This systematic literature review aimed to investigate the impact of dual-class share structure on firm innovation. We utilized SLR methods with specific searching strategy to get our samples. 99 articles from Scopus met the predetermined criteria and were considered suitable for inclusion in our research. The review identified emerging research trends, encompassing diverse industries and regions. By synthesizing independent variables, dependent variables, moderators, and mediators, we unveiled patterns in measurement standards and theoretical orientations among researchers. We also observed that DCS remain influential in shaping the innovative motivation of firms. Our analysis revealed a need for more qualitative analyses, innovation in theoretical frameworks, and deeper exploration of governance in emerging economies. This review served as a foundational resource for future research in this field, since we haven’t found literatures focusing on the combination of DCS and firm innovation. However, we acknowledged potential limitations in our search strategies and database selection. As DCS and innovation continue to evolve, this review highlights the importance of ongoing inquiry and exploration in this dynamic area of study.
Amoako-Adu, B., Baulkaran, V., & Smith, B. F. (2011). Executive compensation in firms with concentrated control: The impact of dual class structure and family management. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17(5), 1580–1594.
Amore, M. D., & Bennedsen, M. (2016). Corporate governance and green innovation. In Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 75, 54–72.
Atanassov, J. (2013). Do hostile takeovers stifle innovation? Evidence from Antitakeover Legislation and Corporate Patenting. In Journal of Finance, 68(3), 1097–1131). https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12019
Bebchuk, L. A., & Kastiel, K. (2017). The untenable case for perpetual dual-class stock. Virginia Law Review, 103(4), 585–630. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2954630
Belloc, F. (2012). Corporate governance and innovation: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(5), 835–864.
Bertoni, F., Meoli, M., & Vismara, S. (2014). Board independence, ownership structure and the valuation of IPOs in Continental Europe. In Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(2), 116–131.
Bhandari, P. (2021, March 1). Mediator vs. moderator variables | differences & examples. Scribbr. Retrieved from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/mediator-vs-moderator/
Busru, S. A., & Shanmugasundaram, G. (2017). Effects of innovation investment on profitability and moderating role of corporate governance: Empirical study of Indian listed firms. In Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 10(2), 97–117).
Cao, X., Leng, T., Goh, J., & Malatesta, P. (2020). The innovation effect of dual-class shares: New evidence from US firms. Economic Modelling, 91, 347–357.
Cescon, F. (2002). Short-term perceptions, corporate governance and the management of R & D in Italian companies. In Journal of Management and Governance, 6(3), 255–270.
Chatterjee, M., & Bhattacharjee, T. (2020). Ownership concentration, innovation and firm performance: Empirical study in Indian technology SME context. In South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 10(2), 149–170.
Chemmanur, T. J., & Jiao, Y. (2012). Dual class IPOs: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(1), 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.07.010
Chen, C.-J., Lin, B.-W., Lin, Y.-H., & Hsiao, Y.-C. (2016). Ownership structure, independent board members and innovation performance: A contingency perspective. In Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3371–3379.
Chizema, A. (2008). Institutions and voluntary compliance: The disclosure of individual executive pay in Germany. In Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(4), 359–374.
Chizema, A., & Kim, J. (2010). Outside directors on Korean boards: Governance and institutions. In Journal of Management Studies, 47(1), 109–129.
Choi, S. B., Lee, S. H., & Williams, C. (2011). Ownership and firm innovation in a transition economy: Evidence from China. In Research Policy, 40(3), 441–452.
Corsi, C., & Prencipe, A. (2018). Innovation propensity and international development of small and medium firms: The moderating effects of corporate governance structure. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 22(1–2), 80–102.
Czarnitzki, D., & Kraft, K. (2009). Capital control, debt financing and innovative activity. In Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 71(2), 372–383.
Dam, L., & Scholtens, B. (2012). Does ownership type matter for corporate social responsibility? In Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(3), 233–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2011.00907.x
DeAngelo, H., & DeAngelo, L. (1985). Managerial ownership of voting rights: A study of public corporations with dual classes of common stock. Journal of Financial Economics, 14(1), 33–69.
Dhaouadi, K. (2011). Effect of corporate governance on the firms’ structural capital. In Corporate Board: Role, Duties and Composition, 7(2), 25–39.
Driver, C., & Guedes, M. J. C. (2012). Research and development, cash flow, agency and governance: UK large companies. In Research Policy, 41(9), 1565–1577.
Fan, J., & Zhu, R. (2021). Studies on the sunset provisions of dual classes share structure corporations in innovation and technology board. Law and Economy, 49–62.
Fan, S., & Wang, C. (2021). Firm age, ultimate ownership, and R&D investments. In International Review of Economics and Finance, 76, 1245–1264.
Gala, P., & Kashmiri, S. (2022). Exploring the dark side of integrity: Impact of CEO integrity on firms’ innovativeness, risk-taking and proactiveness. In European Journal of Marketing, 56(67), 2052–2102.
García Martínez, L. M. (2021). Index funds, strategic engagement and common ownership theory (A rising tension between competition and governance in the EU). In Market and Competition Law Review, 5(2), 71–104.
Gu, Y., & Zhang, L. (2017). The impact of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on corporate innovation. In Journal of Economics and Business, 90, 17–30.
Hazaea, S. A., Zhu, J., Khatib, S. F. A., Bazhair, A. H., & Elamer, A. A. (2022). Sustainability assurance practices: A systematic review and future research agenda. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(4), 4843–4864.
Hernández-Lara, A. B., Camelo-Ordaz, C., & Valle-Cabrera, R. (2014). Does board member stock ownership influence the effect of board composition on innovation? In European Journal of International Management, 8(4), 355–372.
Jarrell, G. A., & Poulsen, A. B. (1988). Dual-class recapitalizations as antitakeover mechanisms: The recent evidence. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(C), 129–152.
Javaid, H. M., Ain, Q. U., & Renzi, A. (2023). She-E-Os and innovation: Do female CEOs influence firm innovation? In European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(4), 982–1004.
Jermias, J. (2007). The effects of corporate governance on the relationship between innovative efforts and performance. European Accounting Review, 16(4), 827–854.
Ji, S., & Wong, G. Y. (2018). Political connections, government regulations and risk-taking-evidence from China. In Frontiers of Economics in China, 13(4), 655–684.
Keum, D. D. (2021). Innovation, short-termism, and the cost of strong corporate governance. In Strategic Management Journal, 42(1), 3–29.
Khatib, S. F. A., Abdullah, D. F., Elamer, A. A., & Abueid, R. (2021). Nudging toward diversity in the boardroom: A systematic literature review of board diversity of financial institutions. In Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(2), 985–1002.
Kim, N., & Kim, E. (2015). Board capital and exploration: From a resource provisional perspective. In Management Decision, 53(9), 2156–2174.
Kotb, A., Elbardan, H., & Halabi, H. (2020). Mapping of internal audit research: A post-enron structured literature review. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, ahead-of-print.
Li, D., & Shen, W. (2021). Can corporate digitalization promote green innovation? The moderating roles of internal control and institutional ownership. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(24). https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413983
Li, J., & Liu, L. (2023). Common institutional ownership and corporate innovation: Synergy of interests or grabs of interests. In Finance Research Letters, 52.
Liu, Q., Yang, X., Shen, Z., & Štreimikien?, D. (2022). Digital economy and substantial green innovation: Empirical evidence from Chinese listed companies. In Technology Analysis and Strategic Management. Routledge.
Ma, X., Ock, Y.-S., Wu, F., & Zhang, Z. (2022). The effect of internal control on green innovation: corporate environmental investment as a mediator. In Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(3).
Massaro, M., Dumay, J., & Guthrie, J. (2016). On the shoulders of giants: Undertaking a structured literature review in accounting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(5), 767–801. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-01-2015-1939
Miozzo, M., & Dewick, P. (2002). Building competitive advantage: Innovation and corporate governance in European construction. In Research Policy, 31(6), 989–1008.
Morck, R., Wolfenzon, D., & Yeung, B. (2005). Corporate governance, economic entrenchment, and growth. In Journal of Economic Literature, 43(3), 655–720.
Nakabayashi, M. (2019). Ownership structure and market efficiency: Stockholder/manager conflicts at the dawn of Japanese capitalism. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 61, 189–212.
Nerantzidis, M., Pazarskis, M., Drogalas, G., & Galanis, S. (2020). Internal auditing in the public sector: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(2), 189–209.
Pareek, R., & Sahu, T. N. (2022). How far the ownership structure is relevant for CSR performance? An empirical investigation. In Corporate Governance (Bingley), 22(1), 128–147.
Park, J., & Bolton, B. (2022). Board of directors turnover with new board chairs in family firms. In Cogent Business and Management, 9(1).
Rock, E. (2012). Shareholder eugenics in the public corporation. Cornell Law Review, 97(4), 849.
Roh, T., Park, B. I., & Xiao, S. (Simon). (2022). Multiple principal conflicts and technological innovation performances of international new ventures: Moderating role of founder’s experiences. In Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 7(4).
Shapiro, D., Tang, Y., Wang, M., & Zhang, W. (2015). The effects of corporate governance and ownership on the innovation performance of Chinese SMEs. In Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 13(4), 311–335.
Smart, S. B., Thirumalai, R. S., & Zutter, C. J. (2008). What’s in a vote? The short- and long-run impact of dual-class equity on IPO firm values. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 45(1), 94–115.
Tran, H. T., & Freel, M. (2023). Ownership, innovation, and variable institutional quality. In Corporate Governance: An International Review, 31(2), 285–306.
Tsao, S.-M., & Chen, G.-Z. (2012). The impact of internationalization on performance and innovation: The moderating effects of ownership concentration. In Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(3), 617–642.
Ullah, F., Jiang, P., Mu, W., & Elamer, A. A. (2023). Rookie directors and corporate innovation: Evidence from Chinese listed firms. Applied Economics Letters, 0(0), 1–4.
Wang, J. (2021). Managing R&D in Chinese listed firms: The interactive effects of ownership concentration and corporate governance. In Thunderbird International Business Review, 63(5), 607–621.
Wang, S., Zhao, S., Shao, D., Fan, X., & Zhang, B. (2022). Impact of managerial reputation and risk-taking on enterprise innovation investment from the perspective of social capital: Evidence from China. In Frontiers in Psychology, 13. Frontiers Media S.A.
Wu, H.-L., Lin, B.-W., & Chen, C.-J. (2007). Examining governance-innovation relationship in the high-tech industries: Monitoring, incentive and a fit with strategic posture. In International Journal of Technology Management, 39(1-2), 86–104.
Wu, T.-H., Ting, P. J. L., Lin, M.-C., & Chang, C.-C. (2022). Corporate ownership and firm performance: A mediating role of innovation efficiency. In Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 31(4), 292–319.
Xu, E. G., Graves, C., Shan, Y. G., & Yang, J. W. (2023). Corporate governance and innovation investment in publicly listed firms: The moderating effect of ownership type and legal jurisdiction. In International Journal of Managerial Finance, 19(1), 1–21.
Xu, P., Zhang, H., & Bai, G. (2019). Research on the differentiated impact mechanism of parent company shareholding and managerial ownership on subsidiary responsive innovation: Empirical analysis based on “principal-agent” framework. In Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(19).
Yahaya, I., Senin, A., Mohd Baba Yusuf, M., Khatib, S., & Usman Sabo, A. (2020). Bibliometric analysis trend on business model innovation. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7, 2020.
Yan, M. (2022). Permitting dual class shares in the UK premium listing regime—A path to enhance rather than compromise investor protection. In Legal Studies, 42(2), 335–357.
Yang, Y., Wang, J., & Lou, W. (2023). Effect of equity checks and balances on corporate social responsibility: A moderated mediating effect. In Cross Cultural and Strategic Management.
Yin, X.-N., Li, J.-P., & Su, C.-W. (2023). How does ESG performance affect stock returns? Empirical evidence from listed companies in China. In Heliyon, 9(5).
Zhang, Q., Chen, L., & Feng, T. (2014). Mediation or moderation? The role of R&D investment in the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance: Empirical evidence from the Chinese IT industry. In Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(6), 501–517).
Zhu, J., & Huang, F. (2023). Transformational leadership, organizational innovation, and ESG performance: Evidence from SMEs in China. In Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(7).
Yue, S., Bajuri, N. H., Khatib, S. F. A., Li, N., & Lyu, Y. (2024). Navigating the Nexus of Dual-Class Share Structure and Firm Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(12), 1189–1202.
Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s)
Published by Knowledge Words Publications (www.kwpublications.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
