私校董事會人數、薪酬與經營效率關係之研究

Board Size, Compensation and Operating Efficiency of Private Universities

10.6295/TAMJ.2013.1301.03

賴永裕(Yung-Yu Lai)；黃劭彥(Shaio-Yan Huang)

董事會規模 ； 董事會薪酬 ； 經營效率 ； 私立大專院校 ； board size ； board compensation ； operating performance ； private universities and colleges

台灣管理學刊

13卷1期（2013 / 02 / 01）

55 - 71

繁體中文

私立學校法於2009年起放寬專任董事長、董事、監察人得支領報酬，本研究旨在探討董事會規模、董事會酬勞與學校辦學績效間關係。以2009學年度私立大專院校財務及非財務資料實證，結果學校辦學績效與董事會酬勞為正相關。顯示董事長、董事、監察人支領報酬對學校辦學績效存在正面助益，此結果支持私立學校法修法讓私校董監事得支領酬勞之政策方向。控制變數中補助及捐贈收與經營效率呈現正向關係，顯示獲得外界資源投入有利於私立大專院校經營效率提升。大學組織與學校經營效率為正相關，大學組織規模架構有利於學校產出較佳經營效率。最後受有企業支持學校較易獲得外界資源，有助於學校辦學績效提升。

The amendment of Private School Law in 2009 allows board of director, board members and supervisors holding their position without remunerations may receive payments for attendance and transportation. This study investigates both effects of board structure of private universities and colleges and board compensation of such schools on school performance. The results, based on financial and non-financial data of the sample schools for the academic year 2009, show that there is a positive association between board compensation and school performance. It indicates that the remuneration to board of director, board members and supervisors has a positive effect on school performance. It supports that there are positive economic implications of the recent amendment of Private School Law in 2009 with regard to board compensation. As for control variables, one of them, government financial supports and private donations is significantly positive correlated to school performance. It indicates the acquirement of external resources by sample schools results in the improvement of school performance. The evidence shows there is a positive association between university organization and school performance. Finally, schools supported by enterprises can acquire external resources more easily and improve their performance accordingly.

1. 方信雄、許秀麗(2008)。台灣私立大專院校董事會治理之研究。台北海洋技術學院學報，3(1)，1-10。
   連結：
2. 傅祖壇(2011)。台灣高等教育院校之學校品質、經營效率與最適規模分析。教育科學研究期刊，56，181-213。
   連結：
3. Perry, T. 1999. Incentive compensation for outside directors and CEO turnover. Working paper, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
4. Bacon, J.(1973).Corporate directorship practices: Membership and committees of the board.New York:The Conference Board.
5. Banker, R. D.,Charnes, A.,Cooper, W. W.(1984).Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficienies in data envelopment analysis.Management Science,30,1078-1092.
6. Charnes, A.,Cooper, W. W.,Rhodes, E.(1978).Measuring the efficiency of decision making units.European Journal of Operational Research,2,429-444.
7. Fama, E. F.,Jensen, M. C.(1983).Separation of ownership and control.Journal of Law & Economics,26,301-325.
8. Fich, E. M.,Shivdasani, A.(2005).The Impact of stock-Option compensation for outside director on firm value.The Journal of Business,78,2229-2254.
9. Green, J. C.,Griesenger, D. W.(1996).Board performance and organizational effectiveness in nonprofit social service organizations.Nonprofit Management and Leadership,6,381-402.
10. Herman, R. D.,Renz, D. O.(1999).Theses on nonprofit organizational effectiveness.Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,28,107-127.
11. Jensen, M. C.(1993).The modern industrial revolution, exit and the failure of internal control system.Journal of Finance,48,831-880.
12. Jensen, M. C.,Meckling, W. H.(1976).Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure.Journal of Financial Economics,3,305-360.
13. Kerr, C.,Gade, M. L.(1989).The guardians: Boards of trustees of American colleges and universities.Washington, DC:Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.
14. Linn, S. C.,Park, D.(2005).Outside director compensation policy and the investment opportunity set.Journal of Corporate Finance,11,680-715.
15. Lipton, M.,Lorsch, J.(1992).A modest proposal for improved corporate governance.Business Lawyer,48,59-77.
16. Patton, A.,Baker, J. C.(1987).Why won't directors rock the boat.Harvard Business Review,65,10-18.
17. Shaw, M. E.(1981).Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior.New York:McGraw-Hill.
18. Yermack, D.(1996).Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors.Journal of Financial Economics,40,185-334.
19. Yermack, D.(2004).Remuneration, retention, and reputation incentives for outside directors.The Journal of Finance,59,2281-2308.
20. Zahra, S. A.,Pearce, J. A.(1989).Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrated model.Journal of Management,15,291-334.
21. 周玲臺、朱德芳、林怡伶(2011)。國立大學相關基金會監督管理機制與會計資訊揭露之探討。教育政策論壇，14(2)，91-116。
22. 林江亮、顏百淞(2008)。台灣私立大學校院負債資金成本影響因素之研究。教育政策論壇，11(4)，63-88。
23. 張國保(2002)。博士論文(博士論文)。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所。
24. 張潤書(2000)。行政學。台北:三民。
25. 陳潓誼(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立成功大學會計研究所。
26. 黃哲彬、洪湘婷(2005)。創新管理與學校創新經營。教育經營與管理研究集刊，1，1-15。
27. 黃振球(1990)。學校管理與績效。台北:師大書苑。
28. 楊濬中、王國明(1996)。,台北:行政院教育改革審議委員會。
29. 溫玲玉、康龍魁、王南喻(2009)。應用 DEA 分析法評估科技大學系科效率差異之研究：以某科技大學為例。教育經營與管理研究集刊，5，95-120。
30. 賴永裕、胡維新、郭佳如(2011)。私立大專院校辦學績效、財務資訊揭露對補助與募款關聯性之研究。教育政策論壇，14(2)，65-89。

1. (2019)。私立高中職校治理機制對於會計師選任與財務資訊揭露之影響。教育政策論壇，22(2)，109-149。
2. (2023)。群集演算法於財務風險等級評估之應用—以大專校院公開財報資料為例。會計與公司治理，18(2)，1-25。