4.4.1 Research methodology

Dutch corporate law requires that Dutch listed companies apply the Code or explain deviations.1 In 2014 and 2015, the Committee requested our university, Nyenrode Business Universiteit (Nyenrode), to perform the annual studies on Dutch listed companies’ compliance with the Code, respectively, concerning the financial years 2013 and 2014 (the Nyenrode Studies).2 Subsequently, on the basis of these studies, the Committee published its annual monitoring reports (the Committee’s Reports),3 in which it summarized the findings about compliance with the Code, and formulated its recommendations to Dutch listed companies aimed at improving their compliance with the Code.

The Nyenrode Studies aimed to: (i) ascertain to what extent the Dutch listed companies complied with the Code in the financial years 2013 and 2014 (the compliance studies) and (ii) assess the quality of the explanations provided by these companies for any non-compliance with provisions of the Code (the quality studies). In addition to the annual compliance studies and the quality studies, the Nyenrode research team was also requested by the Committee to investigate in depth several subjects (iii) (the specific subject studies). For two consecutive years, the theme of diversity in boards was covered in those specific subject studies.4

The methodology applied by Nyenrode can be described as follows:

(i) With regard to the compliance studies, a new methodology introduced by Nyenrode was applied. The method was based upon self-assessment by the companies. Previously, researchers performed their compliance studies by means of desk research only, thereby making use of publicly available information, i.e., annual reports and corporate websites. Such compliance study results were submitted to listed companies for information purposes only, not necessarily to require their consent.

The Nyenrode researchers requested the companies – on behalf of the Committee – to fill out an online self-assessment survey.5 The responses were analyzed by employing quantitative and qualitative methods. The Nyenrode team could partly validate the responses through examining publicly available information (desk research). The validity of the responses could also be tested and confirmed through concordance tests.6 Furthermore, the Nyenrode team ascertained the representativeness of the total selection of the responding companies.7

(ii) Regarding the quality studies, the Nyenrode team applied qualitative research methods. They analyzed the nature and the quality of the explanations provided by any company which (had) deviated from a certain Code provision. This assessment was also based upon data gathered by means of an online self-assessment. This qualitative study constituted a new additional approach in assessing the level of corporate compliance with the Code.8

(iii) Concerning the specific subject studies, the researchers applied qualitative methods. We performed desk research in order to find an appropriate theoretical framework concerning the specific subjects, and on the basis thereof we included additional open and closed questions in the online survey.9 The companies’ responses to the questions concerning the specific subject of board diversity will be elaborated in Section 4.5 below.

In the remainder of this chapter, we refer to the Nyenrode Study on the companies’ compliance with the Code in the financial year 2013 as ‘Nyenrode Study I’, and the ‘Nyenrode Study II’ relates to the companies’ compliance in the financial year 2014. We use the same references for the Committee’s reports, i.e., we refer to the Committee’s report on the companies’ compliance with the Code in the financial year 2013 by ‘Committee Report I’, and we use the term ‘Committee Report II’ to refer to the report on the companies’ compliance in the financial year 2014.