The Power of Connections: Analyzing Director’s Networks and ESG Performance in Malaysian Corporations

This study examines how directors’ network structures influence corporate Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) performance. Drawing upon social network analysis, four centrality measures—degree, eigenvector, closeness, and betweenness—are employed to capture the social capital embedded within board interconnections. The analysis focuses on the 100 largest publicly listed companies in Malaysia for the year 2022, comprising a network of 1,012 unique directors. The findings reveal that network centrality enhances the diffusion of strategic information and resources, enabling companies to respond to stakeholder expectations more effectively and to improve ESG performance. However, excessive direct connections may lead to information redundancy and governance inefficiency, suggesting that the quality of network ties is as important as their quantity. The study is limited by its cross-sectional design and geographical focus, which may constrain causal inference and generalizability. Future research should consider longitudinal or multi-country approaches to provide deeper insights. Practically, the results underscore the importance for companies and regulators to design board structures that balance interconnectedness with diversity, ensuring optimal information flow and oversight. The study contributes to corporate governance literature by integrating Social Network Theory with Resource Dependency and Stakeholder perspectives, offering a comprehensive understanding of how directors’ relational positions can both facilitate and constrain sustainable governance practices.

Director Networks, ESG, Company Performance

1. Abdul Wahab, E. A., Jamaludin, M. F., Agustia, D., & Harymawan, I. (2020). Director Networks, Political Connections, and Earnings Quality in Malaysia. Management and Organization Review, 16(3), 687–724. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2020.26 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Adenan, N. Z. C., Said, R., & Joseph, C. (2024). The role of corporate governance mechanisms in influencing sustainable supply chain management disclosure. International Journal of Business Performance and Supply Chain Modelling, 15(1), 1-27. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Ali, M., & Hasan, M. (2023). Corporate governance and ESG practices: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Corporate Finance, 80, 102320. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Andres, C., Bongard, I., & Lehmann, M. (2013). Measuring the impact of network centrality on corporate governance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21(6), 503-516. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Barnea, A., & Guedj, I. (2006). The role of board networks in determining the strategic direction of firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 82(1), 47-76. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Berberich, G., & Niu, F. (2011). Director Busyness , Director Tenure and the Likelihood of Encountering Corporate Governance Problems. Journal of Corporate Governance, January, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170–1182. https://doi.org/10.1086/228631 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bonacich, P., & Lloyd, P. (2015). Eigenvector Centrality and Structural Zeroes and Ones: When is a Neighbor not a Neighbor? Social Networks, 43, 86–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2015.04.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Bouwman, C. H. S. (2011). Corporate Governance Propagation through Overlapping Directors. Review of Financial Studies, 24(7), 2358–2394. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhr034 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Brass, D. J., Galaskiewicz, J., Greve, H. R., & Tsai, W. (2004). Taking Stock of Networks and Organizations: a Multilevel Perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 795–817. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349-399. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Carpenter, M. A., & Westphal, J. D. (2001). The Strategic Context of External Network Ties: Examining The Impact of Director Appointments on Board Involvement in Strategic Decision Making. Academy of Management Journal, 4(4), 639–660. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Chenhall, R. H., Hall, M., & Smith, D. (2010). Social capital and management control systems: a study of a non- government organization. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(8), 737–756. https://studies2.hec.fr/jahia/webdav/site/hec/shared/sites/compta-gestion/acces_anonyme/Events-seminars/Ateliers et articles recherche 2009-2010/M HALL.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Davis, K., & Thompson, S. (2023). Financial data and corporate performance: A comprehensive analysis. Financial Management Review, 50(2), 99-117. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Dicko, S., & Breton, G. (2011). Social Networks of the Board Members and Acquisition of Resources by the Firm: A Case Study. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1742072 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Durbach, I. N., & Parker, H. (2009). An Analysis of Corporate Board Networks in South Africa. South Africa Journal of Business Management, 40(2), 15–27. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Eccles, R. G., & Klimenko, S. (2022). The investor revolution: Shareholders are getting serious about sustainability. Harvard Business Review, 100(1), 68-76. https://hbr.org/2022/01/the-investor-revolution-shareholders-are-getting-serious-about-sustainability [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Engelberg, J., Gao, P., & Parsons, C. A. (2013). The Price of a CEO’s Rolodex. The Review of Financial Studies, 26(1), 79–144. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhs114 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Fich, E. M., & Shivdasani, A. (2006). Are Busy Boards Effective Monitors? Journal of Finance, 61(2), 689–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.00852.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Field, L., Lowry, M., & Mkrtchyan, A. (2013). Are Busy Boards Detrimental? Journal of Financial Economics, 109(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.02.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Fracassi, C., & Tate, G. (2012). External Networking and Internal Firm Governance. The Journal of Finance, 67(1), 153-194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2011.01706.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing Inc. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Gao, Y., & Wang, Y. (2023). Exploring the impact of board network centrality on ESG performance: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 15(4), 874. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Harjoto, M. A., Laksmana, I., & Lee, J. (2020). The role of board network centrality in corporate social responsibility. Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3600536 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Harris, K., & Zhu, H. (2022). Social network analysis in corporate governance research. Corporate Governance Review, 28(1), 58-75. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Harrison, J. R., & Lin, Z. (2023). The role of social networks in corporate governance and performance. Journal of Business Research, 145, 229-243. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Hassan, M., Akhtar, S., & Al-Matari, E. M. (2023). ESG reporting trends in Malaysia: An empirical analysis. Sustainability, 15(2), 1295. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021295 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Horton, J., Millo, Y., & Serafeim, G. (2009). Paid for connections or too connected to be good ? Social Networks and Executive and Non-Executive Directors Compensation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Horton, J., Millo, Y., & Serafeim, G. (2012). Resources or Power? Implications of Social Networks on Compensation and Firm Performance. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 39(3–4), 399–426. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1416935 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Hsu, H. S., & Wu, M. H. (2022). Network centrality and corporate governance: A review of the literature. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 30(1), 46-65. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Jackson, M. O. (2023). Social network analysis: Theory and applications. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Jamaludin, M. F. & Hashim, F. (2017). Corporate governance, institutional characteristics and director network in Malaysia. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 13(2), 135–154. DOI/10.21315/aamjaf2017.13.2.7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Johnson, C., & Lee, K. (2023). ESG performance metrics and corporate disclosures: A review. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 13(1), 1-19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Johnson, S., & Mitton, T. (2003). Cronyism and Capital Controls: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Financial Economics, 67(2), 351-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00255-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Jomo, K. S. (1998). Tigers in Trouble: Financial Governance, Liberalisation and Crises in East Asia. Zed Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Kim, E. H., & Lu, Y. (2011). The Independent Board Requirement and CEO Connectedness. Accounting, Corporate Governance, Law & Institutions EJournal, 3(75), 1–59. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1970591 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Kim, Y. (2005). Board Network Characteristics and Firm Performance in Korea. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(6), 800–808. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2005.00471.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Kleinbaum, A. M., & Stuart, T. E. (2014). Network responsiveness: The social structural microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 353–367. 10.5465/amp.2013.0096 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Kotsantonis, S., & Serafeim, G. (2023). ESG integration in investment management: Myths and realities. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 35(2), 54-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/jacf.12534 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Kumar, S., & Mian, A. (2022). Corporate governance and market capitalization: A study of the top listed companies. Journal of Corporate Finance, 78, 102259. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Larcker, D. F., Richardson, S. A., Seary, A. J., & Tuna, İ. (2005). Director Networks, Executive Compensation, and Organizational Performance. In NBER Governance Meetings. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Larcker, D. F., So, E. C., & Wang, C. C. Y. (2013). Boardroom Centrality and Firm Performance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 55(2–3), 225–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2013.01.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Lee, K., & Carter, N. (2023). Regression analysis of board networks and ESG outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 185(2), 405-421. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Lei, Y., Li, Z., & Wang, X. (2022). Network centrality and corporate sustainability: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 14(21), 14296. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14296 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Mahmud, R., Ibrahim, M. K., & Pok, W. C. (2009). Earnings Quality Attributes and Performance of Malaysian Public Listed Firms. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1460309 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Mateos de Cabo, R., Grau, P., Gimeno, R., & Gabaldón, P. (2021). Shades of Power: Network Links with Gender Quotas and Corporate Governance Codes. British Journal of Management, 00(2020), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12454 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Mehra, A., Dixon, A. L., Brass, D. J., & Robertson, B. (2006). The Social Network Ties of Group Leaders: Implications for Group Performance and Leader Reputation. Organization Science, 17(1), 64–79. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Nguyen, T., & Sim, T. (2022). The effect of board network centrality on firm performance and governance. Review of Financial Studies, 35(9), 2870-2892. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Nicholson, G. J., Alexander, M., & Kiel, G. C. (2004). Defining the Social Capital of the Board of Directors: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Australian New Zealand Academy of Management, 10(1), 54–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0190-9622(10)00456-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Norwani, N. M., Mohamad, Z. Z., & Tamby Chek, I. (2011). Corporate Governance Failure and its Impact on Financial Reporting within Selected Companies. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(21), 205–213. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Rashid, A., Khan, M. T., & Nizamani, H. (2022). Impact of board network centrality on corporate governance practices in Malaysia. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 22(6), 915-930. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2022-0305 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Robinson, A., & Hill, A. (2023). Data integrity and analysis in quantitative research. Journal of Empirical Research, 32(1), 89-103. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Said, R., Joseph, C., & Adenan, N. Z. C. (2024). A systematic literature review approach to explore the relationship between corporate governance mechanisms and sustainable supply chain management. Middle East Journal of Management, 11(5), 539-564Scott, J. (2000a). Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. In Sage Publications (2nd ed.). Sage Publications Ltd. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Securities Commission Malaysia. (2023). Sustainable and responsible investment (SRI) in Malaysia: Progress and future directions. https://www.sc.com.my/api/documentms/download.ashx?id=ebf4d8a6-5b82-4d4a-8f7c-92417d7e3e8c [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Sharma, V. D. (2014). Independent directors and the propensity to pay dividends. Journal of Corporate Finance, 24, 95-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2013.11.005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Smith, K. J. (2009). Do Board Contacts Matter ? An Analysis of the Relationship between Boards of Directors’ Ties and the Performance of Australia’s Largest Companies. In (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Queensland University of Technology. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Smith, R., Wang, J., & Brown, A. (2023). Professional networking and its impact on corporate governance. Business Horizons, 66(4), 499-510. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Stuart, T. E., & Yim, S. (2010). Board interlocks and the propensity to be targeted in private equity transactions. Journal of Financial Economics, 97(1), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.03.012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Thompson, J., & Garcia, M. (2023). ESG reporting and corporate social responsibility: Data sources and metrics. Sustainable Business Review, 12(2), 112-129. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of Network Position and Absorptive Capacity on Business Unit Innovation and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996–1004. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464–476. https://doi.org/10.2307/257085 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Wang, T., & Xu, Z. (2023). Network centrality and its influence on corporate governance: Evidence from emerging markets. International Business Review, 32(6), 102273. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Westphal, J. D., & Stern, I. (2006). The Other Pathway to the Boardroom : Interpersonal Influence Behavior as a Substitute for Elite Credentials and Majority Status in Obtaining Board Appointments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 169–204. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Yap, S. F., Tan, H. T., & Chong, C. S. (2023). The influence of board network centrality on ESG performance in Malaysian firms. Emerald Insight. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CG-09-2023-0409/full/html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Yusoff, Y., & Mohamad, M. S. (2023). ESG reporting practices and corporate performance: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Business Ethics, 179(4), 1037-1056. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05073-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Zhang, X., & Wang, L. (2022). Social network analysis and board performance: New insights from network centrality measures. Strategic Management Journal, 43(12) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Role of Value and Growth Stocks in Portfolio Returns: Insights From the Nigerian Stock Market
• The Impact of Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) and Profitability on Firm Value Moderated by Firm Size
• Assessment of the Impact of Environmental Operating Costs on Return on Assets: Evidence from Listed Breweries in Nigeria
• Mobile Money and Digital Financial Services Ecosystem in Adamawa State
• A Quantitative Approach of Professional Skepticism and Fraud Detection among Malaysian Internal Auditors