Does Corporate Diversification Influence Market Share? Evidence from Kenyan Insurance Sector



Abstract Views
400

Downloads
377

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Sep 15, 2022
Published Jul 4, 2023
10.24018/ejbmr.2023.8.4.1680

Abstract viewed = 400 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Insurance industry is among the large investors in the financial markets that play a key role of stabilizing financial systems. The industry acts as a growing link between insurers and other financial intermediaries by safeguarding the financial security of households and firms through insurance of risks, provision of long -term capital and overall stability of an economy. Global corporate failure has not spared the insurance industry at regional and local levels which has triggered insurance companies to opt for diversification to expand their markets, enhance returns and survival. This study examines corporate diversification-market share link in the Kenyan insurance sector. The study employs entropy index to measure corporate diversification, and market share as indicator for performance. The study is anchored on modern portfolio theory and supported theory of organizational effectiveness. The target population comprises fifty-six insurance firms in Kenya. Secondary data was collected from published account and company accounts filled at the insurance regulatory authority. Market share was computed as the percentage of gross written premium (GWP) for each company in relation to total industry GWP between the years 2016 and 2020. This study adopted a descriptive research design. Preliminary statistical tests undertaken include descriptive statistics such as the mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis. Correlation analysis was done to test the direction of the relationships while regression analysis was used to test the hypotheses. The study findings established that corporate diversification has a significant influence on market share. From the empirical findings of this study, companies that have ventured into more lines of business have reported higher entropy index than those with fewer lines of products and perform well thus managers of insurance companies should focus on creation and selling more appealing products and improve on penetration to the large untapped market. Future research can be extended to contexts within the developing economies category and other financial service sectors and non-financial sectors by evaluating the diversification index that is well suited to them that would provide more insights into the relationships.
Keywords: Corporate Diversification Kenyan Insurance Sector Market Performance

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Campa, J. M., & Kedia, S. (2002). Explaining the diversification discount. The Journal of Finance, 57, 1731–1762.
     Google Scholar
  2. Chakrabarti, A., Singh, K., Mahmood, I. (2007). Diversification and performance: evidence from East Asian firms. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 101-120.
     Google Scholar
  3. Che, X., & Liebenberg, A. P. (2017). Effects of business diversification on asset risk-taking: evidence from the U.S. property-liability insurance industry. Journal of Banking and Finance, 77, 122-136.
     Google Scholar
  4. Chen, G., & Keung, E. (2018). Corporate diversification, institutional investors and
     Google Scholar
  5. internal control quality. Accounting and Finance, 58(3), 751–786.
     Google Scholar
  6. Datta P. M. (2017). Diversification and performance in turbulent times. Journal of Management Studies, 60(7), 229-258.
     Google Scholar
  7. Delai, H., & Daip, P.C. (2019). Firm performance and focus: long-run stock market performance following spinoffs. Journal of Financial Economics, 54, 75-101.
     Google Scholar
  8. Denison, D. (1990). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc
     Google Scholar
  9. Denison, D., Daniel, Levi, N., & Lindsey, K. (2015). Diagnosing organizational cultures: A conceptual and empirical review of culture effectiveness surveys. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 23, 145–161.
     Google Scholar
  10. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Boston, MA: Pitman.
     Google Scholar
  11. Goll, I., & Rakesh, B. (2015). Corporate ideology, diversification and firm performance. Research article
     Google Scholar
  12. Harker, P. T., & Zenios, S. A. (2013). Performance of financial institutions: Efficiency, innovation, regulation. Cambridge University Press.
     Google Scholar
  13. Hoskis, S., Maria, M., & Ronald, I. (2016). Relationships among corporate level distinctive competencies, diversification strategy, corporate structure and performance. Journal of Research and Management Studies, 103, 201-216.
     Google Scholar
  14. Howard, D., & Walters, P. (2004). Emergent patterns of strategy, environment and performance in a transition economy. Journal of Finance and Economics, 25, 347-364.
     Google Scholar
  15. Humprey, C. J. (2018). Navigating through money markets and the role of market share. Journal of Banking and Statistics, 9, (11)124-130.
     Google Scholar
  16. Hurry. H., & Bowman, E. D. (2015). An integrated view of resource investments and the incremental-choice process. Academy of Management Review, 20(7), 760-782.
     Google Scholar
  17. Jansson, M., & Biel, A. (2011). Motives to engage in sustainable investment: a comparison between institutional and private investors. Sustainable Development, 19(2), 135-142.
     Google Scholar
  18. Kuppuswamy, V., & Villalonga, B. (2016). Does diversification create value in the presence of external financing constraints? Evidence from the 2007–2009 financial crisis. Management Science, 62,905–923.
     Google Scholar
  19. Marcoux, A. (2013). A fiduciary argument against stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(1), 1-24.
     Google Scholar
  20. Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 7, 77-91
     Google Scholar
  21. Matvos, G., & Seru, A. (2014). Resource allocation within firms and financial market dislocation: Evidence from diversified conglomerates. The Review of Financial Studies, 27, 1143-1189.
     Google Scholar
  22. Mojibi, T., Somayeh, H., & Yacob, K. (2013). Organizational culture and its relationship with knowledge management strategy: A Case Study. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 13,281-88.
     Google Scholar
  23. Monika, S., Richter, A., & Amit, K. (2019). Does the diversification–firm performance relationship change over time? A meta-analytical review. Journal of Management Studies, 56(1), 270-298.
     Google Scholar
  24. Naranjo-Valencia, N., Julia, P., Daniel, J., & Raquel, S. (2016). Studying the links between organizational culture, innovation, and performance in Spanish Companies. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 48, 30–41.
     Google Scholar
  25. Norbert, S. (2014). Empirical research on organizational effectiveness. Strategic Management Journal, 48(8), 222-246.
     Google Scholar
  26. Ronald, H. H., & George, A. M. (2016). Organizational culture and performance: Proposing and testing a model. Organization Science, 12(4), 209-225.
     Google Scholar
  27. Rudolph, C., & Schwetzler, B. (2013). Conglomerates on the rise again? A cross-regional study on the impact of the 2008–2009 financial crisis on the diversification discount. Journal of Corporate Finance, 22,153–165.
     Google Scholar
  28. Santalo, J., & Becerra, M. (2008). Competition from specialized firms and the diversification-performance linkage. Journal of Finance, 63(2), 851 – 883.
     Google Scholar
  29. Setianto, R. H. (2020). Corporate diversification and firms’ value in emerging economy: the role of growth opportunity. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies, 8, 1-14.
     Google Scholar


Most read articles by the same author(s)