literature, the study attempts to investigate the relationship between board transparency, accountability and the perceived performance of financial servicesfirms in Nigeria. The following hypothesis has been developed. Therefore, the study hypothesized that: Hypothesis 2: There is a significant and positive relationship between board transparency, accountability and the perceived performance of financial servicesof listed firms in Nigeria. Corporate Image and Firm Performance This study defined behavior as corporate reputation and ethical behavior of the firms. Hence, business ethics has redirected the thought of recent studies that called for renewed attention due to corporate scandals in both developed and emerging economies like those of Enron, Arthur Andersen, Adelphia, Tyco International, and Worldcom, (Gómez-Bezares et al, 2016).In addition, the growing importance and called for governmental regulations and agencies, the amplified scrutiny of the many industries like media as well as increases worries and pressure from numerous stakeholders have put and placed the corporate business ethics challenge, particularly in the virtually all areas of firm’s improvement (Nuhu & Ahmad, 2016). In contrary, others remain skeptical (Jensen, 2001) argued that ethical initiatives are wealth and investments without payoffs or gain and hence against the best interest of shareholders and stakeholders. But regrettably, there is very limited empirical study work that has explicitly answered and addressed these corporate ethical issues that the recent existing literature research has shown mixed results and inconsistencies (Garay et al., 2017). Therefore, the study attempts to investigate the relationship between corporate image and the perceived performance of financial servicesfirms in Nigeria. The following study hypothesized that: Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 82 Hypothesis 3: There is a significant and positive relationship between corporate image and the perceived performance of financial services of listed firms in Nigeria. Board Size and Firm Performance The issue of appropriate board size has been the subject of intense discussion when it comes to analyzing the efficiency of the internal governance mechanism, supported by agency theory (Tai, 2015). Board size is even more pronounced in single-tier governance systems configured in such a manner that ensures the representation of both executive and non-executive members (Lawal, 2016). The size of every board of directors is a vital and important attribute for every successful board mechanisms or structures. Board size is determined on the basis of how it influences the communication, coordination, and control management activities of a firm (Nath, et al, 2015). The ideal size of the board has further become a controversial argument and debate in the recent CG trends. Johl et al contended that in Malaysia for instance, there is no specific ideal size for every company on the board. The Malaysia CG code does not specify the size of the board, but instead, every company board should decide its size in determining the impact on its numbers (Johl et al, 2015). While in Australia CG 2014 does not mention a specific number of people from the board of directors (Appuhami&Bhuyan, 2015). On the other hand, Yermack (1996) study founda negative relationship between the board size and performance withthe sample of 452 US firms during the period of 1984-1991. In the same trend, Bennedsenet al (2008), found a negative relationship between board sizes and firm performances using ROA with the sample of 6,850 Danish firms.Ammariet al (2014), investigated the board structure of 40 French firms listed (SBF 120) during the periods of 2002-2009 found a strong negative relationship. In the opposite trend, Zakaria et al (2014), examine Malaysian listed firms using the panel data regression model, found board size positively influences firm performance. Many studies have been carried out in recent years to determine the empirical validity of the idea of an optimal or moderate board size and its effects on firm operations and financial performance. Overall, empirical studies on the nexus of board size and firm performance have yielded inconsistent outcomes ranging from positive (Appuhami, 2015) to negative (Nath et al, 2015). Lawal (2012), argues that more than two decades of empirical study is yet to justify the above assumptions as inconsistency and inconclusive findings continue to dominate empirical studies on the relationship between board size and firm performance. Therefore, the study hypothesized that: Hypothesis 4: There is a significant and positive relationship between board size and the perceived performance of financial services of listed firms in Nigeria. 3. Theoretical Framework The main theory of the study is Agency and two supporting theories (managerial hegemony and stewardship theory).Agency theoryis acknowledged by many researchers as the dominant theory as against numerous that affect virtually all the aspects of CG research (Aguilera et al., 2008; Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017). Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 83 4. Methodology This study adopted primary data.A self-administered questionnairewas used for the data collection.The study used287 board of directors offinancial serviceslisted inthe Nigeria stock exchange as at January 2016. Therefore, the total population of the study isthe total number of the individual directors on the boards of listed firms (287) of financial servicesin Nigeria. However, the study used Krijcie and Morgan (1970) table to determine the sample size which is 165. Salkind (1997) suggested that an additionalof 50% or double of the sample result should be increased or added tothe original sample size to elude/avoid a low response rate. Thus, the higher the respondent’sresponse rate, the better the results (Salkind, 1991). Hence, 50% of 165 is 82.5 (83approximately). The total number of 248 copies of the questionnaire wasadministered with the assistance of members of staff of the Nigeria Stock Exchange (NSE) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The questionnaire was adapted from prior researchers. Although, the study usedclose-ended format questions (questionnaire) that is based on a 5-pointLikert scale.In the end, 128 copies of the questionnairewere duly completed and returned. Thisrepresents the response rate of 51.61 percent (52%). While 14 out of 128 copies of the questionnairewere invalid. Therefore, the total number of 116 (47%) copies of the questionnaire was used for analysis after carrying out data screening. Thus, Statistical Software for Social Sciences (SPSS)using version 22 for data screening and preliminary analysis. While Smart PLS 2.0 (Partial Least Squares) software was used for the final analysis (Hair, 2014; Nasiru&KeatOoi, 2015; Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017). 5. Results This studyadapted measurements from the work of Ammann, et al, (2011) for corporate image; Okpara (2011) for Shareholders’ rights; Khongmalai, et al, (2010) board transparency and accountability; Ammann et al (2011) and Khongmalai et al (2010) Board Size;Rettab et al (2009) firm performance. However,the total of114 copies of the questionnaire was dulyreturned and usable.Hence, Smart PLS was used to testmodel/hypotheses. 6. Measurement Model The convergent and the discriminant validity were used to testthe adequacy of the study items and variables. The convergent validity, construct reliability, indicators reliability, were assessed as suggested by Hair, (2014). Hence, the indicators reliability and the loadings of the items were carryout and they all met the threshold of 0.7 as suggested by Hair et al., 2014. Thevalidity and reliability, composite reliability and average variance extracted were carried outgiving the composite reliability above 0.7.The average variance extractedisalso above the 0.5thresholdsas suggested by Hair et al., 2014. Accordingly, the minimum/lowest composite reliability of this study is 0.756. While the lowest/minimumaverage variance extracted for the study is 0.616. See Table 1 below: Board Transparency and Accountability Firm Perceived Performance Board Size Corporate Image Shareholder Right Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 84 Table 1 Loading (Items), Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and Composite Reliabilities Variables Code Loading (items) AVE Composite Reliability Board Size BS1 0.930 0.850 0.919 BS2 0.914 Corporate Image CI4 0.937 0.797 0.940 CI5 0.945 CI6 0.846 CI7 0.839 Corporate Transparency, Accountability CTA2 0.918 0.783 0.878 CTA6 0.851 Shareholders Right SR3 0.922 0.616 0.756 SR4 0.618 Firm Perceived Performance FP5 0.924 0.832 0.908 FP6 0.901 Again, the study assessedcross-loadings, inter-construct andcorrelation matrix.The square root of the average variance extracted across the diagonal was examined,the discriminant validity was also assessed for the constructs. Hence, the items that are below the threshold of 0.5were deleted as suggested (Hair et al., 2014). In Table 2,the results show cross-loading of the items (see shadowed lines) which are higher on each respective construct that showsdiscriminant validity. Hence, Table 3, the square root of each constructof the average variance extracted must be higher than any other figure in the construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Therefore, the study model has successfullymet andsatisfied the threshold of validity and reliability as recommended by Hair, 2014. The next step was toassess the structural model. Table 2 Variables Correlations; Average Variance Extracted (AVE); Mean and Standard Deviation. Variables BS CI CTA SR FP Mean Std. Dev Board Size (BS) .850 2.78 .558 Corporate Image (CI) -.087 .797 2.92 .569 Corporate Transparency and Accountability (CTA) .513 -.094 .783 2.92 .569 Shareholder Right (SR) .054 .178 .014 .616 3.5 .669 Firm Performance (FP) .323 .098 .424 .706 .823 2.74 .522 Note: The shaded numbers in bold are the square roots of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) across the diagonalline and off- diagonallines of the correlation among the variables Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 85 Figure 1: The Measurement Model 7. Structural Model The first step in the structural model is to test the predictive power of the construct (independent variables) and the explanatory power of the study (entire model) model. Hence, the explanatory power was examined through squared multiple correlations (i.e. R²)of the firm perceived performance as the dependent variable. Therefore, figure 1 shows 67.7% (i.e.R²) and 0.677 for variation in the firm perceived performance are assessed by the independent variables. In line with the threshold or recommendation by Falk and Miller (1992), the results show that the study model has an acceptable R-square (R²) statistic greater than 10%. Hence,the study observed formulated hypotheses with the standardized parameter estimates on the study constructs conforming to p-value and t-values that indicate the significance level. Furthermore, to obtain t-values, partial least squares (PLS) was performed with 5,000 bootstrapping procedures in the number of cases that represent the total number of the valid observation with no sign of changes option. The findings have shown support for the three hypotheses formulated in the path coefficients that showpositive and significant at 0.01 (1%) and 0.05 (5%) level of significance. While one hypothesis is not supported. Interestingly, the effect sizes (f²) of the three supported hypotheses were small at 0.474 and 1.290 respectively (Cohen, 1988). Figure 2:The Structural Model Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 86 .364 (5.728) .017 (.241) .101 (1.436) .692(12.129) Figure 3: The Validated Structural Model Figure 3 shows the validated structural model for the study. The values in parentheses indicate t-values that indicate significant relationships (p <0.01 and p < 0.05). The dotted lines indicatethat there is no significant, but positive relationship. Table 3 The Structural Model (Hypotheses Test)Assessment Hypothesis Relationship beta value Std. Error t-value p-value Decision H1 SR -> FP 0.692 0.057 12.129 0.000*** Supported H2 CTA -> FP 0.364 0.064 5.728 0.000*** Supported H3 CI -> FP 0.017 0.071 0.241 0.810 Not Supported H4 BS -> FP 0.101 0.070 1.436 0.150** Supported ***P< .001; **P< .005 8. Discussion The study investigated the relationship between shareholder mechanisms and theperceived performance of the financial servicesof listed firms in Nigeria. Hence, it shows that shareholder mechanisms positively relate to firm perceived performance. In overall, the findings/results of the study showedthat the empirical analysis supports the role of shareholder mechanisms in improving firm perceived performance (Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017). Therefore, there is a strong positive,statistically significant relationship between corporate transparency and accountability on the perceived performance of financial services listed firms in Nigeria. The result ofone of hypothesisthree is not supported as there is no relationship between corporate behaviour and the perceived performance of financial services listed firms in Nigeria (β=.012; T value=0.179). Therefore, the hypothesis two supported (β=.414; T value=8.481). The results of this hypothesis two are consistent with the prior findings (Zehir et al, 2016) who showed that corporate transparency and accountability influence the firm performance. This result is also consistent with the prior studies (Gibson, 2000). Hence, there is also the statistically significant positive relationship between Shareholder Rights and the performance of listed financial services firms in Nigeria. Hence, this is consistent with the hypothesis number three.The results supported with β=.698; T value=11.949. The finding is in line findingsof Gómez-Bezares et al., (2016). However, the overall results show three hypotheses are significant and positive relatedto perceived firm SR CI BTA FPP R²=.669 BS Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 87 performance show by t-values and p-values results (significant at p<0.01 and p<0.05) while one hypothesis notsupported. Hence, this study showed that corporate governance mechanisms (corporate transparency and accountability and shareholder right) influence the performance of financial servicesin Nigeria. However, the findings were expected to be significant and positive to perceived firm performance (Jizi, 2017;Lawal, 2016; Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017) argued in their findings that poor CG performance is mostly caused that leads to changes and reform of many corporate governance characteristics particularly in the area of transparency, and accountability as well as shareholder right (interest). 9. Conclusion and Future Researchers In this study, the various related constructs of shareholder mechanisms that enhance firm perceived performance were analyzed. Consequently, the findings of the study confirmed that the transparency and accountability, investor/shareholder rights are significant except corporate behaviour that showed no significant relationship. Hence, there is a need to use more than one theory in a single study (Lawal, 2016; Nuhu&Hussaini 2017). Mix findings of the prior studies are as a result of relying on one theory (Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017). This study has also improved in the area of methodology over previous researchers by the use of primary data (questionnaire) as suggested by recent studies (Lawal, 2016; Nuhu&Hussaini, 2017; Johl et al, 2015).Many studies on CG have relied strongly on particular methodological changes. The time is a good fit for methodological changes that took into considerationfor primary investigation (Lawal, 2016). Again, another advancement for primary data measurementis by using the "Structural Equation Modelling-Partial Least Square (SEM-PLS) for primary data analysis" (Hair, 2014). This statistical softwarehas demonstrated a lot of guarantees (Hair et al, 2013). Hence, the partial least squares structural equation modeling has been recommended asa rigorous application that gives accurate andbetter results with a higher acceptance by researchers (Hair et al, 2014). The findings of this paper provide policymakers, the board of director, stakeholders, and the government agencies with a better picture of the transparency and accountability and the right of the shareholder. The study recommends that listed firms in Nigeria should adhere to professional ethics and best business practices such as financial prudence and accountability to their board of directors. Future studies should also,therefore, extendto other variables example board meeting, CEO duality, and board diversity among others. Further studies should strength the use of primary statistical techniques(AMOS-Structural Equation Modeling). References Adegbite, E. (2015). Good corporate governance in Nigeria: Antecedents, propositions, and peculiarities. International Business Review, 24(2), 319-330. Ararat, M., Black, B. S., &Yurtoglu, B. B. (2017). The effect of corporate governance on firm value and profitability: Time-series evidence from Turkey. Emerging Markets Review, 30, 113-132. Armour, J., Enriques, L., Hansmann, H., &Kraakman, R. (2017). The Basic Governance Structure: The Interests of Shareholders as a Class Epstein, M. J., Buhovac, A. R., &Yuthas, K. (2015). Managing social, environmental and financial performance simultaneously. Long range planning, 48(1), 35-45. Fernández-Gago, R., Cabeza-García, L., & Nieto, M. (2016). Corporate social responsibility, the board of directors, and firm performance: an analysis of their relationships. Review of Managerial Science, 10(1), 85-104. Ferro, C., Ferro, C., Padin, C., Padin, C., Svensson, G., Svensson, G., &Høgevold, N. M. (2017). Validating a framework of stakeholders in connection with business sustainability efforts in supply chains. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 32(1), 124-137. Garay, L., Font, X., & Pereira-Moliner, J. (2017). Understanding sustainability behaviour: The relationship between information acquisition, proactivity, and performance. Tourism Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 88 Management, 60, 418-429. Gómez-Bezares, F., Przychodzen, W., &Przychodzen, J. (2016). Corporate Sustainability and Shareholder Wealth—Evidence from British Companies and Lessons from the Crisis. Sustainability, 8(3), 276. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., &Sarstedt, M. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results, and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46(1-2), 1–12 Harvey Pamburai, H., Chamisa, E., Abdulla, C., & Smith, C. (2015). An analysis of corporate governance and company performance: a South African perspective. South African Journal of Accounting Research, (ahead-of-print), 1-17. Jizi, M. (2017). The Influence of Board Composition on Sustainable Development Disclosure. Business Strategy and the Environment. Johl, S. K., Kaur, S., & Cooper, B. J. (2015). Board characteristics and firm performance: evidence from Malaysian public listed firms. Journal of Economics, Business, and Management, 3(2). Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and psychological measurement, 30(3), 607-610. Krishnamurti, C., Pensiero, D., &Velayutham, E. (2016). Determinants of Defence Industry Corruption Risk: Firm-Level Empirical Evidence Using Transparency International’s Anti-Corruption Index. The Singapore Economic Review, 1650005. Lawal, B. (2016). Re: Duplication of corporate governance codes and the Dilemma of firms with dual regulatory jurisdictions. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 16(3), 2–19. Mugesani, P. A. (2017). The role of Internal Corporate Social Responsibility Activities on Employees’ commitment to Firms Listed in The Nairobi Stock Exchange. Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, 4(1). Nasiru, A., Keat, O. Y., & Bhatti, M. A. (2015). Moderating Role of the Perception of University Support on the Relationship between Perceived Effective Entrepreneurship Education and Perceived Creativity Disposition on Entrepreneurial Intention. International Journal of Management Research and Reviews, 5(5), 302. Nath, S. D., Islam, S., &Saha, A. K. (2015). Corporate Board Structure and Firm Performance: The Context of Pharmaceutical Industry in Bangladesh. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 7(7), p106. Nuhu, M. and Ahmad, B. S. (2016). Investigating the issues and challenges of corporate governance in Nigerian, A Peer Reviewed International Journal of Asian Academic Research Associates, 3(12), 93-122. Nuhu, M., & Ahmad, B. S. (2017). Board composition and performance of listed firms in Nigeria: mediated and moderated model. Academic Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 3(11), 25-38 Nuhu, M., and Hussaini, S.M., (2017). Empirical Study of the Relationship between Board of Director Mechanisms and Perceived Performance of Listed Firms in Nigeria. Journal of Accounting and Finance in Emerging Economies, 3(2) 161-180. http://publishing.globalcsrc.org/ojs/index.php/jafee Nuhu, M., & Ahmad, B. S. (2017). Does corporate governance matter? Issues and challenges of the code of best practice in Nigerian. Academic Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 3(11), 116-123 Pérez, A., Pérez, A., López, C., López, C., García-De LosSalmones, M. D. M., &García-De LosSalmones, M. D. M. (2017). An empirical exploration of the link between reporting to stakeholders and corporate social responsibility reputation in the Spanish context. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(3), 668-698. Rettab, B., Brik, A. B., &Mellahi, K. (2009). A study of management perceptions of the impact of corporate social responsibility on organizational performance in emerging economies: the case of Dubai. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(3), 371-390. Salkind, N. J. (1997). Exploring Research (3 rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ; Prentice Hall Samaduzzaman, M., Zaman, F., &Quazi, Z. (2015). Literature Review on Corporate Governance Structure and Performance in Non-Financial Bangladesh Firms. Asian Journal of Finance & https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=Nuhu,+M.%26+Hussaini,+S.M.,(2017).+Empirical+Study+of+the+Relationship+between+Board+of+Director+Mechanisms+and+Perceived+Performance+of+Listed+Firms+in+Nigeria.+Journal+of+Accounting+and+Finance+in+Emerging+Economies,+3(2)+161-180 https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=Nuhu,+M.%26+Hussaini,+S.M.,(2017).+Empirical+Study+of+the+Relationship+between+Board+of+Director+Mechanisms+and+Perceived+Performance+of+Listed+Firms+in+Nigeria.+Journal+of+Accounting+and+Finance+in+Emerging+Economies,+3(2)+161-180 https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=Nuhu,+M.%26+Hussaini,+S.M.,(2017).+Empirical+Study+of+the+Relationship+between+Board+of+Director+Mechanisms+and+Perceived+Performance+of+Listed+Firms+in+Nigeria.+Journal+of+Accounting+and+Finance+in+Emerging+Economies,+3(2)+161-180 Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 1, June 2018 89 Accounting, 7(1), 96-104. Sanusi, L. S. (2012). Banking reform and its impact on the Nigerian economy. CBN Journal of Applied Statistics, 2(2), 115-122. Zahra, S. and J. Pearce (1989). Boards of directors and financial performance: a review and integrative model, Journal of Management, 15(2), 291-334. Zehir, C., Çınar, F., &Şengül, H. (2016). The role of Stakeholder Participation between Transparency and Qualitative and Quantitive Performance Relations: An Application at Hospital Management. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 234-245.