IC and Firms Performance: The Moderating Effect of Malaysia Corporate Government Code 2012 and 2017
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/kyg4er24Keywords:
Intellectual capital, VAIC, corporate governance, , firm performances.Abstract
In the age of knowledge economy Intellectual Capital (IC) is gaining prominence in academic research and management practices owing to the fact that it is a significant contributor to strong performance creation. To achieve maximum performance, corporate governance (CG) mechanism plays an important role by enhancing the management of IC practice via effective control, measurement, and reliable reporting of IC. In 2017, Malaysia witnessed the reform of corporate governance emphasizing a holistic structural change. Arguably, such reforms could result in better IC management practice compared to the prior CG code established in 2012. However, the desired effect of the new code on IC with respect to strong performance has not been tested thus far. This study, therefore, was carried out with the aim to compare the effect of IC on strong performance between pre- and post-Malaysian Code of Corporate Governance 2017 practices. The study involved three research objectives, which were to investigate the associations of IC and performance, to compare the moderating effects of MCCG 2012 and MCCG 2017 practices on such associations relating to the desired improvement between the codes, and to compare the moderating effects of mandatory CG 2012 and 2017 practices CG practices on such associations. The research data consisted of information derived from the financial years of 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. The CG index of mandatory practice was developed using MCCG 2012 and 2017 codes. Value Added Intellectual Coefficient (VAIC) was calculated to measure IC performance. The findings showed that the total VAIC was associated with performance. Furthermore, the sub-analysis of VAIC revealed that only human capital efficiency was significantly associated with performance and human capital and structural capital efficiencies were not significantly associated with firm performance. Regression results indicated that mandatory CG practices significantly moderated the relationships between VAIC and firm performance. The findings also showed that the moderating effect of MCCG 2017 was stronger than that of MCCG 2012, indicating that regulators’ efforts in reforming CG practice code had achieved their aims. Based on such findings, an investment in human capital is paramount to improving performance. In addition, such findings provide empirical support for resource base view and agency theory where a better corporate governance mechanism can contribute to the significant association between IC management practices and firm performance.
Downloads
References
1. Ahmadi, AA, Ahmadi, F & Shakeri, S 2012. The Survey of Relationship between Intellectual Capital(IC) and Organizational Performance (OP) within The National Iranian South Oil Company. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(5):369-380.
2. Al-Musali, M.A.K. and Ismail, K. N. I. K. (2014). Intellectual capital and its effect on financial performance of banks: evidence from Saudi Arabia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 164, 201–207.
3. Al-Najjar, B. 2010. Corporate governance and institutional ownership: evidence from Jordan. Corporate Governance:The international journal of business in society, 10 (2):176-190.
4. Appuhami, R., and Bhuyan, M. (2015). Examining the influence of corporate governance on intellectual capital efficiency: Evidence from top service firms in Australia. Managerial Auditing Journal, 30(4/5), 347–372.
5. Bhagat, S. and Black, B. 2002.The non-correlation between board independence and long-term firm performance. Journal of Corporation Law, 27 (2):231-274.
6. Bhatt Padmanabha Ramachandra, Bhatt R. Rathish.2017 Corporate governance and firm performance in Malaysia. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 17 (5): 896-912.
7. Bontis Nick, William Chua Chong Keow, Stanley Richardson 2000.Intellectual capital and business performance in Malaysian industries. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1 (1):85 – 100.
8. Bontis, N., Dragonetti, N.C., Jacobsen, K. and Roos, G. 1999. The knowledge toolbox: a review of the tools available to measure and manage intangible resources. European Management Journal, 17(4): 391-402.
9. Bontis, V. 2016. Intellectual capital and financial performance in the Serbian ICT industry . Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17 (2): 373 – 396.
10. Buallay, A. 2018. Audit committee characteristics: an empirical investigation of the contribution to intellectual capital efficiency. Measuring Business Excellence. 22(2):183-200.
11. Chan, K. H., (2009). Impact of intellectual capital on organisational performance: an empirical study of companies in the Hang Seng Index (part 1). Learning Organization, 16 (1), 4-21.
12. Chen, M. C., Cheng, S. J., and Hwang, Y. (2005). An empirical investigation of the relationship between intellectual capital and firms’ market value and financial performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(2), 159–176.
13. Chien, S.-H. and Chao, M.-C. (2011), “Intellectual capital and new product sale performance of the financial services industry in Taiwan”, Service Industries Journal,Vol. 31No. 16, pp. 2641-2659.
14. Clarke, M., Seng, D. and Whiting, R. (2011). Intellectual capital and firm performance in Australia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(4), 505–530.
15. Farrukh, W., & Joiya, J. Q. 2018. Impact of Intellectual Capital on Firm Performance. International Journal of Management and Economics Invention, 4(10): 1943-1952.
16. Firer, S., and Williams, S. M. (2003). Intellectual Capital and Traditional Measures of Corporate Performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(3), 348–360.
17. Gan, Kin and Saleh Z. 2008. Intellectual Capital and Corporate Performance of Technology-Intensive. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 1(1):113-130.
18. Gogan, L. M., Artene, A, Sarca, I., and Draghici, A. 2016. The Impact of Intellectual Capital on Organizational Performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2(21):194 – 202.
19. Goh, P. C. (2005). Intellectual capital performance of commercial banks in Malaysia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(3), 385–396.
20. Goh, P. C., and Lim, K. P. (2004). Disclosing Intellectual Capital in Company Annual Reports: Evidence from Malaysia, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (3) 500 – 510.
21. Gompers, P.A., Ishii, J.L. and Metrick, A. 2003.Corporate governance and equity prices. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1):107-155.
22. Gul, F. A. (2006). Auditors’ response to political connections and cronyism in Malaysia. Journal of Accounting Research, 44(5), 931–961.
23. Gupta, P., & Sharma, A. M. 2014. A study of the impact of corporate governance practices on firm performance in Indian and South Korean companies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 13(3): 4-11.
24. Haji, A. A. and Ghazali, N. A. M. (2013). A longitudinal examination of intellectual capital disclosures and corporate governance attributes in Malaysia. Asian Review of Accounting, 21(1), 27–52.
25. Hashim, H. A., & Devi, S. S. 2008. Board independence, CEO duality and accrual management: Malaysian evidence. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 1(1):27–46.
26. Hashim, Maryam Jameelah, Osman Idris, and Alhabshi, S.M. 2015. Effect of Intellectual Capital on Organizational Performance. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211: 207–214.
27. Ho, P. L., and Taylor, G. (2013). Corporate governance and different types of voluntary disclosure: Evidence from Malaysian listed firms. Pacific Accounting Review, 25(1), 4–29.
28. Holland, J. 2003. Intellectual capital and the capital market - organisation and competence. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 16 (1):39-48.
29. Hosam Alden Riyadh, A. A. S., Ahim Abdurahim, Hafiez Sofyani. (2020). THE EFFECT OF IRAQ'S DINAR EXCHANGE RATE AGAINST UK POUND ON IRAQ'S EXPORT TO UK. Journal of critical reviews (JCR), 7(2), 51-55. doi: doi: 10.31838/jcr.07.02.12
30. Kamath, G. B. (2007). The intellectual capital performance of the Indian banking sector. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(1), 96–123.
31. Kamath, G. B. (2008). Intellectual capital and corporate performance in Indian Pharmaceutical Industry. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 9(4), 684 – 704.
32. Keenan, J. and Aggestam, M. (2001). Corporate governance and intellectual capital: some Conceptualisations. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 9(4), 259–275.
33. Khalique, M., Bontis, N., Abdul, J., Yaacob, M. R. & Ngah, R. 2018. Intellectual capital and organisational performance in Malaysian knowledge-intensive SMEs. Int. J. Learning and Intellectual Capital 15(1):20-36.
34. Kianto, A., Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., Ritala, P. (2010) Intellectual capital in service- and product-oriented companies, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11, 305-325.
35. Korutaro, S., Joseph, N., Augustine, M.N., Samuel, A., Korutaro, S., Joseph, N., Augustine, M.N., Samuel, A. & Nkundabanyanga, S.K. 2014. performance Intellectual capital in Ugandan service firms as mediator of board governance and firm performance. African Journal of Economic and Management Studie 5(3): 300–340.
36. Kweh, Q. L., Chan, Y. C., & Ting, I. W. K. (2013). Measuring intellectual capital efficiency in the Malaysian software sector. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(1), 310–324.
37. Kweh, Q. L., Chan, Y. C., & Ting, I.W.K. 2015. Intellectual Capital Efficiency and Its Determinants. Kajian Malaysia 33(1): 105–124.
38. La Rocca, M., La Rocca, T. and Cariola, A. (2008). Corporate governance, intellectual capital and value creation. ICFAI Journal of Corporate Governance, 7(3), 7–30.
39. Latif, M., Malik, S. M., and Aslam, S. (2012). Intellectual Capital Efficiency and Corporate Performance in Developing Countries: a Comparison between Islamic and Conventional Banks of Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(1).
40. Machuga, S., & Teitel, K. (2009). Board of director characteristics and earnings quality surrounding implementation of a corporate governance code in Mexico. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 18(1), 1–13.
41. Makki, M.A.M. and Lodhi, S. A. (2014). Impact of corporate governance on intellectual capital efficiency and financial performance. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 8(2), 305–330.
42. Malaysia, S. C. (2017). Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance 2017. Retrieved from https://www.sc.com.my/api/documentms/download.ashx?id=70a5568b-1937-4d2b-8cbf-3aefed112c0a
43. Marquardt, D.W. (1980). You should standardize the predictor variables in your regression models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75, 87-91.
44. Mashayekhi, B., & Bazazb, M. S. (2008). Corporate governance and firm performance in Iran, 4(2):156–172.
45. Mention, A.-L. and Bontis, N. (2013). Intellectual capital and performance within the banking sector of Luxembourg and Belgium. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(2), 286–309.
46. Mohd Saleh N., Che Abdul Rahman M.R. and Hasan M. S. 2009. Ownership structure and Intellectual Capital performance in Malaysia. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 5 (1):1 – 29.
47. Mondal, A. and Ghosh, S. 2012. Intellectual capital and financial performance of Indian banks. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 13, (4):515-530.
48. Nuryanah, S., & Islam, S. M. N.2011. Corporate governance and performance: Evidence from an Emerging Market. Malaysian Accounting Review, 10(1):17–42.
49. Ousama, A. A., Fatima, A. and Hafiz-Majdi, A. R. (2012). Determinants of intellectual capital reporting Evidence from annual reports of Malaysian listed companies. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 2 (2), 119-139.
50. Pal, K., and Soriya, S. (2012). IC performance of Indian pharmaceutical and textile industry. . Journal of Intellectual Capital, 13(1), 120 – 137.
51. Pedhazur, E.J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioural research. 2nd ed. Holt, Rinehart, & Winston: New York.
52. Pulic, A. (2000). VAICTM an accounting tool for IC management. International Journal of Technology Management, 20(5–8), 702–714.
53. Pulic, A. (1998), “Measuring the performance of intellectual potential in knowledge economy”, available at: https://www.bib.irb.hr/35384 (accessed 16 October 2017).
54. Rabaya, A., Hamzah, N. & Mohd Saleh, N. 2018. Malaysian Financial Reporting Standard 139 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement Adoption and Intellectual Capital Performance: Evidence from the Malaysian Financial Sector. Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance 9: 151–166.
55. Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (2003). Intellectual capital and firm performance of US multinational firms. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(2), 215–26.
56. Riyadh, H. A., Alfaiza, S. A., & Sultan, A. A. (2019). THE EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGY, ORGANISATIONAL, BEHAVIOURAL FACTORS TOWARDS UTILIZATION OF E-GOVERNMENT
ADOPTION MODEL BY MODERATING CULTURAL FACTORS. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 97(8).
57. Saengchan, S. (2008), “The role of intellectual capital in creating value in the banking industry”, working paper, available at: www.bus.tu.ac.th/uploadPR/ADV3_11_2008/9.%20.pdf (accessed 13 May 2016).
58. Safieddine, A., Jamali, D. and Noureddine, S. (2009). Corporate governance and intellectual capital: evidence from an academic institution. Corporate Governance, 9(2), 146–157.
59. Sauer, C. (2014). Orthogonalizing powered and product terms using residual centering. The Stata Journal, 14(1): 226–229.
60. Securities Commission Malaysian. (2012). Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance 2012. Retrieved from http://www.sc.com.my/malaysian-code-on-corporate-governance- 2012.
61. Shamsudin, S.M., Abdullah, W.R.W. & Osman, A.H. 2015. Corporate Governance Practices and Firm Performance after Revised Code of Corporate Governance: Evidence from Malaysia. State-of-the-Art Theories and Empirical Evidence(June): 49–63.
62. Shiu, H. J. (2006). Application of the value added intellectual coefficient to measure corporate performance: evidence from technological firms. International Journal of Management, 23(2), 356–365.
63. Skroupa P. C. (2017, October 31). How Intangible Assets Are Affecting Company Value in the Stock Market. Online: https://skytopstrategies.com/intangible-assets-affecting-company-value-stock-market/(retrieved, Jan, 2018)
64. Sohail Imran Khan, A. A. S., Hosam Alden Riyadh. (2019). Academic Performance, Social Media Effects, and Leaning of College Students: Evidence of Positive Influence in Erbil City. Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera, 50(4).
65. Spira, L. F. (2003). Audit committees: begging the question? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 11(3), 180–187.
66. St-Pierre, J. and Audet, J. (2011), “Intangible assets and performance. Analysis on manufacturing SMEs”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(2), 202-223.
67. Sultan, A. A., & Noor, S. M. (2017). Absorptive Capacity, Civil Conflict and E-Commerce Adoption Among Iraqi Firms. Advanced Science Letters, 23(8), 7992-7995.
68. Tan, H. P., Plowman, D., and Hancock, P. (2007). Intellectual capital and financial returns of companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(1), 76–95.
69. Ting, I. W. K. and Lean, H. H. (2009). Intellectual capital performance of financial institutions in Malaysia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(4), 588 – 599.
70. Tovstiga, G., and Tulugurova, E. (2007). Intellectual capital practices and performance in Russian enterprises. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(4), 695–707.
71. Tseng, C-Y. and Goo, Y.-J. J. (2005). Intellectual capital and corporate value in an emerging economy: empirical study of Taiwanese manufacturers. R&D Management, 35(2), 187–201.
72. Vafeas, N. and Theodorou, E. (1998). The relationship between board structure and firm performance in the UK. The British Accounting Review, 30(4), 383–407.
73. Wahab, E. A. A., Zain, M. M., and James, K. (2011). Political connections, corporate governance and audit fees in Malaysia. Managerial Auditing Journal, 26(5), 393–418.
74. Wang, Z., Cai, S., Liang, H., Wang, N. & Xiang, E. 2018. Intellectual capital and firm performance: the mediating role of innovation speed and quality. The International Journal of Human Resource Management: 1–29
75. Weimer, J. and Pape, J. C. (1999). A taxonomy of systems of corporate governance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 7(2), 152–166.
76. Zulkifli, N.S., Abdul Shukor, Z. & Rahman, M. R.2017, Intellectual Capital Efficiency And Firm Performance In Malaysia: The Effect Of Government Ownership.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
