Management & Information Systems Review (경영과정보연구)

Daehan Academy of Management Information Systems (대한경영정보학회)
권호 표지

CEO Stock Incentive, Board of Directors, and the Performance of Chinese Corporations after the Stock Incentive Management Law in 2006

주식인센티브 관리법 이후 중국 상장기업 CEO주식인센티브, 이사회, 기업성과의 관계

  • Zhang, Rui-Zhi (College of Business Administration, Konkuk University) ;
  • Yoo, Jae-Wook (College of Business Administration, Konkuk University)
  • Received : 2016.07.22
  • Accepted : 2016.09.08
  • Published : 2016.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Separation of management with ownership induces the agency problems between CEO and shareholders of Chinese firms. To solve this problem Chinese government has enforced the "stock incentive management law for stock listed companies" since 2006. However, it has not been clear that this law is beneficial to reduce the agency cost and thus to increase the performance of Chinese firms. This study aims to answer this question. It is specifically designed to explore the effects of CEO's stock incentive on the performance of Chinese firms. It also examines the moderating effects of the characteristics of the board of directors on this relationship. Using a multi-year sample (2008-2014), we found that CEO's stock incentive is positively related to firm's performance. We also found that the equity stakes of board members strengthens the positive relations between CEO's equity incentives and firms' performance. On the other hand, contrary to expectations, the independency of the board of directors does not significantly moderate the relationship between CEO's equity incentives and firms' performance. Based on the findings, this study provides valuable implication for theory and practice.

소유와 경영이 분리된 기업에서는 경영자와 주주 간의 이해관계 상충으로 인한 대리인 문제가 발생될 수 있으며, 이를 해소하기 위한 지배구조체제로서 CEO에 대한 주식인센티브제도를 실행할 수 있다. 하지만 본 제도의 실효성에 대해서는 서구 기업들을 대상으로 한 연구들에서와 마찬가지로 중국기업들을 대상으로 했던 선행연구들에서도 상충되는 다양한 주장들이 제시되어 왔다. 따라서 국영기업들의 사유화를 추진해 온 중국 정부는 소유와 경영이 분리된 기업들의 대리인 문제를 보다 효과적으로 해소시키기 위하여 "상장기업 주식인센티브관리법"을 2006년부터 시행해왔다. 하지만 본 법률의 기대효과가 발생되었는지에 대해서는 아직도 명확한 답변을 하기 어려운 상황이다. 이에 본 연구에서는 2006년 법률의 시행 이후 중국 상장기업 CEO에 대한 주식인센티브제도가 기업들의 성과향상에 기여했는지, 더불어 이사회의 특성들이 CEO 주식인센티브와의 상호작용을 통해 기업성과에 어떤 영향을 미쳤는지에 대한 실증분석을 실행하였다. 연구표본은 2008년부터 2013년까지의 6년의 연구기간 동안 최고경영자에 대한 주식인센티브제도를 실시한 중국 상장기업들이며, 제시된 가설들에 대한 검증을 기업성과를 종속변수로 하는 계층적 다중회귀분석을 통해 실시하였다. 연구결과에 따르면 CEO 주식인센티브와 기업성과 간에는 기대했던 것처럼 정(+)의 관계가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 이사회의 지분보유는 CEO 주식인센티브와 기업성과 간의 관계를 강화시킨 것으로 나타났다. 하지만 이사회의 독립성을 나타내는 사외이사비율과 CEO/이사회의장직의 분리는 CEO 주식인센티브와의 상호작용을 통해 기업성과에 중대한 정의 영향을 미치지 않은 것으로 나타났다. 이와 같은 분석결과에 기초하여 본 논문의 결론에서는 이론적 실무적 차원의 중요한 시사점들을 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김해룡․하치덕(2001), "이사회와 최고경영자 보상: 기존 연구의 검토와 상황적 대리인이론 모형의 제안," 인사관리연구, 24(2), 259-288.
  2. 유재욱(2015), "다국적기업의 중국시장 현지화전략과 사회적 책임 활동의 보완적 관계에 대한 연구," 경영과 정보연구, 34(1), 35-49.
  3. 유재욱․김광수(2008), "이사회의 독립성이 기업성과에 미치는 영향: CEO의 기업 내 경력과의 상호작용효과에 대한 연구," 경영과 정보연구, 24, 1-24.
  4. 주혜려․유재욱(2014), "중국기업 최고경영자팀의 배경특성과 국제화 간의 관계와 이사회독립성의 조절효과에 대한 연구," 경영과 정보연구, 33(1), 157-172.
  5. 황인태(1995), "경영자보상과 기업성과," 회계학연구, 20(3), 107-125.
  6. 高雷․宋顺林(2007), "高管报酬激励与企业绩效--来自中国上市公司的证据," 财经科学, 第4期, 96-104.
  7. 韩小芳(2013), "公开谴责, 董事会持股变动与盈余管理--基于财务舞弊公司面板数据的研究," 财会通讯:综合(15), 27-29.
  8. 黄之骏․王华(2006), "经营者股权激励与企业价值--基于内生性视角的理论分析与经验证据,"中国会计评论, 01期, 29-58.
  9. 黄之骏(2006), 经营者股权激励与企业价值, 暨南大学.
  10. 李维安․李汉军(2006), "股权结构, 高管持股与公司绩效--来自民营上市公司的证据," 南开管理评论, 第5期(5), 4-10. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2002.05.002
  11. 李先霞(2009), 经营者股权激励与企业价值的关系研究, 中国海洋大学.
  12. 李增泉(2000), "激励机制与企业绩效:-项基于上市公司的实证研究," 会计研究, 第1期(1), 24-30.
  13. 苏冬蔚․林大庞(2010), "股权激励, 盈余管理与公司治理," 经济研究(11), 88-100.
  14. 林大庞․苏冬蔚(2011), "股权激励与公司业绩--基于盈余管理视角的新研究," 金融研究(09), 162-177.
  15. 刘玉灿․张琳华(2012), "中国上市公司股权激励对公司绩效影响的实证研究," 南京理工大学学报:社会科学版, 05期, 42-49.
  16. 莫冬燕․邵聪(2010), "高管薪酬, 股权激励与公司绩效的相关性检验," 科学决策, 07期, 18-29.
  17. 王鑫磊(2015), "国有上市公司股权激励研究," 商(24), 149-150.
  18. 魏刚(2000), "非对称信息下的股利政策," 经济科学(02), 69-76.
  19. 魏贤运(2013), "股权激励与公司治理:理论, 经验与实践," 会计之友旬刊, 第33期(33), 79-83.
  20. 叶建芳․陈潇(2008), "我国高管持股对企业价值的影响研究--一项来自高科技行业上市公司的证据," 财经问题研究, 03期, 101-108.
  21. 周建波․孙菊生(2003), "经营者股权激励的治理效应研究--来自中国上市公司的经验证据," 经济研究, 05期(5), 74-82.
  22. 陈海生․卢丹(2011), "研发投入与企业价值的相关性研究," 软科学, 20-23.
  23. 周丽萍(2006), "浅析我国上市公司的代理人问题及其解决途径," 企业经济, (9), 191-192.
  24. Aboody, D.(1996), "Market valuation of employee stock options," Journal of accounting and economics, 22(1), 357-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(96)00439-9
  25. Ahn, S. and Shrestha, K.(2013), "The differential effects of classified boards on firm value," Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(11), 3993-4013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.07.029
  26. Barney, J. B.(1992), "Integrating organizational behavior and strategy formulation research: A resource based analysis," in Advances in Strategic Management, P. Shrivastava, A. Huff, and J. Dutton., eds., JAU Press, Greenwich, Connecticut, 8, 39-61.
  27. Beasley, M. S.(1996), "An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud," Accounting Review, 71(4), 443-465.
  28. Bebchuk, L. A.(2002), "Ex Ante costs of violating absolute priority in Bankruptcy," Journal of Finance, 57(1), 445-460. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6261.00427
  29. Brickley, J. A., Bhagat, S., and Lease, R. C.(1985), "The impact of long-range management incentive compensation plans on shareholder wealth," Journal of Accounting and Economics, 7, 115-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(85)90031-X
  30. Carpenter, M. A. and Westphal, J. D.(2001), "The strategic context of external network ties: Examining the impact of director appointments on board involvement in strategic decision making," Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 639-660. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069408
  31. Cheng, Q. and Warfield, T. D.(2004), "Equity incentives and earnings management," Accounting Review, 80(2), 317-349.
  32. Conyon, M. J. and Peck, S. I.(1998), "Board size and corporate performance: Evidence from European countries," The European Journal of Finance, 4(3), 291-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/135184798337317
  33. DeFusco, R. A., Zorn, T. S., and Johnson, R. R.(1991), "The association between executive stock option plan changes and managerial decision making," Financial Management, 20, 36-43. https://doi.org/10.2307/3666095
  34. Donaldson, G. and Lorsch, J. W.(1983), "Decision making at the top: The shaping of strategic direction," New York: Basic books.
  35. Fama, E. F.(1980), "Agency problems and the theory of the Firm," The Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288-307. https://doi.org/10.1086/260866
  36. Fama, E. F. and Jensen, M. C.(1983), "Separation of ownership and control," Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325. https://doi.org/10.1086/467037
  37. Gabrielsson, J. and Huse, M.(2004), "Context, behavior, and evolution: Challenges in research on boards and governance," International Studies of Management & Organization, 34(2), 11-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2004.11043704
  38. Gales, L. M. and Kesner, I. F.(1994), "An analysis of board of director size and composition in bankrupt organizations," Journal of Business Research, 30(3), 271-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(94)90057-4
  39. Hall, B. J. and Liberman, J. B.(2000), "The taxation of executive compensation," In Tax Policy and the Economy, 14:1-44, MIT Press.
  40. Hermalin, B. E. and Weisbach, M. S.(1991), "The effects of board composition and direct incentives on firm performance," Journal of the Financial Management Association, 20(4), 101-112. https://doi.org/10.2307/3665716
  41. Hillman, A. J., Cannella, A. A., and Paetzold, R. L.(2000), "The resource dependence role of corporate directors: Strategic adaptation of board composition in response to environmental change," Journal of Management Studies, 37(2), 235-256. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00179
  42. Hillman, A. J. and Dalziel, T.(2003), "Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives," Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 383-396. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2003.10196729
  43. Himmelberg, C. P., Hubbard, R. G., and Palia, D.(1999), "Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance," Journal of Financial Economics, 53(3), 353-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(99)00025-2
  44. Jensen, M. C. and Meckling, W. H.(1976), "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
  45. Johnson, J. L., Daily, C. M., and Ellstrand, A. E.(1996), "Boards of directors: A review and research agenda," Journal of Management, 22(3), 409-438. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639602200303
  46. Laffont, J. J. and N'Guessan, T.(1999), "Competition and corruption in an agency relationship," Journal of Development Economics, 60(2), 271-295. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(99)00056-5
  47. Mehran, H.(1995), "Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance," Journal of Financial Economics, 38(2), 163-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(94)00809-F
  48. Morck, R., Nakamura, M., and Shivdasani, A.(2000), "Banks, ownership structure, and firm value in Japan," Journal of Business, 73(4), 539-67. https://doi.org/10.1086/209654
  49. Peng, L. and Roell, A.(2008), "Manipulation and equity-based compensation," American Economic Review, 98(2), 285-290. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.98.2.285
  50. Rindova, V. P.(1999), "What corporate boards have to do with strategy: A cognitive perspective," Journal of Management Studies, 36(7), 953-975. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00165
  51. Salancik, G. R. and Pfeffer, J.(1978), "Who gets power-and how they hold on to it: A strategic-contingency model of power," Organizational Dynamics, 5(3), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(77)90028-6
  52. Westphal, J. D. and Zajac, E. J.(1995), "Who shall govern? CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection," Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 60-83. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393700
  53. Zahra, S. A. and Pearce, J. A.(1989), "Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model," Journal of Management, 15(2), 291-334. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638901500208