Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/30284
|
| Title: | 高階經理人之選擇權與公司績效之關聯性研究
Executive Stock Options and Firm Performance: Evidence from US Compensation Data |
| Authors: | 黎劭儀 |
| Contributors: | 梁嘉紋
黎劭儀 |
| Keywords: | 員工選擇權
公司績效
誘因調整
利益榨取
Employee stock option
Firm performance
Incentive alignment
Rent extraction |
| Date: | 2004 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-11 17:35:49 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究主要探討高階經理人之選擇權與公司績效之關聯性，研究發現，公司發給高階經理人之選擇權價值與Tobin’s Q呈正向關係。為區分誘因調整（the incentive alignment perspective）與利益榨取（the rent extraction perspective）兩觀點，本研究將選擇權預測值分為經濟因素、公司治理與殘值三部分。研究結果顯示依據經濟因素所預測出之選擇權價值與Tobin’s Q呈正向關係，其符合誘因調整觀點，即發放選擇權可減少代理問題。而依公司治理所預測出之選擇權價值，則與Tobin’s Q 呈負向關係，此亦與利益榨取觀點相符，即當公司治理較差時，發給高階經理人之選擇權往往較股東最適程度為高。此外，本研究亦發現選擇權與Tobin’s Q有一非線性關係。
This study examines the association between employee stock options (ESOs) and future firm performance (Tobin’s Q). The evidence shows that the value of ESOs granted to CEOs in the current and past five years are positively associated with Tobin’s Q. To test the incentive alignment perspective and the rent extraction perspective, this study predicts the value of ESOs granted to CEOs due to economic determinants, governance quality and residual value. I find that the predicted component of ESO grants due to economic determinants are positively related with Tobin’s Q, consistent with the incentive alignment perspective that ESOs are granted to reduce the agency problem. Further, the predicted component of ESO grants attributable to the governance factors are negatively associated with Tobin’s Q, indicating that for firms with poor governance, the actual level of incentives executives receive may go well beyond the optimal level for shareholders. The negative association is consistent with the rent extraction perspective. Moreover, this study also finds a non-linear association between the Tobin’s Q and the ESO grant values. |
| Reference: | Aboody, D., M. E. Barth, and R. Kasznik. 2004. SFAS No.123 stock-based compensation expense and equity market values. The Accounting Review 79(2): 251-275.
Adams, R. B. 2003. What do boards do? Evidence from board committee and director compensation data. Working paper, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Anderson, M. C., R. D. Banker, and S. Ravindran. 2000. Executive compensation in the information technology industry. Management Science 46 (April): 530-547.
Bryan, S., L. Hwang, and S. Lilien. 2000. CEO stock-based compensation: An empirical analysis of incentive-intensity, relative mix, and economic determinants. Journal of Business 73(October): 661-693.
Core, J., and W. Guay. 1999. The use of equity grants to manage optimal equity incentive levels. Journal of Accounting and Economics 28(December): 151-184.
Core, J. E., R. W. Holthausen, and D. F. Larcker. 1999. Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics 51(March): 371-406
Demsetz, H., and K. Lehn. 1985. The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. Journal of Political Economy 93(December): 1155-1177.
Ding, D. K., and Q. Sun. 2001. Causes and effects of employee stock option plans: Evidence from Singapore. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal 9(May): 563-599.
Evans, J. P., and J. A. Gentry. 2003. Using Tobin’s Q ratio to assess the strategy of repurchasing shares. Finance India 17(March): 149-163.
Frye, M. B. 2004. Equity-based compensation for employees: Firm performance and determinants. Journal of Financial Research 27(Spring): 31-54.
Garen, J. E. 1994. Executive compensation and principal-agency theory. Journal of Political Economy 102 (December): 1175-1199.
Guay, W. R. 1999. The sensitivity of CEO wealth to equity risk: An analysis of the magnitude and determinants. Journal of Financial Economics 53(July): 43-71.
Hall, B. J., and J. B. Liebman. 1998. Are CEOs really paid like bureaucrats? Quarterly Journal of Economics 113(August): 653-691.
Hanlon, M., S. Rajgopal, and T. Shevlin. 2003. Are executive stock options associated with future earnings? Journal of Accounting and Economics 36(December): 3-43.
Hillegeist, S. A., and F. Penalva. 2003. Stock option incentives and firm performance. Working paper, Northwestern University.
Himmelberg, C. P., R. G. Hubbard, and D. Palia. 1999. Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance. Journal of Financial Economics 53(September): 353-384.
Ittner, C. D., R. A. Lambert, and D. F. Larker. 2003. The structure and performance consequences of equity grants to employees of new economy firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics 34(January): 89-127.
Jensen, M. C., and W. H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305-360.
Kedia, S., and A. Mozumdar. 2002. Performance impact of employee stock options. Working paper, Harvard University.
Lang, L. H. P., and R. M. Stulz. 1994. Tobin’s q, corporate diversification, and firm performance. Journal of Political Economy 102(December): 1248-1280.
La Porta, R., F. Lopez-De-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 2002. Investor protection and corporate valuation. Journal of Finance 57(June): 1147-1170.
Lewellen, W., C. Loderer, and K. Martin. 1987. Executive compensation and executive incentive problems: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Economics 9: 287-310.
Matsunaga, S. R. 1995. The effects of financial reporting costs on the use of employee stock options. Accounting Review 70(January): 1-26.
Mehran, H. 1995. Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics 38(June): 163-184.
Morck, R., A. Shleifer, and R. W. Vishny. 1988. Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics 20: 293-315.
Rajgopal, S., and T. Shevlin. 2002. Empirical evidence on the relation between stock option compensation and risk taking. Journal of Accounting and Economics 33(June): 145-171.
Vafeas, N. 1999. Board meeting frequency and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics 53(July): 113-142.
Yermack, D. 1995. Do corporations award CEO stock options effectively? Journal of Financial Economics 39(October): 237-269.
Yermack, D. 1996. Higher market valuation for firms with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics 40(February): 185-211. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
會計研究所
92353002
93 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0923530021 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [會計學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| index.html | 0Kb | HTML2 | 346 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
