Summary information

Study title

Limited Liability Housing Companies Act's Functionality and Impact 2013: Board Members

Creator

Ministry of Justice

Study number / PID

FSD2938 (FSD)

urn:nbn:fi:fsd:T-FSD2938 (URN)

10.60686/t-fsd2938 (DOI)

Data access

Open

Series

Individual datasets

Individual datasets that do not belong to any series.

Abstract

The survey investigated how the new Limited Liability Housing Companies Act 2010 (Asunto-osakeyhtiölaki) functioned in Finland, what its impact had been and how it had been implemented. Separate surveys were conducted for shareholders of limited liability housing companies, members of governing boards, property managers and estate agents. This dataset contains the responses of board members. The respondents were first asked basic information about the company, such as the types of buildings belonging to the company, number of apartments, and business premises belonging to the company. Relating to management of the company, the respondents were asked about the number of members in the governing board, number of meetings in 2012, average time spent on a meeting, change in the time spent on meetings after 2010, division of labour within the board, documents drawn up to guide the work of the board, composition of the board, remuneration received by board members, and increase in the workload of the board. Further questions probed, for instance, the ease of attracting new members to join the board, interest shown by shareholders in the activities of the company, and effects of the new Act on the activities of the company. With regards to property management, the questions surveyed whether the company had a property manager, who was responsible for property management, where the duties of the property manager had been set out, changes in property management services and their costs after 2010, and the need for allowing a property management company to assume the tasks of a property manager. Concerning auditing, topics included person/people responsible for financial/performance audit in the company, differences in opinions about the duties of a performance auditor, and benefit of the performance audit to the company. Views were charted on information and communication by the company, for instance, by asking whether invitations to meetings were sent out early enough,...
Read more

Methodology

Data collection period

01/11/2013 - 18/12/2013

Country

Finland

Time dimension

Cross-section

Analysis unit

Individual
Organization/Institution
Event/Process/Activity

Universe

Board members of limited liability housing companies

Sampling procedure

Non-probability: Availability

Kind of data

Quantitative

Data collection mode

Self-administered questionnaire: Web-based (CAWI)

Access

Publisher

Finnish Social Science Data Archive

Publication year

2014

Terms of data access

The dataset is (A) openly available for all users without registration (CC BY 4.0).