Delinquent Parents :: essays research papers fc

Delinquent Parents? Gone are the good old days when mom and dad were around to teach their children about morality and the basics of growing up. Instead, we see parents who have replaced caring and personal involvement with the purchase of material goods. We see parents who are afraid to discipline their children and who are afraid to set boundaries. We see parents who are afraid to hug their children and be involved in their lives. A child's behavior shows the kind of home he or she comes from. Parents are suppose to be role models, but what do we find. Parents are neglecting their responsibility. Parents, who ought to teach by precept and example, have fallen prey to the "do as I say, but not as I do" syndrome. We as a society, often times fail to look at the root cause of many of the adolescent problems being witnessed today. I watched a PBS documentary entitled "The Lost Children of Rockdale County." I found this documentary to be very disturbing look into th e lives of middle to upper class youth. Though the focus of the program was sexual promiscuity, drugs, pornography, and alcohol, but what I found far more troubling was the tremendous breakdown that exists between the children of Rockdale County and their parents. This entire documentary was full of houses that were empty and void of supervision and adult presence. Some recent research on adolescent behavior has provided an insight into factors that contribute to juvenile delinquency. The relationships between parents and children play a significant role in the social well being of the children. Children who do the best, have parents who use both a great deal of warmth and caring with their children and also exercise a high level of control over their children's actions. High levels of warmth and control characterize the form of parenting referred to as authoritative. (Teenagers in Trouble, Gallagher, p.2) Authoritative parents are both firm and fair. Rarely did I see this type of p arent in the program. "I thought that if I disciplined you, you would run away" was one comment made by a mother whose daughter had gone on a drinking bing at age twelve, blacked out, and realized she had been raped when she came to. Many of the parents documented were not able to connect with their children and even when they did, they thought that just showing concern was enough.

On Being an Atheist Essay

In this article McCloskey writes what he believes as truth in the world we live in. He states that theists believe in a God and that they have â€Å"proofs† that this God exists. In the article he addresses these â€Å"proofs† and in a very academic and respectful way tears them down. He attempts to eliminate all possibilities of the existence of God, through what he calls â€Å"reasons why I believe that atheism is a much more comfortable belief than theism, and why theist should be miserable just because they are theists.† The first issue that McCloskey references to is the â€Å"proofs† that Christians hold to prove that God exist, but as we learned in one of our PointeCast presentations, the reasons Christians believe in God are not exactly proofs, because they cannot scientifically or in any way prove to a point that God does in fact exist. These reasons are arguments, theories and carefully thought out propositions that try their hardest to justify what we believe in. Because of this McCloskey argues that humans should give up on the notion that God exists, yet since there also no way to prove that God does not exist, McCloskey is defeated by his own logic. So if humans are to give up on both the notion that there is or is not a God, then that leaves us with nothing whatsoever to believe in. There is no way to prove that God does or does not exist, what I might believe to be a strong argument for the existence of God, and atheist such as McCloskey might deem nonsense. These â€Å"proofsâ₠¬  are simply and objective argument for the existence of God, thus have to be taken as valid argument, propositions, and theory and not as tangible proof. McCloskey dissects three major arguments being the cosmological proof, the  theological proof, and the argument from design. He takes all these arguments and picks them apart for both atheist and theist to see what he is trying to prove. In all honesty in some cases in these arguments of his I can see what he is trying to prove, yet in the end I have no sense of what he has accomplished with his arguments if he himself cannot prove that God does not exist. The first argument that McCloskey addresses is the Cosmological proof. He states that we cannot possibly assume without proof on an â€Å"an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause† and to this notion I somewhat agree. The reason being is that this argument does not specify the qualities of a god that could create the universe as it is. Thus the argument simply states that there must have been a first cause or there would have been infinite regress, or in other words gods and that is what the argument is trying to avoid. The next argument that McCloskey addresses is the Theological proof. He states that there cannot be indisputable proofs and examples of design that the whole argument becomes invalid. In this case he is again defeated by his own logic; because once again there is no way that any arguments attempting to prove that God does not exist are indisputable as well. In the world we live we must believe in what we as individuals take to as truth, since there is no possible way that a person can prove or disprove that God does or does not exist. McCloskey is attempting to support his arguments so hard that in the essence of itself he is defeating himself without realizing it. I believe that a perfect example of intelligent design is the human body. There is no possible way that such a complex and amazing creation came from a bunch of cells meshing together. Our bodies are built to live on the earth in a way that is amazingly thought out. The body is functioning, living organism in and of itself with thousands of different parts and pieces all working together to accomplish one goal: to live. The human body is the perfect example to show that intelligent design was indeed included in the universe and in the world today. Though this does not prove that there is one God, it does prove that there is a higher being that created what we are  today. I do not object to the thought of microevolution or even evolution itself, but I do not believe that evolution exterminates the need for intelligent design and a creator. Evolutionists believe that there exist the â€Å"perfect condition† as to what created the cosmos and the world around us, yet all the experiments to prove that this event took place have failed. Again there is the fact that we cannot prove or disprove this belief, while the experiments have failed; there is no way to go back in time and to prove that it indeed does not exist. Yet people must take into account that evolution does not cancel out God, in fact why couldn’t it have been God himself that created the â€Å"perfect condition† that brought into place evolution. McCloskey also addresses the fact that there is imperfection and evil in the world, he states that there could not possibly be a God who would allow this. First of all, the cosmological proof in itself does not tell us the characteristic of the creator, simply that there is one. Secondly a person who believes in God would tell you that there is evil in the world because God gave his creation the right to choose. The choice of the first man and woman of the world which God created chose to sin and brought evil into the world. There is also the fact that I believe McCloskey is being quite bold by stating that there is no divine purpose. After all he is simply a person in the world; he himself is not the creator and definitely does not have all the knowledge of the universe. The fact that McCloskey brings up the presence of evil is quite understandable. I completely understand where he is coming from and have had experiences in my own life with people like this. This is actually a very common argument among atheist and McCloskey is not an exception. It is sometimes hard to accept that fact that evil sometime does in fact fall into God’s Will, even some theist have trouble with the problem of evil when they themselves believe in a â€Å"good God†. In this argument I honestly have trouble as well. It is hard to justify a good person’s murder, or the rape of a young child, or the death of thousands because of a natural disaster. Yet in  the depths of my heart I personally believe that when God created the world it was not as such, it was perfect. When sin entered into the world it brought the evil as well. As for why God allows such evil to take place, that is a harder question and an even more difficult answer. I was brought up to believe that when God sees his creation in pain, it hurts him too; there have been times when I have questioned why God allows certain evils in our lives. The truth is there is no arguments that can make a person feel better in the face of child abuse, rape, murder, suicide, and even natural disasters, yet in the moments when people are hurting the most is when they turn to God. Thus I believe that is the way in which we see the reason there is evil in the world. God did not create the world with evil in place, but he did create a creation that could choose for their selves. Thus in essence the human race suffers from our own choices. McCloskey makes some very valid arguments yet I find that most of them stand empty handed. McCloskey also questions why God would not create a human race with free will to always to choose what is right. To this statement I honestly believe that would not be freewill. The reason that God created man with free will was so that he could love God of his own free will. If God had created man to the point where he could only choose what was good and right then in essence it would not have been free will at all. The beauty of having free will is the fact that God lets you choose, though he knows the choices that you will make, the choices are yours. Whether to love God or to reject God, free will cannot be controlled for then it would not be free will at all. At the end of his article McCloskey states that atheism is a much more comforting belief than theism. He uses the example of an ill child that was dying and that he would find no comfort in knowing there was a God. I on the other hand find that if there was no God and man was here on earth simply to be and that there was no reason for living that the death of a child would be unimportant. This might sounds very cruel but it is the truth. If there is no reason to live then dying is not much of an issue, since there is no afterlife simply the life we have here on earth. I find the fact of not knowing what will happen after death disconcerting. To know that when I die I will be in heaven with God is more than enough to help me through this  life on earth. Atheism to me is a sad religion with no reason for the existence of man. Heaven holds so much for the believer, peace, no pain, and an eternal home with God. Atheism to me is the religion that is the most miserable to live with, not theism. The greatest reason being that if there is no God, no afterlife, no salvation; then when death is on your doorsteps there is no hope only despair and fear of the nothingness beyond the grave. I cannot live believing there is no reason to live here on earth, knowing God loves and has a place for me in heaven is what helps me live on this Earth. References Craig, William L. Reasonable faith: Christian truth and apologetics. 3rd Ed. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008. 71-90. Evans, C. S., Manis, R. Z. Philosophy of religion: Thinking about faith. 2nd Ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009. McCloskey, H. J. Question 1: On being an atheist. 1968. 51-54.

Relationship Between Institutional Holdings And Firm Performance Finance Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 17 Words: 4959 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Finance Essay Type Research paper Did you like this example? The study under consideration Role of Institutional Investors in Corporate Governance in India has been conducted to examine whether institutional investors and its constituents play an active role in corporate governance practices of companies and whether they do have any impact over financial performance of respective companies. This study is essentially empirical and exploratory in nature. It is empirical in the sense that it is a data based research used to derive meaningful conclusions that are capable of being verified by observation or experimentation. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Relationship Between Institutional Holdings And Firm Performance Finance Essay" essay for you Create order It is exploratory in the sense that it explores the evidences of role of institutional investors in corporate governance practices and their financial performance. The study tried to maintain reasonable level of accuracy in constructing corporate governance score and data collection. Widely acknowledged statistical approaches have been used to achieve the study objectives. Objectives of the Study: The present study attempts to achieve the following objectives: To construct corporate governance score To establish relationship between institutional holdings and corporate governance score To establish relationship between institutional holdings and firm performance To establish relationship between corporate governance score and firm performance The Sample Design and Data: The study was started with a vast sample of 4,000 non-finance companies but due to lack of information on all the required variables, sample of 200 companies was considered adequate for the study. The present study is based on the secondary data. It covers a period of five financial years from 1st April 2004 to 31st March 2008. It is considered long enough to generalize on the role of institutional investors. Data has been collected on the institutional holdings in total as well as on different constituents of institutional holdings from nseindia.com. Institutional holdings are further segregated into three constituents. The mutual funds being the first one. The second constituent includes various public and private sector banks, all the developmental financial institutions (like IFCI, ICICI, IDBI, SFC) and insurance companies like the LIC, GIC, and their subsidiaries. The last constituent comprise of foreign institutional investors. The secondary data regarding annual report s to construct the corporate governance score have been collected from respective company websites and sebiedifar.com. The firm performance measures have been divided into two categories, one being the accounting measures while others are based on market returns. The accounting return measures include (%) return on networth, (%) return on capital employed, Profit After Tax, (%) Return on Assets, Net Profit Margin and Earning Per Share. Whereas, market return based measures include Tobins Q, (%) Risk Adjusted Excess Return and (%) Dividend Yield. Data for the study period on financial performance measures have been collected from Prowess Database. The annual published reports incorporate information in quantitative form about the past performance of a business unit but the use of these reports for in-depth analysis and interpretation is not without limitations. The financial position reflected by the annual reports is true only for the last day of accounting year and it may not be relevant for the remaining part of the year. Hence, the conclusions drawn in the present study should be taken in the light of these deficiencies of data. The collected data has been analyzed by using various statistical tools. Table 3.1 Name of Companies Selected For Analysis Company Code Name of Company Company Code Name of Company 1 Aban Offshore Ltd. 101 Jaiprakash Hydro-Power Ltd. 2 Ador Welding Ltd. 102 Jubilant Organosys Ltd. 3 Agro Dutch Industries Ltd. 103 Jet Airways India Ltd. 4 Aarti Industries Ltd. 104 Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. 5 Alfa Laval India Ltd. 105 Jaypee Hotels Ltd. 6 Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd. 106 JSW Steel Ltd. 7 Aegis Logistics Ltd. 107 Kajaria Ceramics Ltd. 8 Alembic Ltd. 108 Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. 9 Alps Industries Ltd. 109 KCP Ltd. 10 Apar Industries Ltd. 110 Khaitan Electricals Ltd. 11 Apollo Hospital Ent erprises 111 Lakshmi Machine Works 12 Arvind Remedies Ltd. 112 LGB and Bros. Ltd. 13 Asian Paints Ltd. 113 Larsen and Toubro Ltd. 14 Ashok Leyland Ltd. 114 Liberty Shoes Pvt. Ltd. 15 Asahi India Glass Ltd. 115 Lumax Industries Ltd. 16 Asian Electronics Ltd. 116 Lotte India Corporations Ltd. 17 Asian Hotels Ltd. 117 Lupin Chemicals Ltd. 18 Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. 118 Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. 19 Balaji Telefilms Ltd. 119 Marico Ltd. 20 Bombay and Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. 120 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. 21 BASF India Ltd. 121 Max India Ltd. 22 Bell Ceramics Ltd. 122 Madras Cements Ltd 23 Berger Paints (I) Ltd. 123 Malwa Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd. 24 Bharat Rasayan Ltd. 124 Moser-Baer India Ltd 25 BEML Ltd. 125 Nagarjuna Construction Co Ltd. 26 Bharat Electronics ltd. 126 NationalAluminium Company Lt d. 27 Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. 127 Navneet Publications (India) Ltd. 28 Bharat Forge Ltd. 128 NEPC India Ltd. 29 Bharti Airtel Ltd. 129 Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. 30 Blue Star Infotech Ltd. 130 Nirma Ltd. 31 Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. 131 Nahar Industrial Enterprises 32 Bhushan Steel and Strips Ltd. 132 NTPC Ltd. 33 Birla Corporation Ltd. 133 OCL India Ltd. 34 Biocon Ltd. 134 Omax Autos Ltd. 35 Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 135 ONGC Ltd. 36 Britannia Industries Ltd. 136 Oil Country Tubular Ltd. 37 Balmer Lawrie and Co. Ltd. 137 Pantaloon Retail India Ltd. 38 Cadila Healthcare Ltd. 138 Petron Engg. Construction 39 Century Textiles and Industries Ltd. 139 Petronet LNG Ltd. 40 Cyber Media (I) Ltd. 140 Premier Ltd. 41 Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. 141 Patel Engg. Ltd. 4 2 Chennai Petrochemical Corporation Ltd. 142 Patspin India Ltd. 43 Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. 143 Radico Khaitan Ltd. 44 Cipla Ltd. 144 Rajesh Exports Ltd. 45 CCL Products (I) Ltd. 145 Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers ltd. 46 Cheslind Textiles and Industries Ltd. 146 Radaan Mediaworks (I) Ltd. 47 Crompton Greaves Ltd. 147 Reliance Industries Ltd. 48 Dabur India Ltd. 148 RPG Cables Ltd. 49 DCW Ltd. 149 R S W M Ltd 50 Delta Magnets Ltd. 150 Rico Auto Industries Ltd. 51 Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. 151 Rane Holdings Ltd. 52 Deepak Fertilizers Ltd. 152 Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. 53 Dalmia Cements (Bharat) Ltd. 153 Ramco Industries Ltd. 54 DCM Ltd. 154 Saksoft Ltd. 55 D-Link India Ltd. 155 Saregama India Ltd. 56 Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd. 156 S Kumars Nationwide Ltd. 57 Eicher Motors Ltd. 157 Sand esh Ltd. 58 Elgi Equipments Ltd. 158 S Band T International Ltd. 59 Eurotex Inds. and Exports Ltd. 159 Sah Petroleum Ltd. 60 Eveready Inds. Ltd. 160 Sesa Goa Ltd. 61 Everest Industries Ltd. 161 Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. 62 Exide Industries ltd. 162 Salora International Pvt. Ltd. 63 Four Soft Ltd. 163 Sintex Industries Ltd. 64 F D C Ltd. 164 Seamec Ltd. 65 Fame India Ltd. 165 Sterlite Industries India Ltd. 66 Finolex Industries Ltd. 166 Shiva Texyarn Ltd. 67 Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. 167 Supreme Petrochemical Ltd. 68 Gas Authority of India Ltd. 168 Sundaram Brake Lining Ltd. 70 Gabriel India Ltd. 170 Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. 71 Godrej Industries Ltd. 171 Tata Power Company Ltd. 72 Grasim Industries Ltd. 172 Tata Tea Ltd. 73 GTN Industries Ltd. 173 Tata Coffee Ltd. 74 Gujarat Minera l Development Corporation Ltd. 174 Texmaco Ltd. 75 Geometric Ltd. 175 TIL Ltd. 76 HCC India Ltd. 176 Tips Industries Ltd. 77 HEG Ltd. 177 Trent Ltd. 78 Hero Honda Motors Ltd. 178 TTK Prestige Ltd. 79 HCL Technologies Ltd. 179 Thermax Ltd. 80 Halonix Ltd. 180 Titan Industries Ltd. 81 Hind Syntax Ltd. 181 Thirumalai Chemicals Ltd. 82 Hitachi home and life solutions India Ltd. 182 TVS Motor Co. Ltd. 83 Heritage Foods (I) Ltd. 183 TV Today Network Ltd. 84 Hindalco Industries Ltd. 184 Usha Martin Ltd. 85 Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd. 185 Ultratech Cement Ltd. 86 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. 186 Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. 87 Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. 187 Unitech Ltd. 88 Indian Hotels Company Ltd. 188 United Phosphorous Ltd. 89 IFGL Refractories Ltd. 189 Voltas Ltd. 90 Impex Ferro Tech Ltd. 190 VIP Industries Ltd. 91 Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 191 Vardhman Holdings Ltd. 92 IFB Agro Industries Ltd. 192 VST Industries Ltd. 93 Infosys Technologies Ltd. 193 Welspun-Gujarat Stahl Rohren Ltd. 94 IPCA Laboratories Ltd. 194 Wipro Ltd. 95 India Glycols Ltd. 195 Wheels India Ltd. 96 ITC Ltd. 196 Wyeth Ltd. 97 IVRCL Infrastructures and Projects Ltd. 197 Xpro India Ltd. 98 Jai Corporation Ltd. 198 Zee Entertainment Enterprise Ltd. 99 Jain Irrigation System Ltd. 199 Zenith Computers Ltd. 100 Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. 200 Zuari Industries Ltd. Construction of Corporate Governance Score: Various researchers have considered alternate measures of corporate governance. Some of them have used single measure, while others have used the multiple measures in the form of indices. Some researchers have used board characteristics as an effective measure of corporate governance as Hermalin and Weisbach (1998, 2003) have used board independence, Bhagat, Carey and Elson (1999) have used stock ownership of board members and Brickley, Coles and Jarrell (1997) have used the occupation of Chairman and CEO positions by the same or two different individuals. Whereas, Gompers, Ishii and Metrick (2003) have constructed a governance measure comprising of an index of 24 corporate governance provisions such as, classification of board of directors, measures taken by corporations to discourage unwanted takeover attempts, various lucrative benefits offered to the top executives if they are discharged of duties after the takeover and others, carrying equal weights collected by the Investment Responsibility Research Center. Bebchuk, Cohen and Ferrell (2004) created an entrenchment index consisting of six provisions in total out of which four include limit to shareholder rights and other two related with potential hostile takeovers. While the above-mentioned reports use data compiled by IRRC, Brown and Caylor (2004) applied Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) data to construct their governance index. This index considered 51corporate governance features covering eight corporate governance categories: ownership, board of directors, director eduction, executive and director compensation, , progressive practices, audit, charter/bylaws, and state of incorporation. Similarly, Mohanty (2002) has developed nineteen measures of corporate governance and combining it into one composite measure by giving higher weightage to the measures relating to the shareholders compared to the other stakeholders. The details of these measures are: Providing valuable and timely informati on to shareholders, Exceeding projections made at the time of issue of shares, asymmetric treatment of shareholders, quality of earnings, investor grievances, consistent difference between free cash flow to equity and dividends, improvement in credit rating, transfer of wealth from bondholders to shareholders, bondholders grievances, employee turnover rate, strikes and lockouts, customer satisfaction, timely or deferring payment to suppliers, evasion of duties and taxes, building social infrastructure, producing socially useful products, adopting street children, polluting environment, reneging on commitments made to the society. Bhagat and Bolton took GIM G-Index (constructed from data compiled by Investor Responsibility Research Centre), BCF E-Index (6 provision subset of the G-Index), TCL Benchmark Score (based on whether the board is classified, whether the outside directors constitute a majority on the board, whether the board has an independent chairman or lead director, wheth er the audit committee consists of only independent directors, whether the board has adopted a formal governance policy, number of directors with more than fifteen years tenure, number of directors who serve on more than four boards, number of old directors, and CEO compensation structure), BC Gov Score (as described by Brown and Caylor), Board independence, Median Director Dollar Value Ownership, Median Director Percent Value Ownership, CEO Chair duality and some alternative governance measures (the percentage of directors who are currently active CEOs, the percentage of directors currently serving on more than four boards, the percentage of directors who have served on the sample firms board for more than fifteen years, the percentage of old directors, the percentage of women directors, and (6) the percentage of directors not possessing any stock in the sample firm, as governance variables). In the present study, Corporate Governance Score has been developed on the basis of key characteristics of Standard and Poors Transparency and Disclosure Benchmark. Standard and Poors provides a range of corporate governance analyses and services, the crux of which is the Corporate Governance Score. CGSs are based on an assessment of the qualitative aspects of corporate governance practices of a company. Information has been collected on the attributes given below from the latest available annual reports of sample companies. The methodology, with 98 questions in three categories and 12 sub-categories, is designed to balance the conflicting requirements of the range of issues analyzed and the tractability of the analysis. Transparency and Disclosure is evaluated by searching company annual reports for the 98 possible attributes broadly divided into the following three broad categories: Ownership structure and investor rights (28 attributes) Financial transparency and information disclosure (35 attributes) Board and management structure and process (35 attri butes) Each question has been evaluated on a binary basis to ensure objectivity, and rankings for the three broad categories and an overall ranking is developed from the answers to individual questions. 98 Individual Transparency and Disclosure Questions: (1) Ownership Structure and Investor Rights Transparency of ownership: Provide a description of share classes? Provide a review of shareholders by type? Provide the number of issued and authorized but non-issued ordinary shares? Provide the par value of issued and authorized but non-issued ordinary shares? Provide the number of issued and authorized but non-issued shares of preferred, non-voting, and other classes? Provide the par value of issued and authorized but non-issued shares of preferred, non-voting and other classes? Does the company disclose the voting rights for each class of shares? Concentration of Ownership Top 1,3,5, or 10 shareholders disclosed? Shareholders owning more than 10,5, or 3 percent is disclosed? Does the company disclose percentage of cross-ownership? Voting and Shareholder meeting procedures Is there a calendar of important shareholder dates? Review of shareholder meetings (could be minutes)? Describe procedure for proposals at shareholder meetings? How shareholders convene an extraordinary general meeting? How shareholders nominate directors to board? Describe the process of putting inquiry to board? Does the annual report refer to or publish Charter or Code of best corporate governance practices? Are the Articles of Association or Charter Articles of Incorporation published? (2) Financial Transparency and Information Disclosure Is there a discussion of corporate strategy? Report of the kind of business it is pursuing in detail? Does the company give an overview of trends in its industry? Report of the products or services manufactured/provided? Provide the analysis of various segments broken down by business line? Does the market share of any or all of businesses of company disclosed? Does the company report basic earnings forecast of any kind? In detail? Disclose output in physical terms? Does the company give an output forecast of any kind? Does the company give characteristics of assets employed? Does the company provide efficiency indicators Does the company provide any industry-specific ratios? Does the company disclose its plans for investment in the coming years? Does the company disclose details of its investment plans in the coming years? Accounting Policy Review Provide financial information on a quarterly basis? Does the company discuss its accounting policy? Does the company disclose accounting standards it uses for its accounts? Does the company provide accounts according to the local accounting standards? Does the company provide accounts in alternate internationally recognized accounting method? Does the company provide each of the balance sheet, income statement, and cash-flow statement by internationally recognized methods? Does the company provide a reconciliation of its domestic accounts to internationally recognized methods? Accounting Policy Details Does the company disclose methods of asset valuation? Does the company disclose information on method of fixed assets depreciation? Does the company produce consolidated financial statements? Related Party structure and transactions Provide a list of associate companies in which it carries a minority stake Is ownership structure of affiliates is disclosed by the company? Is there a list/register of related party transactions? Is there a list/register of group transactions? Information on Auditors Does the company disclose the name of its auditing firm? Does the company reproduce the auditors report? Disclose how much audit fees is paid to the auditor? Disclose any non-audit fees paid to auditors? (3) Structure of Board and Management and its Process Is there a chairman listed? Are details, vital information, about the chairman disclosed? Is there a list of board members (names)? Are there details about directors (other than name/title) Details about current employment/position of directors provided? Are details about previous employment/positions provided? Disclose the dates of joining of directors on the board? Are directors classified as executive or outside directors? Role of the Board Is the role of Board at the company is disclosed in detail.? Is list of matters reserved for the board is disclosed? Is there a list of board committees? Review last board meeting (could be minutes)? Is there an audit committee? Disclosure of names on audit committee? Is there a remuneration/compensation committee? Names on remuneration/compensation committee? Is there a nomination committee? Disclosure of names on nomination committee? Other internal audit function besides audit committee? Is there a strategy/investment/finance committee? Director training and compensation Disclose whether they provide director training? Disclose the number of shares in the company held by directors? Discuss decision-making process of directors pay? Are specifics of directors salaries disclosed (numbers)? Form of directors salaries disclosed (cash, shares, etc.)? Specifics disclosed on performance-related pay for directors? Executive compensation and evaluation Names of senior managers who are not on the board Details (background information) of senior managers disclosed Disclose the numbers of shares held by the senior managers Disclose the number of shares held by managers in other associated companies Disclose the process of decision-making of managers pay who are not on the board Numbers of managers (not on board) salaries disclosed? Form of managers (not on board) salaries disclosed? Specifics disclosed on performance-related pay for managers? Details of the CEOs contract disclosed? Measures of Financial Performance: To measure the impact of corporate governance on financial performance different researchers have used different financial measures. Hermalin and Weisbach (1991) has taken Tobins Q as the single measure of financial performance. Bhagat and Black (2002) took return on assets, asset turnover and stock returns. Bhagat and Bolton (2007) considered annual return, annual return on assets and annual Tobins Q as performance variables. Brown and Caylor (2004) have used six industry-adjusted performance measures as return on equity, net profit margin, sales growth, Tobins Q, Dividend Yield, Stock Repurchases. Mohanty (2002) has used Tobins Q and stock returns as the measures of financial performance. Overall, nine measures of financial performance have been taken in the present study. Some are based on accounting profits and accounting ratios while others are related to stock prices of sample companies for the sample period. Different measures are stated below: Return on Net worth This is a tool of measuring profitability of a company. It is arrived at using the following formula: Profit After Tax net of non-recurring item x100 Average Net Worth Net worth This represents the share capital and retained earnings of a company. It is arrived at using the following formula: Equity Capital Preference Capital Reserves and Surplus-Revaluation reserve-Misc. expenses not written off Return on capital employed This is another ratio to measure the profitability of a company. It is arrived at using the following formula: Profit After Tax net of non-recurring item x100 Average Capital Employed Capital employed This represents the share capital plus reserves and long- term debt of a company. It is arrived at using the following formula: Equity Capital Preference Capital+ Reserves and Surplus-Revaluation Reserve-Misc. expenses not written off+Total borrowing- (Bank Borrowing+Short- term commercial paper). Profit After Tax This is the net profit of the company after tax. It is derived by deducting all expenditures from the sum of all source of income including changes in stock. This net profit includes all the regular, prior-period and extraordinary sources of income on the income side. Correspondingly, it includes all kinds of revenue expenses including those for prior-period transactions, extraordinary in nature, cash or non-cash in nature, etc. Expenses also include all indirect and direct taxes. Return on Assets This is another ratio to evaluate the profitability of a company. It is calculated using the following formula: Profit Before Depreciation, Interest and Tax x 100 Total Assets Risk Adjusted Excess Return This is a market return based measure of financial performance of a company. It is calculated using the following formula: 365 Days Excess Return over Nifty x100 Beta (a measure for Risk) Beta: It is also known as the systematic risk parameter indicating the volatility of the funds portfolio compared to the benchmark index. It has gained worldwide acceptance as the primary risk measure for asset selection. Unlike standard deviation, which is also a measure of the risk, beta measures the past volatility of a security relative to something else, usually a benchmark index. Tobins Q This is a measure of the financial performance of a company. It is calculated using the following formula: (Market Capitalization+Book value of Debt) x 100 Book value of Assets Market Capitalization: It is defined as the product of the closing price of shares of a company on that date and the number of outstanding equity shares as on the same date. Dividend Yield It is the return earned by an equity shareholder by way of dividends. It is calculated on the closing price on a given date. It is calculated using the following formula: Face value of Equity shares x Dividend rate Closing Price Net Profit Margin This is the profitability margin ratio derived considering into account the profit after tax, which is net of non-recurring item as percentage of gross sales. It is calculated using the following formula: Profit After Tax net of non-recurring item x100 Gross Sales Earning Per Share It is defined as the ratio of the profit after tax net of non-recurring transactions of the company in the 12month period to the number of shares outstanding as on that date. Statistical Tools The study has been conducted in light of three perspectives. The first aspect intends to find out whether the institutional investors and its different constituents do invest in the companies with good governance practices and simultaneously, do their presence improve the governance practices of companies. The second aspect deals with verifying whether institutional investors as whole and its different constituents have any significant and positive impact over financial performance of companies. And the last aspect deals with affirming whether the companies with good governance practices also have better financial companies than the firms with poor governance practices. To throw light on the above aspects and to establish the relationship between Institutional Holdings and Corporate Governance Score, Corporate Governance Score and Institutional Holdings, Institutional Holdings and Firm Performance and Corporate Governance Score and Firm Performance, simple linear regression analysi s has been used. Regression analysis is a statistical tool for the investigation of relationships between variables. In the present study, an attempt has been made to ascertain the causal effect of one variable upon another. Data has been assembled on the variables of interest and employed regression to estimate the quantitative effect of the causal variables upon the variable that they influence. The study also typically assesses the statistical significance at 5 percent level of the estimated relationships, that is, the degree of confidence that the true relationship is close to the estimated relationship. In order to achieve the objectives stated earlier, the present study conceptualized the following null hypotheses for validation of positive relation between institutional holdings, corporate governance and firm performance H01: Institutional/its components Holdings and Corporate Governance score are very closely related in a manner as to depict a positive relationship between the two H02: Corporate Governance Score and Institutional/its components Holdings are also very closely related in a manner as to depict positive relationship between the two H03: Institutional/its components Holdings and various measures of firm performance are very closely related in a manner as to depict positive relationship between the two H04: Corporate Governance Score and various measures of firm performance are very closely related in a manner as to depict positive relationship between the two To investigate these hypotheses, data has been collected from the earlier mentioned sources on institutional holdings and its sub-categories, corporate governance score and different measures of financial performance. The hypothesized relationship between any two variables is written as: Y =  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡ +  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¢X +  Ãƒâ€¹Ã…“ Where  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡ = the constant value when value of X is zero  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¢ = the eff ect of X on Y, hypothesized to be positive  Ãƒâ€¹Ã…“ = the error term reflecting other factors that influence Y variable Variable X is termed as independent, explanatory or exogenous variable and variable Y is termed the dependent or endogenous variable Hence, Standardized Co-efficient in terms of Constant value,  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¢ value and Standard Error has been calculated by taking different variables as independent (Institutional Holdings and different constituents of Institutional Holdings1) and (Corporate Governance Score2) and dependent variables (Corporate Governance Score1, Institutional Holdings in total and different constituents of institutional holdings2) in one chapter. Similarly, in other chapter, (Institutional Holdings and different constituents of Institutional Holdings3) is taken as independent variable and (different measures of financial performance3) is taken as dependent variable. Likewise, in another chapter, (Corporate Governance Score4) is taken as independent and (different measures of financial performance4) as dependent variables. t-statistic has also been calculated to determine the relative importance of each variable in the regression model at 5% level of significance. This statistic can be positive or negative as the parameter estimate from which it is derived is greater or lesser than the hypothesized true value of the parameter. R2 has been calculated to see the proportion of variation in the dependent variable explained by the regression model. It is equal to one minus the ratio of the sum of squared estimated errors (the deviation of the actual value of the dependent variable from the regression line) to the sum of squared deviations about the mean of the dependent variable. Intuitively, the sum of squared deviations about its mean is a measure of the total variation of the dependent variable. The sum of squared deviations about the regression line is a measure of the extent to which the regression fa ils to explain the dependent variable (a measure of the noise). Hence, the R2 statistic is a measure of the extent to which the total variation of the dependent variable is explained by the regression. The values of R2 ranges from 0 and 1. Small values indicate that the model does not fit the data well whereas; a high value suggests that the regression model explains the variation in the dependent variable well. To find out whether the results are reliable or not Durban/Watson values have been calculated. Organization of the Study The study under consideration has been divided into seven chapters, which are mentioned below: Chapter I An Introduction Chapter II Review of Literature Chapter III Research Methodology Chapter IV Institutional Holdings and Corporate Governance Chapter V Institutional Holdings and Firm Performance Chapter VI Corporate Governance and Firm Performance Chapter VII Summary and Conclusion Significance of Study Corporate Governance has been emerged as the most pertinent issue in the corporate world in the recent era. Agency problem is considered as the central cause of governance problems around the world. The large number of small shareholders virtually do not have any control on the managers. They are only informed of the financial results on a periodical basis while the managers control the firms assets. This widely held structure provides an opportunity to the managers to expropriate shareholders wealth and to misappropriate the funds by way of transfer of money as loans to his own companies, or sale of the company assets to themselves at a lesser price or pay himself more perks leading to poor governance practices. To overcome this agency problem and to improve the governance practices, the role of institutional investors have become vital now a day. Being the large investors, they have potential to influence the company strategy and executive decision-making. They can engage in d ialogue with management, attending annual meetings, submitting shareholder resolutions, bringing lawsuits, and other mechanisms designed to communicate shareholder interests to the corporation. Even their selling of shares can have significant pressure on the companies improve their governance practices. But, to the contrary it is also supposed that institutional investors have their own specific objectives and they are more concerned about the return on their investments to the governance practices adopted by the corporations. Therefore, if the institutional investors invest in the companies with higher returns and good governance as well, is justified. Therefore, while investigating into the role of institutional investors in corporate governance, two more related issues have to be considered. Whether the institutional investors presence improve the firm performance and whether the governance practices adopted by the corporations have any impact over their financial performance. H ence, the intricacy of role of institutional investors in corporate governance, impact of institutional investment on firm performance and impact of corporate governance over firm performance needs attention. Various studies have been conducted so far on the above issues around the world and in India also on the above issues and the results have been inconclusive so far. Results are mixed as to the whether the institutional investors invest in the companies with good governance practices or their investment improve the governance practices adopted by the corporations. Similarly, the impact of institutional holdings over financial performance of firms is also not clear and the results are not coherent regarding the impact of corporate governance over firm performance also. The present study is expected to draw the attention of corporate world and researchers towards the role of institutional investors in corporate governance practices in India. The present research work would prov ide important guidelines for institutional investors too whether they should concentrate on the financial performance of target companies only or they should also value the governance practices followed therein. Similarly, it will draw the attention of policy makers towards institutional investor activism in India and thereafter, making policies to enhance the same. Limitations of the Study The conclusions drawn in the present study are of tentative nature, subject to the veracity of the data available. The published annual reports have been taken as the base for constructing corporate governance score and for collecting data on other variables too. But these reports show the position on a particular day, which may not prove true for the whole year. But the researcher, with time constraint, has to depend upon these reports because it is not possible to compile the data originated at different times during the period under study. Corporate Governance Score has been constructed on the basis of information derived from annual reports of only year 2008, therefore, the other limitation of the study. Though it is constructed on the basis of comprehensive attributes but only one score is taken for the study period instead of taking separate scores for individual years as the other variables are taken. This is a maiden attempt on the part of the researcher; therefore, lack of experience may be considered as a stumbling block. This, however, is a mammoth task beyond the reach of an individual researcher. ********