Woolworths Group 2017 Financial Analysis

Woolworth’s group is among the major companies listed in the Australian Stock Market.  The company operated both in New Zealand and Australia. It has developed a culture that gives priority to customers wants and desires over anything else making it one of the most customers oriented companies in the region(ROI Case Study: Woolworths and Episys’ 2004, p.47). Woolworths Group is an employer of millions of farmers originating from New Zealand and Australia (Stephens 2017, p 159). The concept of partnership is one of the key tools that the company uses to ensure the smooth operations of the various departments. According to Parkinson (2018), the entity has put in place various strategies in an effort to increase the generation of revenue to ensure the growth of the company. The strategies that have the company has implemented include diversification of product, innovation, and the introduction of fresh products to the market. Moreover, they have also made an effort to increase the portfolio business via techniques and strategies that are aimed at increasing the value of shareholders (Woolworths takes the lead’ 2009.p 53). Changes in business strategies are also highly encouraged by the entity to modify the business to align up with customers’ expectations and the emerging patterns of demand. Additionally, the strategies should also aim at minimizing costs and increase efficiency in production. Woolworth group has made steps adhere to the corporate governance principles that are formulated by the Australian Stock Exchange (Lama and Anderson 2015, p.379). Some of the corporate governance principles that the company has adhered to include making public the Group Executive Committee, the Board Committees, and the Board Charter. Furthermore, the group management also entails risk management and their governance report points at the ways and forms of stakeholder engagement. That is not all as the report also entails the transparency and information disclosure at the correct time (Woolworths Holdings Limited 2018, p.16). The Group also has principles of diversity and inclusion in place. However, the Group does not comply with all the regulations as it falls short on some of the regulations established by ASX.  Some of the regulations that the company report include how the entity assists in recognition of the managers, the board of directors to bust the growth of the company. Additionally, they did not adhere to the policies that are based on the employee’s productivity and capacity development. Moreover, they should have also mentioned the steps that the company has taken to improve trust and appeal to the interests of stakeholders. As a result of the combination of the policies that the company adheres to and those that it does not adhere to, Woolworths Group is categorized as a Semi-Strong Corporate Governance Oriented Firm. This paper analyses the analyses the company’s general 2017 annual report.

Receivable turnover rate

According to the financial Woolworths Group 2017 report, the company reported a profit of $1,534 attributed to the shareholder. The profit was an increase as compared to the profits made in the year 2016. The earning of the company before taxation and interest amounted to $ 2,326 million. Despite the increase in the profit attributed to the shareholders, the earning before tax and interest was a 4.9% decline from 2016. The sales growth was an increase of 3.6% from the year 2016 while the net cash from all operating activities increased by 32%   to $ 3.1 billion in the year 2016. During the financial year 2016, the revenue per share dropped by 5.1% whiles the fully ranked dividend per share experienced and an increase of 9.1% (Woolworths Group 2017). The summation of the dividend payout in the financial year 2017 amounted to $1.1billion.

In order to relate the strength of the company with other companies in the stock market, it is essential to take into consideration the financial ratios of the company. The financial ratios indicate the financial strength of the company (Mankin, Jewell and Rivas 2017, p. 97). In the financial year 2017, the financial ratios of the company were as follows.

The receivable turnover ratio through which accounts use in the measurement of  how effective a firm can be in terms of extending credit and also collecting debts on credit. According to accounting procedures, the receivable turnover rate is computed by dividing the net credit sales by the average accounts receivable for the year. Most companies prefere the calculation of the receivable turnover rate on annual basis to the calculation based on monthly basis. However, it is vital to note that, both options are acceptable in accounting.  A firm that keeps account receivable records is assumed to have given out loans at zero interest rate. The longer it takes for the company to get the money back the more the company loses as the face value on the money may depreciate with time as the company waits to collect the sales. The Receivables turnover rate was at 133.90. The rate means that the company collects sales 133.90 in a year. This rate gives an indication of the efficiency at which the company collected the outstanding bills during the financial year 2017(Matsumoto, Shivaswamy, and Hoban, 2015, p.47). Higher receivable turnover ratios indicate higher efficiency levels of collecting sales. This might be as a result of having good customers who make payments promptly or a company policy that discourages credit sales. Low ratios on the other hand are an indication of poor debt collection process or poor company policy and in some cases the absence of a company policy.  It therefore means that a company with low receivable turnover ratio has a large amount of if debts to collect from various debtors.

Payables turnover rate

While the receivable turnover rate help in measuring the efficiency at which the company collects its debts, the payable turnover rate measures the efficiency with which the company settles it debts. This includes payments to supplier and service providers. The ratio is calculated by dividing the total purchases by the average accounts payable (Anderson and Buchholz 2008, p.33).  It is the measurement of the frequency at which the company makes payments to creditors and other debtors.  Lower turnover rate means that the company takes longer to settle debts while high payable turnover rates indicate prompt payments by the company to their suppliers and service providers. The Payables turnover rate stood at 0.3.

The assets turnover rate is the ratio that uses that compares net assets with net sales to measure the efficiency at which the company generates sales from the assets. Companies therefore use assets turn over rates as an indicator of the efficiency level of how they use the assets to generate sales. The ration looks at the net sales a percentage of the value of the assets. The resulting ratio therefore tells us the number of sales that the company makes from each dollar asset that the company poses. The ratio is calculated by dividing the net sales by the average total assets. The asset turnover rate of Woolworths group stood at the rate of 2.43 in 2017. The ratio is a considerable increase in the previous financial year.  It therefore means that during the financial year 2017, the company generated 24.3 cents from every one dollar worth of asset that the company had during the financial year. Low assets turn over ratios is indication of low production in the company while high rate indicate a higher rate of sales generation using available assets. High turnover rates are desirable by companies. If the ratio is 1 it means that the nets sales of the company equate to the average total assets for that particular year.

The return to equity ratio is the ratio that measures the amount of returns on income as a percentage of the shareholder’s equity. It is the profitability level of the company based on the investments made by shareholders. The ratio is calculated dividing the net income of the company during the financial year divided by the shareholders. In calculation of the return to equity ratio, it is vital to note that the net income for a financial year after payments of preferred stock but before the payment of dividend to the ordinary stakeholders. It also measures the efficiency at which the company makes use of its funds in the company’s operations. The return on equity in the financial year 2017 was at 16.04. High returns to equity ratios are admirable as they indicate high efficiency of the company when it comes to utilization of the money injected into the company by the share holders.

Asset turnover rate

Like the previously mentioned ratios, the return on assets ratio is an important ration in the analysis of company’s financial performance. The ratio measures the percentage of the profit that the company has earned in connection with the overall resources of the company.   The ratio is used in combination with the other financial ratios to measure the progress of the company. However, the Returns on assest is often not given attention by most share holders since in the calculation, total assets are used ruther than the net assets. However, the ratios are important in determining the efficiency of the strategy that the company has employed in the effort to generate revenue from the assets. The return on assets registered a negative of -6.60. It, therefore, point out that the investments made during the financial year did not yield as expected but brought loses to the company.

Debt to equity ratio is also commonly referred to as leverage or gearing ratio. The ratio is important in the analysis of the risk levels of the company. It gives an indication of how much of the assets of the company are supported by the debts.  The company’s debt-equity ratio was at 40.25% while the asset-liability ratio was at 0.19. Given the ratios as mentioned above, it is evident that despite the company making an effort of growth and increase in revenue generation; it still has some shortfall which includes wrong investment plans and decisions that resulted to loss during the financial year 2017. The company should, therefore, consider a change in the investment strategy and develop a new investment plan for the subsequent financial years (Wu et al.2012, p.301).  On the other hand, the remuneration for the CEO in the financial year 2017 was $2,348,405 providing a competitive picture of the company.

The report by the managing director highlights five areas in which the company has made strides during the financial year 2017.  These areas included the development of customer and Store-led Culture and team, generation of sustainable performance in food, ensure that their endeavourer drinks produce good results on a competitive market; empowerment of portfolio business and initiation of processes to become a lean retailer in the industry.

The report indicates that the company’s key objective during the FY 2007 was to build trust with their customers and for that; they had made notable strides by the end of the financial year. The financial year has an improvement in customer store across the branches. They have 116,000 employees charged with the mandate of responding to customer claims a step that aide the company to attain an 81% score. A recent survey also indicates that the customer response rate of the company has improved by five points over the previous year to 82%. Furthermore, the company has also committed itself to improve not only the physical safety but also the mental health of the team. At the beginning of the financial year, the company also launched a corporate responsibility strategy for the year 2020. That is no all; the manager also indicates that they are focused the on diversity especially on attaining gender diversity in the company.

Return to equity ratio

When it comes to sustainable performance, the food sales of the company had increased by 4.5% within the year with the fourth quarter registering a high performance of 7.2%.  The company continues to optimize customer transaction and is also experiencing an increase in the number of items per basket of the customers.  Woolworths has also invested in repositioning and rebranding of an approximate of over 3000 food brands in an aim to show their commitments to improve on nutrition by the year 2020 and also inspire their customers to consume the healthy products more sustainably.

The director also indicated that the fourth priority of Woolworths was on empowerment of the company portfolio business.  In this area, the final results were a disappointment to the company. The disappointment is reflected in the investment that the company made in the second half of the financial year as the company aimed at making a turnaround plan. The new plan has the approval of the board and communication has been made to the stakeholders.

Away from the disappointment of a failed plan, the company continues to make steps towards becoming a lean retailer via end to end systems and process.  According to the director, the company is on the right track of growth as they have taken measures and employed techniques to see the company increase revenue generation. He also admits that some of the plans that were put in place during the financial year 2017 failed and that the company had to come up with alternative plans.  The directors’ reports portray the correct picture of the company which has a semi-strong financial performance. I, therefore, agree with the analysis of the Director.

Woolworth Group is keen on annual publication of Corporate Governance Policy as approves and updated by the Australian Stock Exchange principles. The company is listed in the Australian Stock Exchange (ASE) and therefore is expected to observe and apply the eight Corporate Governance regulations and requirements (Lama and Anderson 2015, p.382). The regulations and requirements as revised in the year 2014 are as follows;

I. The listed company should have a strong foundation of oversight and management. This requirement needs the company to make public the specific roles of the board of management of the company (Fox 2014,p.157). Additionally, it should also elaborate the how the performance of the board will be monitored. It is therefore vital for a listed company to provide an evaluation framework for its board of management.

II. The board of the company should be of good composition. The members of the board should have the required skills and commitment that add value to the company. The size of the board should also be adequate to enable to charge its duties with efficiency (Shimeld, Williams and Shimeld 2017, p.340).

III. A listed company is expected to uphold ethical consideration in their operations when dealing with their customers and stakeholders (McCollum 2007 p.20). It therefore essential that a listed company provides an ethical framework for its operations. The frameworks may include strategies to eliminate biasness based on gender, religion, color, etc. Moreover; it may also include the company’s strategies to prevent and to handle corruption cases in the company’s operations.

IV. The fourth requirement involves the company’s reporting criteria. It is required for all listed companies to have a reliable, properly constructed and safeguarded reporting structure. The reporting structure should be clear on who does the reporting for the company, when the reporting should be done and when the reporting should be done as well as the mechanisms of doing the reporting (Sheehy 2013,p.21). The reporting system should be independent and adequately safeguards its independence.

V. The fifth requirement of the ASE listed companies is timely and balanced disclosure. Information on issues affecting the value or the price of the company’s securities should be made available to all concerned parties at an adequate time (Henry 2008,p. 931). Timely disclosure of any material information that would be considered to have a material impact on the value of the shares by a reasonable person should is vital for all the listed companies.

VI. It is also a requirement for the listed company to show respect for the right of the security holders (De Forest 2015, p. 15). The company should provide the necessary information and facilities to aid their stakeholders to exercise their rights.

VII. The second last requirement of the ASE involves risk management (Buckby Gallery and Ma 2015, p.859). Other than the establishment of risk management framework, it is also required of the listed company to exercise periodical evaluation of the risk management framework to determine its effectiveness and make adjustments where necessary.

VIII. The last requirement is the fair remuneration requirement. All the listed companies are expected to offer an attractive remuneration for its executives to attract qualified and efficient managers and senior executives. This aids in the creation of trust among the stakeholders (Xu et al. 2017, p.928). The company is therefore expected to publish its remuneration rates and considerations based on the qualifications and the responsibilities of its employees.

The Board of the company is responsible for the formulation of the Corporate Governance policies taking into consideration the financial interests of the company and the shareholders (Cuomo, Mallin and Zattoni 2016, p. 235). Furthermore, the board also plans the financial objectives of the Woolworths Group as an entity. Furthermore, the board is also charged with the mandate of ensuring ha the actions of the company ate ethical and responsible for giving back to the community in which it operates. Additionally, the board addresses the issue of a code of conduct which is vital for the operations of the company. The principles and policies governing matters of inclusion and diversity are captured in the same document as well.

The structure of good corporate governance as recommended by the Australian Stock exchange (2003) has a primary focus on the responsibilities of the management which includes the board of directors. The framework and the structure are always as robust as the number of years that the company has operated. Even though is not easy for the Australian corporate entities to be at the same level with other companies in the world, they do have a set of governance principals that guide their corporate framework. The Woolworth Groups, through their financial year 2017 report, demonstrate adherence to some of the corporate governance framework laid by the Australian Stock Exchange.

It is a requirement that a corporate entity should provide precise responsibilities of the members of the Board  Directors. The Board of Directors is always looked at as the main support of the entity as the company is always directed by them (Yang Pan, Peng Huang, and Gopal,2018, p.982). The year 2017 financial report, on its constitution section outlines the responsibilities of the Directors of the Group, the Executive committee, the Board Committees, and the Board charter. The sections form a foundation for ethical responsibility as well structured decision-making structure.

The next requirement by the ASE is the principle that guides the ethical decision-making process within the corporate entity. The requirements dictate the decisions of the company should only be made based on well researched and analyzed conclusions as well as past experiences. In line with this requirement, the company outlines methods and ways of stakeholder engagement. The report gives a list of requirements and needs of stakeholders that aids in meeting the interests of the stakeholders and in the maintenance of strong shareholder relations to help in ensuring not only a stable but also a holistic growth of the company (Woolworths Group 2017).

The next requirement of the ASE that of the formulation of a financial budget as well as setting the financial objectives of in a way that aids in ensuring that the process of financial reporting is carried out ethically. To meet this requirement, the financial reporting of the company provides the financial structuring of the organization as well as the financial objectives that company intends to achieve (Pérez-Rave, Muñoz-Giraldo, and Correa-Morales, 2017, p.77). Furthermore, the report provides an outline of the risk management techniques as indicated in the risk management section of the report. This section of the reports also complies to the requirement of risk mitigation and management within the corporation.

 Furthermore, it required the company to make available any crucial information. It involves publishing of company information at the right time and to the recommended extent (Christopher 2016, p.1). The company reports fulfill this requirement through the provision of a detailed explanation of the transparency mechanism through with the company utilizes to disclose information at the appropriate and required time. Moreover, the company is expected to demonstrate an understanding of the value, needs, and interest of various stakeholders in the firm. To adhere to this requirement, the company report indicates the core values with a special focus on the customers’ interest and making changes in line with the customers’ demands.

On the other hand, there are some requirements that the company did not adhere to in the 2017 general report. Some of these requirements include the requirements to come up with rules and regulations on a framework that recognizes the hard work of its employees providing them with adequate remunerations, incentives and salaries according to their productivity and responsibilities (Kolk, and Perego 2014, p. 7). Furthermore, while the report mentions the directors and the board, it fails to give the initiatives and the strategies undertaken by the company to help in boosting the growth of the company. Additionally, the company should have provided more information on the remuneration of the employees as well as well as the measures that the company intend o put in place to help in the maintaining trust and appeal to the stakeholders’ interests. There is a light mention of the measures for ensuring ethical and sustainable measures by it to achieve the financial objectives of the firm.  The company should have provided more details in the report as supported by their actions and strategies put in place during the financial year (Woolworths Group 2017). Even though the company has made efforts to ensure compliance with the ASX Corporate Governance principals and guidelines, it still falls shot in a few of the guidelines. This shortfall is also reflected in the financial performance indicators as the company maintains a semi-strong level of performance.

The chairman’s report point south that the focus of the board during the financial year 2017 was on three major areas. Firstly, the board has focused on the development of a strategy that would fix the Australian Supermarkets. The strategy to achieve this goal involved realignment of the company’s portfolio of the company and exiting the masters business to reset the strategy known to the company as the Big W strategy. In this, the chairperson indicates that there has been significant progress (Woolworths Group 2017). However, the reports also admit that there is still much to be done for the company to achieve this objective.  In the report, the chairperson also acknowledges the existence of threats from there different quarters. The threats indicated by the chairperson are the traditional competitors, digital entrants, and the discounters.  The second item that was given attention by the chairman’s report is the efforts of the company in building the culture of achievement in the organization. The perceived culture should see the employees operating according to the values of the company. Furthermore, the report elaborates on how important the leadership of the company values not only the welfare of the employees but also the health of the employees. This is demonstrated by the renewed commitment to make the team’s welfare and health better. The entity is also keen to cultivate the culture of transparency both with the investors and within the company.  Additionally, the board expressed its satisfaction with capital management in the company. The report alludes that the company has focused on capital management. It is stated that the company to an investment grade rating that is strong. This has led to a decline in net debt during the year. On dividends, the board announced final profits of fifty cents per share which makes the total dividends for the year to be eighty-four cents. This is a 9.1% increase from the financial year 2016. In the process of determining the final dividend, the board made consideration of the improvements in the trading activities in the second half of the financial year. Furthermore, the strong cash generation resulted in a reduction in the net debt. According to the chairman, the board maintains its commitment towards solid grade of investment and credit ratings. Like the manager, the chairman also admits that despite the strides and improvement in performance that the company has witnessed during the financial year 2017, there is still a lot that the company should do to transform Woolworths Group.  The chairman has given an honest overview of the financial position and the progress of the company in the financial year 2017.  By acknowledging the shortfalls of the company, he confirms the results of the analysis that places the company in the category of companies with semi-strong financial performance.

Conclusion

Woolworth Group, being one of the companies listed on the Australian Stoke Exchange is expected to adhere to the Corporate Governance regulations and Principles that are set by the ASE. The analysis of the company general report for the financial year 2017 indicates a considerable level of compliance with Corporate Governance and principals. However, the company still has to put more effort toward complete adherence to the regulations. Some of the requirements the company has adhered to include transparency in the business dealings when dealing with shareholders, aligning the company operations and objectives with the interests of the customers and timely and adequate publication of information regarding the company. Furthermore, the company also complies with the regulation that requires it to have a sound financial plan. The availability of a financial plane to help the company grow and generate more revenue is indicated in the financial report. Additionally, the company also published and made public its managers and the members of the board as requires by the regulations.  Furthermore, they also adhered to the ethical consideration. The analysis of Woolworths Group financial statements for the financial year 2017 indicated that the company was in a strong financial position based on the ratio analysis used by this report. However, the company did not perform well regarding investments hence ending up with undesirable results. Both the managing director and the chairperson’s statements indicated that they were pleased with the progress that the company was making. However, they did not fail to mention the shortfall that the company has had during the financial year. While the reports indicated an increase in revenue as compared to the previous year the chairperson acknowledged the investment decisions made during the year that did not yield returns.

References

Anderson, E. E. and Buchholz, R. A. (2008) ‘Economic Instability and Occupational Injuries: The Impact of Overtime Hours and Turnover Rates’, Labor Studies Journal, 13(4), p. 33. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=6121630&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 15 October 2018).

Buckby, S., Gallery, G. and Ma, J. (2015) ‘An analysis of risk management disclosures: Australian evidence’, Managerial Auditing Journal, 30(8/9), pp. 812–869. doi: 10.1108/MAJ-09-2013-0934.

Christopher, M. (2016) Logistics & Supply Chain Management. New York: FT Publishing International. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1419659&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 15 October 2018).

Cuomo, F., Mallin, C. and Zattoni, A. (2016) ‘Corporate Governance Codes: A Review and Research Agenda’, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(3), pp. 222–241. doi: 10.1111/corg.12148.

De Forest Billyou (2015) ‘Priority Rights of Security Holders in Bankruptcy Reorganization: New Directions’, Harvard Law Review, 67(4), pp. 1–38. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=15236390&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 15 October 2018).

Fox, J. (2014) ‘ASX Corporate Governance Council review of Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations’, Governance Directions, 66(3), pp. 142–146. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=101915142&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 14 October 2018).

Henry, D. (2008) ‘Corporate Governance Structure and the Valuation of Australian Firms: Is There Value in Ticking the Boxes?’, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 35(7/8), pp. 912–942. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.2008.02100.x.

Lama, T. and Anderson, W. W. (2015) ‘Company characteristics and compliance with ASX corporate governance principles’, Pacific Accounting Review (Emerald Group Publishing Limited), 27(3), pp. 373–392. doi: 10.1108/PAR-12-2013-0104.

Mankin, J. A., Jewell, J. J. and Rivas, J. A. (2017) ‘To Improve Financial Reporting, We Need to Disclose More Relevant Information’, International Journal of the Academic Business World, 11(2), pp. 95–102. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=125439977&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 15 October 2018).

Matsumoto, K., Shivaswamy, M. and Hoban, J. . J. P. (2015) ‘Security analysts’ views of the financial ratios of manufacturers and retailers’, Financial Practice & Education, 5(2), pp. 44–55. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=9603130589&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 15 October 2018).

McCollum, T. (2007) ‘ASX Updates Governance Principles’, Internal Auditor, 64(5), p. 20. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=31282459&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 14 October 2018).

Parkinson, M. M. (2018). Case Study 4: Woolworths Group plc.

Pérez-Rave, J., Muñoz-Giraldo, L. and Correa-Morales, J. C. (2017) ‘Use of control charts with regression analysis for autocorrelated data in the context of logistic financial budgeting’, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 112, pp. 71–83. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2017.08.015.

ROI Case Study: Woolworths and Episys’ (2004) European Retail Digest, (43), pp. 47–51. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=15546527&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 14 October 2018).

Sheehy, B. (2013) ‘From law firm to stock exchange listed law practice: an examination of institutional and regulatory reform’, International Journal of the Legal Profession, 20(1), pp. 3–32. doi: 10.1080/09695958.2013.833093.

Shimeld, S., Williams, B. and Shimeld, J. (2017) ‘Diversity ASX corporate governance recommendations: a step towards change?’, Sustainability Accounting, Management & Policy Journal, 8(3), pp. 335–357. doi: 10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2016-0089.

Stephens, S. (2017) ‘Tragedy of the Commonality: A Substantive Right to Collective Action in Employment Disputes’, Emory Law Journal, 67(1), pp. 157–196. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=126264939&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 14 October 2018).

Woolworths Group 2017 Annual Report, pp. 1-132. Retreved through www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/icms_docs/188797_woolworths-group-2017—annual-report.pdf

Woolworths Holdings Limited 2018, Woolworths Holdings Limited MarketLine Company Profile, 13 March, pp. 1–18, viewed 14 October 2018, <https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=127027867&site=ehost-live>.

Woolworths takes the lead’ 2009, Finweek, p. 53, viewed 14 October 2018, <https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=45347344&site=ehost-live>.

Woolworths. (2017). woolworths. [online] Available at: https://www.woolworths.com.au/ [Accessed 11 Jul. 2016].

Wu, W. et al. (2012) ‘Improved AHP-group decision making for investment strategy selection’, Technological & Economic Development of Economy, 18(2), pp. 299–316. doi: 10.3846/20294913.2012.680520.

Xu, S. et al. (2017) ‘Corporate governance and private placement issuance in Australia’, Accounting & Finance, 57(3), pp. 907–933. doi: 10.1111/acfi.12171.

Yang Pan, Peng Huang and Gopal, A. (2018) ‘Board Independence and Firm Performance in the It Industry: The Moderating Role of New Entry Threats’, MIS Quarterly, 42(3), pp. 979–1000. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2018/14688.

Kolk, A. [email protected] n. and Perego, P. [email protected] n. (2014) ‘Sustainable Bonuses: Sign of Corporate Responsibility or Window Dressing?’, Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), pp. 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1614-x.