Non-controlling large shareholders play an important role in corporate governance in emerging markets where controlling shareholder expropriation is a major concern. We argue that non-controlling large shareholders are faced with two non-conflicting incentives: to take advantage of their information advantage and obtain positive abnormal returns when they trade company shares, and to serve as effective monitors and minimize controlling shareholders' appropriation of company wealth. Using a sample of large shareholders' selling events upon the expiration of the lockup period following the split-share structure reform in China, we find that non-controlling large shareholders successfully time the market, as shown by their positive abnormal returns when selling their shares. Their returns are higher if they have a greater information advantage. Furthermore, the positive returns of the controlling large shareholder are negatively related to non-controlling large shareholders' ownership, suggesting that non-controlling large shareholders play a monitoring role and prevent controlling shareholders from looting the company. We also show that large shareholders affiliated with the controlling shareholders are not subject to as high a level of monitoring as those controlling shareholders are. Furthermore, both firm opaqueness and the severity of agency cost affect the quality of non-controlling large shareholders' monitoring.

We examine whether requiring a Party committee to lead corporate governance at listed state-owned enterprises (SOEs) affects firm value in China. We find that the market reacts positively to the inclusion of Party leadership in SOEs' governance structure and that the prospect of a crackdown on SOE corruption is likely to be the reason. The China governance model is strikingly different from other known models, and our findings suggest that a convergence of the corporate governance system of different countries due to globalization might not be the only outcome.

Investment banker human capital is valuable in mergers and acquisitions. Exploiting a unique hand-built dataset, this paper studies whether and how investment banker's education and experience impact the merger performance in China. We find that investment bankers' education credentials are positively related to the post-merger performance; however, greater investment banker experience does not. We further explore the channels and show that the education effect is stronger in deals with higher information asymmetry and acquirers with worse corporate governance. On the other hand, experience increases merger performance in deals with high information asymmetry but reduces deal performance in poorly governed firms. Our findings suggest that higher education attainment facilitates both the advisory and monitoring role of investment bankers, while more experience makes investment bankers better advisors yet worse monitors. Our findings also suggest that investment bankers' roles in value creation are highly dependent on different institutional backgrounds, and one cannot generalize the findings in the U.S. across borders.