Abstract:Research Question/Issue This study analyzes the diffusion of internationally recognized governance standards in public corporate governance codes. Local, state, and federal governments issue very different codes for their state‐owned enterprises, which reflect governments' understanding of corporate governance. Research Findings/Insights Developing and applying a comprehensive measurement framework with 150 criteria to 60 public corporate governance codes in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland, the study shows that the diffusion varies considerably between codes and regulatory fields (e.g., directors, auditing). Governments react very differently to similar governance challenges and show varying degrees of willingness to regulate the corporate governance of their state‐owned enterprises. Theoretical/Academic Implications This study enhances the understanding of the diffusion of governance standards in the under‐researched context of government ownership. The findings imply the need for comprehensive measurement approaches to gain a nuanced theoretical understanding on the diffusion and underlying mechanisms. Future research could use the measurement framework or single regulatory fields to generate data to investigate different theoretical questions regarding many areas of corporate governance. Derived from the findings and neo‐institutional theory, the study develops propositions about potential drivers of diffusion differences, offering avenues for advancing future theory‐building. Practitioner/Policy Implications This study develops a comprehensive measurement framework to quantify the diffusion of governance standards in public corporate governance codes in international comparisons. Governments, standard‐setters, and other actors (e.g., directors, auditors) could use it for condensed overviews, implementing or revising codes, and reflecting on governance practices. Overall, data show a severe need to improve the quality of public corporate governance codes.

Corporate Governance Code Focusing on Asian Jurisdictions - China [Mainland], Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, Japan - and Germany

The Evolution of Corporate Governance in China : the Role of Institutional Investors

Corporate Governance,Enforcement of Accounting Standards and Value-Relevance of Earnings

Experience of Internationalization of Chinese Corporate Law and Corporate Governance: How to Make the Hybrid of Civil Law and Common Law Work?

Analysis of Amendments to Japan's Corporate Legal System and Governance Efficiency

Reforms of corporate governance in East Asia: December 2022

The Combined Code in the UK: A General Review

Comparative Analysis on the Tendency of Corporate Governance Models in Globalization

Local Versus Global: Corporate Governance Practices in Chinese Domestic and Overseas Companies

Corporate Governance and Firm Valuation in Asian Emerging Markets

Corporate Governance in China: Current Practices, Economic Effects and Institutional Determinants

Corporate Governance in China: A Survey

Executive Compensation, Supervisory Board, and China'S Governance Reform: A Legal Approach Perspective

The diffusion of governance standards in public corporate governance codes: Measurement framework and three countries comparison

Overall Study on the Tendency of Corporate Governance Models

Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: A Cross-Country Analysis in South Korea

The publication landscape of German corporate governance research: A bibliometric analysis

New Analyses on Modern Corporate Governance——And a Review of New Development of Modern Corporate Governance in Domestic and Oversea Literature

The value of the corporate governance canon on Chinese companies

Corporate governance reform, and ownership, and control: perspective from Japan

Modern Corporate Governance Standards and Role of Auditing-Cases in Some Western European Countries After Financial Crisis, Corporate Scandals and Manipulation