UKURAN DEWAN KOMISARIS, PROPORSI KOMISARIS INDEPENDEN, DAN PENGAMBILAN RISIKO BANK PADA PERUSAHAAN PERBANKAN DI INDONESIA
Keywords:
Idiosyncratic Risk, Insolvency Risk, Proportion of Independent Commissioners, Size of the Board of CommissionersAbstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the size of the board of commissioners and the proportion of independent commissioners on bank risk taking. The sample of this study is banking companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during the period 2007 to 2016. The number of observational data analysed was 194 data in the first model and 131 data in the second model. The analysis method used in this research is multiple linear regression. The dependent variables analysed include insolvency risk and idiosyncratic risk. And the independent variables consist of the size of the board of commissioners and the proportion of independent commissioners. The results showed that the size of the board of commissioners and the proportion of independent commissioners had a significant negative effect on bank risk taking as measured by insolvency risk and idiosyncratic risk.
References
Çam, S., Uzkaralar, Ö., & Borak, M. 2024. Idiosyncratic risk and market volatility: Threat or opportunity for returns? A study of Borsa Istanbul stocks. Borsa Istanbul Review, 24(4), 698–709.
Astami, E., Pramono, A. J., Rusmin, R., Cahaya, F. R., & Soobaroyen, T. 2024. Do family ownership and supervisory board characteristics influence audit report lag? A view from a two-tier board context. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 56.
Hunjra, A. I., Jebabli, I., Thrikawala, S. S., Alawi, S. M., & Mehmood, R. 2024. How do corporate governance and corporate social responsibility affect credit risk? Research in International Business and Finance, 67.
Kohler, Mattias. 2014. Which banks are more risky? The impact of business models on bank stability. Journal of Financial Stability, 18 (1), 1-18.
Chen, et al., 2006. Does stock option-based executive compensation induce risk-taking? An analysis of the banking industry. Journal of Banking and Finance, 20(30), 915-945
Akbar, S. et al. 2017. Board strucure and corporate risk taking in the UK financial sector. International Review of Financial Analysis, 50(7), 101-110.
Pathan, S. 2009. Strong boards, CEO power and bank risk-taking. Journal of Banking &Finance, 33(7), 1340–1350.
Jensen, M. And Meckling, W. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Cost, and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 3, p.:305-360
Sudana, I Made. 2015. Manajemen Keuangan: Teori dan Praktik. Edisi 2. Surabaya: Erlangga.
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J., Lang, L. 1999. Expropriation of minority shareholders: evidence from East Asia. Policy Research paper 2088. World Bank, Washington DC.
Shleifer, A., and R. Vishny. 1997. A Survey of Corporate Governance. Journal of Finance, 52, 737-783.
Bank Indonesia. 2009. Peraturan Bank Indonesia nomor 11/25/PBI/2009 tentang perubahan Peraturan Bank Indonesia nomor 5/8/PBI/2003 tentang penerapan manajemen risiko bagi bank umum. Jakarta: Author.
Hartono, Jogiyanto. 2017. Teori Portofolio dan Analisis Investasi Edisi ke 11. Yogyakarta : BPFE-Yogyakarta
Moscovici, S., & Zavalloni, M. 1969. The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12(2), 125–135.
Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88, 288-307.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Rahmat Setiawan, Salsabila Barasyid, Nanda Surya Jatnika
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
