all journals have to be from google scholar.

Write an individual essay, which should not exceed 2,000 words (excluding appendices and bibliographies):

Critically evaluate the role of one of following mechanisms in corporate governance and firm performance: 1) Non-executive directors; 2) Executive incentives; 3) Audit committee; and 4) Institutional Investors. Requirements are as follows:

1) Critically discuss a theoretical framework that you believe represents the most appropriate explicit framework for the chosen corporate governance mechanism.

2) Briefly describe the background to the creation of the mechanism and the key UK governance documents regarding to the mechanism.

3) Critically evaluate the roles and the effectiveness of the mechanism, drawing on theories, academic research findings (3 academic papers at a minimum), real life examples (a minimum of one case, news or/and other sources).

4) Make your own recommendations in terms of how the mechanism could work better.
5) The essay should be well organised and clearly presented.

¬ Structure your essay with sub-headings, following the exact order of the requirements, adding a brief introduction and a conclusion.
¬ Ideas and arguments should be logically laid out.
¬ References/sources should be properly cited in the text (Harvard style of citation recommended), with full bibliographies provided at the end of the essay.
¬ Pay attention to format and overall readability
– Font size Times New Roman 11 or 12
– Line space 1
¬ Your Essay should not exceed 2,000 words (3% will be deduced from the final mark of 40% for every 200 extra words).

6) Please submit your essay in word file (not PDF) in the dropbox under the folder Assessment by Friday 17th January 2016.

1) Choose and discuss an appropriate theoretical framework for the selected corporate governance mechanism (35%):

Several theories that you can choose from, e.g. agency theory; stakeholder theory; stewardship theory, resource dependence theory etc.
You should cover what the theory is about, the usefulness and criticisms of the theory, and how it explains the chosen mechanism as a governance mechanism.
Good practices:
Discuss and critically review at least one theory in depth
Good/updated references & citations from academic papers
Compare and contrast theories justify your best pick
Link the theory/(ies) to the corporate governance mechanism you choose
Poor practices:
No theory at all
No references or citations
Misunderstanding or misinterpretation
No linkage between theory and the mechanism

2) Briefly describe the background to the creation of the mechanism and the key regulations/recommendation documents regarding to the mechanism (10%) – ALL IN ONE PARAGRAPH!!:

For this part, you should cover:
How the mechanism is created?
Why did/does it become important and attract public attention? -You can write about the key events and major financial scandal cases, analyse the problems especially linking to the your chosen governance mechanism
Key related regulations & reports
Good practices
Describe the key events and reports chronologically, briefly, and synthesized
Rewards are given if you include more up-to-date events and reports

3) Critically evaluate the roles and the effectiveness of the mechanism, with various supporting evidence, e.g. theories, academic research findings (3 at a minimum), real examples (1 recent case at a minimum). (30%):

You should talk about what roles the mechanism are supposed to play (according to theory and reports), and evaluate how the mechanism work in carrying out these roles in reality, backed up by various evidence.
Good practices
Recent examples – not just the ones in the textbook
More up-to-date literature and cases (we are in 2015)
Good structured + Logical argument!
Good integration of discussion, academic findings and examples
Use of recent reports and journal articles – we are in 2015
Poor practices
Talk about corporate governance generally rather than focusing on the chosen mechanism
Not meeting the minimum requirements of citing evidence
Lack of focus, structure and logic etc.
Simply list papers or other evidence without discussion or reflection
Copy and paste
Just writing about something irrelevant!

4) Conclusion and recommendations: (10%):

Conclude key aspects of your essay succinctly and to the point
Critically evaluate the key findings (i.e., link them to your chosen theoretical framework). This is where you discuss the key aspects of your essay in relation to your chosen theoretical framework.
Good recommendation should flow naturally from your discussion and evaluation in the previous parts
Should be your own understanding & opinions, but you may cite one or two scholarly references references that share the same opinion
Make your recommendations explicit and specific, rather than implicit and general
Remain focused on your chosen mechanism

5) Organisation and presentation of the essay; Referencing and citations (15%):

Organization and presentation:
Introduction – should be brief, introducing the topic and the structure of your essay
Conclusion – should be brief (normally a paragraph), summing up the key elements of the essay.
Grammar, sentence & paragraphs – Should be checked!
Presentation & consistency in formatting
Flow of argument and Coherence:
The whole essay should be a holistic and related piece, the focus remaining on the mechanism you chose to write about.
General readability of the essay – the whole essay should flow!
References:
Citation and references – Please refer to the Coursework sheet, make sure you follow the right format throughout!

no plagiarizing