董事會結構與經理人薪酬對公司績效之影響 —以台灣電子業與傳統業為例

Effects on Company Performance with Regards to Board Structure and CEO Salary – on the Objects of Electronic and Conventional Corporates.

黃小玲

董事會結構 ； 董事會規模 ； 獨立董事 ； 經理人薪酬 ； board structure ； board size ； independent board director ； CEO salary

長榮大學經營管理研究所學位論文

2017年

碩士

陳振宇

繁體中文

摘要 本研究係以董事會結構與經理人薪酬之角度，探討其對公司績效之影響，並將台灣上市(櫃)公司區分為電子業與傳統業兩大族群分別探討之。在研究期間方面，則係取金融海嘯後之時間點為主要研究主軸。在整體樣本之研究結果方面，本研究發現董事會規模與公司績效係呈現顯著負相關，本研究係認為就組織學之觀點，可以解讀上述現象，代表著當董事會規模愈小時，將有利於擬定決策共識，進而提升公司經營績效。另外，在獨立董事比率方面，則發現當其比率愈高時，將有助於提升公司經營績效，此結果係符合鞏固利益假說。另外，在董監事持股比率方面，亦發現其與公司績效之關連性上呈顯著正相關，符合利益收斂假說，指當董監事利益與股民一致時，將減少代理成本，提升公司績效。另外，本研究亦發現董事兼經理人比率與公司績效呈顯著正相關，係指在資訊透明度增加下，董事兼經理人較能做出有利於公司績效之決策。在經理人薪酬方面，則發現其對公司績效並無顯著之關連性。 此外，考量台灣電子業與傳統產業在股權集中度與薪酬給付方面因產業性之明顯不同，故本研究進一步將整體樣本區分為電子業與傳統業進行探討。實證結果發現，無論電子產業或傳統產業，董事會規模與公司績效均呈負相關，獨立董事比率、董監事持股比率、董事兼經理人比率等特性皆與公司績效呈正相關。惟在經理人薪酬之構面有所差異，意謂經理人薪酬之特徵對於不同產業具有相異之影響。在傳統產業，經理人薪酬與公司績效呈正相關，此結果與Holmstrom(1979)之研究一致，係指在設計薪酬契約時，若將經理人薪酬連結公司績效，就能解決經理人與股東之代理問題，驅使、激勵經理人做出最佳決策來提升公司績效。但電子產業中，經理人薪酬與公司績效呈無相關之反應。

Abstract This research investigates the effect of board structure and CEO salary on the corporate financial performance for a sample of companies listed in Taiwan Stock Exchange under electronics and conventional industries during the post financial crisis period. The results indicate, first, a negative correlation between the board size and the firm. That is, the smaller the board size, the better the firm performance. Next, the study finds the higher the independent board director ratio tends to improve the corporate performance. It meets the theory of consolidate interest hypothesis. Also, as the theory of convergence interest hypothesis implies: when the directors’ interest are on the same side of the investors, the agency cost will be decreased and the corporate value will be increased, therefore, this study looks into the directors’ shareholding ratio and confirms a positive correlation between such ratio and corporate performance. Furthermore, for the association between CEO duality and firm performance, the results show that CEO duality has a positive impact on the firm performance. In this case, CEOs are able to receive more information to make better decisions. Finally, the study results domonstrate that in electronics industry, there is no correlation between CEO salary and corporate performance; however, in conventional industry, CEO salary is positively correlated with firm performance, which meets the theory of Holmstrom(1979): if CEO salary is connected with firm performance, the principal–agent problem will be solved and CEO will be incentivized to make the best policies to accelerate firm effectiveness and firm performance.

1. 杜榮瑞、劉雅芳、吳婉婷(2006)。獨立董監、會計規範與財務報導品質之關：
   連結：
2. 林鈺棋（2010）。董事會結構與高階主管薪酬關係之探討。未出版碩士論文，國立中興大學會計學系研究所，台中市。
   連結：
3. 高惠松、詹照潔(2013)。不景氣時期之高階經理人薪酬結構與公司未來績效。東吳經濟商學學報，第八十期，81-117。
   連結：
4. 陳愛庭(2014)。高階經理人薪酬對企業社會責任與公司績效之關聯性的調節效果。未出版之碩士論文，國立中正大學研究所，嘉義縣。
   連結：
5. 蔡柳卿(2003)。總經理薪酬、非財務績效衡量指標與公司未來績效。會計評論，第三十七期，85-116。
   連結：
6. 戴怡蕙(2012)。內部董事超額薪酬和公司未來績效－隱含合約觀點之實證研究。
   連結：
7. Abbott, L., Parker, S. & Peters, G. (2004). Audit committee characteristics and restatements. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 23(1):69-87.
   連結：
8. Agrawal, Anup, & Knoeber, Charles R. (1996). Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31, 377-397.
   連結：
9. Agrawal, Anup, & Knoeber, Charles R. (2001). Do some outside directors play a political role? The Journal of Law and Economics 44, 179-198.
   連結：
10. Babío Arcay, M. R., & Muiño Vázquez, M. F. (2005). Corporate Characteristics, Governance Rules and the Extent of Voluntary Disclosure in Spain. Advances in Accounting, 21, 299-331.
    連結：
11. Beasley, M. S. (1996). An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. The Accounting Review, 71(4): 443-465.
    連結：
12. Bhagat, S. & Black, B. (1999). The uncertain relationship between board composition and firm performance. The Business Lawyer, 54：921-963.
    連結：
13. Boyd, B. K. (1995). CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model. Strategic Management Journal, 16(4), 301- 12.
    連結：
14. Chen, G., Firth, M., Gao, D. N., & Rui, O. M. (2006). Ownership structure, corporate governance, and fraud: Evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(3), 424-448.
    連結：
15. Chen, Z., Cheung, Y. L., Stouraitis, A., & Wong, A. W. S. (2005). Ownership concentration, firm performance, and dividend policy in Hong Kong. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 13(4), 431-449.
    連結：
16. Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, F., & Lang, L.H. (2000). The separation of Ownership and control in East Asian Corporation. Journal of Financial Economics 58, 81-112.
    連結：
17. Conyon, M. J., Peck, S. I., & Sadler, G. V. (2001). Corporate Tournaments and Executive Compensation: Evidence from the UK. Strategic Management Journal, 22(8), 805-815.
    連結：
18. directors enhance target shareholder wealth during tender offers? Journal of
    連結：
19. Financial Economics, 43, 195-218.
    連結：
20. Crespi-Cladera, R., & Gispert, C. (2003). Total Board Compensation, Governance and Performance of Spanish Listed Companies. Labour, 17(1), 103-126.
    連結：
21. Daily, C. & Dalton, D. (1993) Board of Directors Leadership and Structure: Control and Performance Implications. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice ,Spring, 65–81.
    連結：
22. (1998). Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and
    連結：
23. De Andres, P., Azofra, V., & Lopez, F. (2005). Corporate boards in OECD countries: Size, composition, functioning and effectiveness. Corporate Governance, 13(2), 197–210.
    連結：
24. Demsetz & Lehn (1985). The Structure of Corporate Ownership: Causes and ConsequencesAuthor(s). Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 93, No. 6 (Dec., 1985), 1155-1177
    連結：
25. Duchin, R., Matsusaka, J. & Ozbas, O. (2010). When are outside directors effective? Journal of Financial Economics 96, 195-214.
    連結：
26. Eric, A. F., Xuejing, X., Wafa, H. O. & William, I. M. Jr. (2015). Consequences of deviating from predicted CEO labor market compensation on long-term firm
    連結：
27. Fama, Eugene F., & Jensen, Michael C. (1983). Separation of ownership and
    連結：
28. Faria, P., Martins, F. V. & Brandão, E. (2014). The Level of CEO Compensation for the Short and Long-term – A View on High-tech Firms. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,110,1023–1032.
    連結：
29. Fich, Eliezer M., & Shivdasani, Anil. (2007). Financial fraud, director reputation, and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics, 86, 306-336.
    連結：
30. Gerhart, B., & George, T. M. (1990). Organizational Difference in Managerial Compensation and Financial Performance. The Academic of Management Journal, 33(4), 663-691.
    連結：
31. Goodstein, J., Gautam, K. & Beeker, W. (1994). The effect of board size and diversify on strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 15: 241-250.
    連結：
32. Holmstrom(1979). Moral Hazard and Observability. The Bell Journal of Economics, 10(1),74-91.
    連結：
33. Jensen, M. C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution , exit , and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance , Vol. 48 , 831-880
    連結：
34. Jensen, & Ruback, R. (1983). The market for corporate control：The scientific
    連結：
35. evidence. Journal of Financial Economics ,11, 5-50.
    連結：
36. Judge, W.Q., & Zeithaml, C.P. Jr. (1992). Institutional and strategic choice perspectives on board involvement in the strategic decision making process. Academy of Management Journal, 35:766–794.
    連結：
37. Kato, T., & Long, C. (2004). Executive compensation ,Firm performance, and
    連結：
38. Lilling, M. S. (2006). The Link Between CEO Compensation Does Simultaneity Matter? Atlantic Economic Journal, (34), 101-104.
    連結：
39. Mak, Y. T., & Kusnadi, Y. (2005). Size really matters: Further evidence on the negative relationship between board size and firm value. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 13(3), 301-318.
    連結：
40. Mallette, P. & Fowler, K.L. (1992). Effects of board composition and stock ownership on the adoption of "poison pills." Academy of Management Journal, 35, 1010-1035.
    連結：
41. Morck, R., Shleifer, A. & Vishny, R.W. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation：An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics ,20, 293-315.
    連結：
42. Ozkan, N. (2007). Do corporate governance mechanisms influence CEO compensation? An empirical investigation of UK companies. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 17(5), 349-364.
    連結：
43. Harvard Business Review 65, 10-18.
    連結：
44. Pound, J. (1988). Proxy contests and the efficiency of shareholder oversight. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 237-265.
    連結：
45. Rechner, P. K., & Dalton, D. R. (1991). CEO duality and organizational performance: A longitudinal analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 12(2), 155-160.
    連結：
46. Rosenstein, S. & Wyatt, J.G. (1990). Outside directors, board independence, and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics, 26, 175-192.
    連結：
47. Rosenstein, S. & Wyatt, J.G. (1997). Inside directors, board effectiveness, and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics, 44, 229-250.
    連結：
48. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1986). Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of Political Economy 94, 461-488.
    連結：
49. Weisbach, M. S. (1988). Outsider directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 431-460.
    連結：
50. Yermack, D. (1996). Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics, 40, 185 –212.
    連結：
51. Zahra, S. A., & PearceⅡ, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance：A review and integrated model. Journal of Management 15, 293.
    連結：
52. 參考文獻
53. 一、中文部分
54. 朱磊（2011）。我國金融上市公司高管薪酬與公司績效相關性研究。已出版碩士論文，化工大學商院，北京。
55. 多重研究方法之運用。當代會計，第7卷第2期，135-170。
56. 杜玉振、黃荃、林容竹(2002)。董事會特性對經營績效、財務決策之研究影
57. 響－以臺灣上市公司為例。管理與系統，第9卷第3期，345-368。
58. 呂彥慧(2001)。股權結構、監督機制、轉投資、交叉持股與公司經營績效之關
59. 係。未出版之碩士論文，中正大學金融研究所，嘉義縣。
60. 吳昆皇(1995）。上市公司董事會組成與特性對企業經營績效之關聯性研究。未出版之碩士論文，台灣大學會計學研究所，台北市。
61. 林君玲(1999)。企業財務危機預警之研究。未出版之碩士論文，國立台灣大學會計學研究，台北市。
62. 林卓民、蘇欣玫、黃健銘、林東寬（2009）。CEO 薪酬與廠商績效，2009 金融創新與科際整合學術研討會。
63. 柯承恩(2000)。我國公司治理體系之問題與改進建議（上）及（下）。 會計研
64. 究月刊，第173 期，75-83。
65. 翁淑育(2000)。台灣上市公司股權結構、核心代理問題與公司價值之研究。輔
66. 仁大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
67. 翁銘鴻（1998）。我國上市公司董事會特性與經營績效之關聯性研究。未出版之碩士論文，政治大學會計學研究所，台北市。
68. 孫秀蘭（1996）。董事會制度與經營績效之研究。未出版之碩士論文，台灣大學財務金融研究所，台北市。
69. 郭欣潔(2011)。高階主管薪酬與信用風險。未出版之碩士論文，銘傳大學風險管理與保險學系研究所，台中市。
70. 廖益興(2004)。董監事獨立性、企業結構特徵與盈餘管理之關聯性研究。未出版之博士論文，國立台北大學會計研究所，台北市。
71. 未出版之博士論文，國立台灣大學會計學研究所，台北市。
72. 魏剛（2000）。高級管理層激勵與上市公司經營績效。經濟研究，35(3)，32-64。
73.  
74. 二、英文部分
75. Bacon, J. (1973). Corporate directorship practice: member and committees of the board. New York: The conference board.
76. Cotter, James F., Shivdasani, Anil. & Zenner, Marc. (1997). Do independent
77. Dalton, Dan R., Daily, Catherine M., Ellstrand, Alan E., & Johnson, Jonathan L.
78. financial performance. Strategic Management Journal: 19, 269-290.
79. Davidson, W. N., Nemec, C., Worrell, D. L., & Lin, J. (2002). Industrial Origin of CEOs in Outside Succession: Board Preference and Stockholder Reaction. Journal of Management and Governance, 6(4), 295-321.
80. Eisenberg, T., Sundgren, S., & Wells, M. T. (1998). Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 48(1), 35-54.
81. value. Journal of Business Research, 68(2), 299-305.
82. control, Journal Law & Economics 26, 301-324.
83. Grossman, Sanford J. & Hart Source, Olivia D. (1983). Econometrica, Vol. 51, No. 1, 7-45
84. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial
85. Behavior. Agency Costs and Ownersh, Vol. 3, 305-360.
86. Ownership Structure: An Empirical Study of Listed Firms in China. Working Paper.
87. Kester, W. C. (1986). Capital and Ownership Structure: A Comparison of
88. United States and Japanese Manufacturing Corporations. Financial
89. Management, 15(1), 5-16.
90. Patton, Arch. & Baker, John C. (1987). Why won’t directors rock the boat?
91. Rappaport, A. (1998). Creating Shareholder Value: A Guide for Managers and Investors. New York, NY: The Free Press.
92. Van Ees, H., Postma, T. J. B. M., & Sterken, E. (2003). Board Characteristics and Corporate Performance in the Netherlands. Eastern Economic Journal, 29(1), 41-58.
93. Weir, Charlie., & Laing, David. ( 2001). Governance structures, director
94. independence and corporate performance in the UK. European Business Review 13, 86-95.