政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/49563
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113451/144438 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51249468      線上人數 : 867
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 會計學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/49563


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/49563


    題名: 經營權異動與異動後績效之探討
    The study of executive turnover and the following performance changes
    作者: 游子瑩
    貢獻者: 林宛瑩
    游子瑩
    關鍵詞: 經營權異動
    公司治理
    董監事持股
    控制權與所有權偏離
    corporate control change
    corporate governance
    shareholdings by board members
    deviation of control right from cash flow right
    日期: 2007
    上傳時間: 2010-12-08 13:56:03 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 本研究針對我國1996年至2006年之上市櫃公司，以最終控制集團發生異動之公司作為經營權異動樣本，探討經營權異動之決定性因素，與異動後經營績效表現與公司治理機制間之關聯。
    實證結果顯示，董監事持股比率愈低、最終控制者無超額持股、經營控制權與所有權偏離愈大、董監事持股質押比率愈高之公司，其經營權發生異動之可能性愈高。獨立董監事之設置雖與經營權異動之可能性呈正向相關，惟其關聯性未達顯著水準。經營權異動之公司，其財務績效在異動前後並無顯著差異，表示經營權異動之目的可能不在取代無效率之管理當局，也可能表示併購的綜效需要較長的時間才得以顯現。其中，董監事持股比率較高之公司，其經營績效在經營權異動後表現較佳。本研究顯示董監最低持股可發揮利益連結的效果，對於近期金管會擬取消董監最低持股規範之提案，本研究認為有作更深入討論之需要。
    Using companies listed on Taiwan Stock Exchange Corporation and GreTai Securities Market over the period of 1996 to 2006, this study empirically investigates the determinants of change in corporate control and the subsequent period performance after the change. The change in corporate control is measured in terms of change in business group of a specific firm.
    The empirical results show that companies with less shareholdings owned by their board members, inadequate shareholdings to support their control, larger deviation in cash flow right from voting right, and higher ratio of shareholding pledged by their board members, have higher probabilities of occurrence of change in corporate control. However, the result doesn’t support that independent directors play a role in corporate control change. With respect to the firm performance in the period subsequent to the corporate control change, there exists no significant difference as compared to that of prior period. The evidence thus suggests that the replacing unqualified management may not be the primary purpose of corporate control change, or simply that the synergies take more time to show. In addition, this study also finds that firms subject to corporate control change tend to perform better if their board members hold a larger fraction of shares. This result lends itself to the proposal recently discussed by the Financial Supervisory Commission, Executive Yuan Taiwan on abolition of requirement of minimal shareholding by the board members. It appears that shareholdings by the board members can have interest-alignment effect.
    參考文獻: 中文文獻
    丁秀儀，2004，上市公司公司治理、經營績效與機構投資人投資行為關聯性之研究，國立政治大學企業管理研究所博士學位論文。
    吳曉寧，2005，委託書徵求事件與公司經營績效、股權結構及盈餘管理關聯性之研究，國立政治大學會計學系碩士學位論文。
    呂倩如與蘇淑慧，2007，家族公司與盈餘品質關係之研究：所有權、管理權與控制權，2007會計理論與實務研討會論文，國立台北大學會計學系。
    沈中華、陳錦村、吳孟紋，2005，更早期預警模型:台灣銀行道德指標的建立及影響，管理學報 22(1)：1-28。
    林俊宏，2007，公司治理體系下控制權市場之定位，國立政治大學會計學研究所碩士學位論文。
    林重印，1996，股權結構對委託書爭奪戰結果之影響，中正大學會計學研究所碩士學位論文。
    林宛瑩、許崇源，2008，台灣集團企業之控股型態及公司治理衡量指標之研究與建議，交大管理學報 28(1)：269-312。
    許加昂，1999，董監質押比率與企業經營績效、融資政策、股利政策關聯性之研究，國立臺灣大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
    陳信吉，2008，CEO異動與盈餘管理，國立台北大學會計學研究所博士學位論文。
    陳嬿如、吳清在、林惠芬，2007，委託書徵求、控制權偏離及侵佔行為之探討，2007會計理論與實務研討會論文，國立台北大學會計學系。
    楊淑清，1996，委託書收購事件與公司經營績效—以台灣地區上市公司為例，中正大學會計學研究所碩士學位論文。
    葉銀華，2008年3月初版，實踐公司治理-台灣集團企業的功與過，台北:聯經出版社。
    賴英照，2006年8月初版3刷，股市遊戲規則-最新證券交易法解析，作者自版。
    蔡信夫、鍾惠民與林詩韻，2003，控制股東代理問題與盈餘管理資訊內涵之關聯性研究-以台灣上市公司為例，當代會計，第四卷第二期(一月)：143-168。
    薛健宏，2008，董監持股、盈餘平穩化與企業風險之關聯性研究，會計評論 46(一月)：107-130。
    英文文獻
    Abe N. 2004. Managerial incentive mechanisms and turnover of company presidents and directors in Japan. Working paper.
    Bhagat, S., D. C. Carey, and C. M. Elson. 1999. Direct ownership, corporate performance, and management turnover. The Business Lawyer 54(3): 885-919.
    Chen, G., M. Firth, and O. Rui. 2006. Have China’s enterprise reforms led to improved efficiency and profitability? Emerging Markets Review 7: 82-109.
    Chen, G., M. Firth, Y. Xin, and L. Xu. 2008. Control transfers, privatization, and corporate performance: Efficiency gains in China’s listed companies. Journal of Finance and Quantitative Analysis 43(1): 161-190.
    Chen, X. and Z. Dai. 2007. Are US family firms subject to agency problems? Evidence from CEO turnover and firm valuation. Working paper.
    Chi, W. and Y. Wang. 2007. Ownership, performance and executive turnover. Working paper.
    Claessens, S. and S. Djankov. 1999a. Enterprise performance and management turnover in the Czech Republic. European Economic Review 43(4-6): 1115-1124.
    Claessens, S. and S. Djankov. 1999b. Ownership concentration and corporate performance in the Czech Republic. Journal of Comparative Economics 27(3): 498-513.
    Claessens, S., S. Djankov, J. P. H. Fan, and L. H. P. Lang. 2002. Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholdings. The Journal of Finance LVII(6): 2741-2771.
    Cubbin, J. and D. Leech. 1983. The effect of shareholding dispersion on the degree of control in British companies: theory and measurement. The Economic Journal 93(370):351-369.
    DeAngelo, L.E. 1988. Managerial competition, information costs, and corporate governance: The use of accounting performance measures in proxy contests. Journal of Accounting and Economics 10(1): 3-36.
    Dechow, P. M., R. Sloan, and A. Sweeny. 1996. Causes and consequences of earnings manipulation: An analysis of firms subject to enforcement actions by the SEC. Contemporary Accounting Research 13(1): 1-36.
    Denis, D. J., Denis K. Denis, and Atulya Sarin. 1997. Ownership structure and top executive turnover. Journal of Finance Economics 45(2): 193-221.
    Fama, E. F.1980. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. The Journal of Political Economy 88(2): 288-307.
    Fan, J. P. H. and T. J. Wong. 2002. Corporate ownership structure and the informativeness of accounting earning in East Asia. Journal of Accounting and Economics 33(3): 401-425.
    Fidrmuc, J. F. and J, Fidrmuc. 2007. Fire the manager to improve performance? Economics of Transition 15(3): 505-533.
    Firth, M. , P. M. Y. Fung and O. M. Rui. 2006. Firm performance, governance structure, and top management turnover in transitional economy. Journal of Management Studies 43(6): 1289-1330.
    Fisman, R., R. Khurana, and M. R. Kropf. 2005.Governance and CEO turnover: Do something or do the right thing? Working paper.
    Gibson, M. S. 2003. Is corporate governance ineffective in emerging markets? Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 38(1): 231-250.
    Goergen, M. and L. Renneboog. 2000. Insider control by large investor groups and managerial disciplining in listed Belgian companies. Managerial Finance 26: 22-41.
    Gompers, P., J. Ishii, and A. Metrick. 2003. Corporate governance and equity prices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(1)：107-155
    Hancock, G. D. and M. Mougoue. 1991. The impact of financial factors on proxy contest outcomes. Journal of Business Finance& Accounting 18(4): 541-551.
    Jensen, M. C. and W. H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency cost and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3(4): 305-360.
    Johnson, S., P. Boone, A. Breach, and E. Friedman. 2000. Corporate governance in the Asian financial crisis. Journal of Financial Economics 58(1): 141-186.
    Jostarndt, P. and Z. Sautner. 2007. Financila distress, corporate control, and management turnover. Working paper.
    Kang, J. K. and A. Shivdasani.1995. Firm performance, corporate governance, and top executive turnover in Japan. Journal of Financial Economics 38: 29-58.
    Kini, O. , W. Kracaw, and S. Mian. 1995. Corporate takeover, firm performance, and board composition. Journal of Corporate Finance 1: 383-412.
    La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes ,and A. Shleifer. 1999. Corporate ownership around the world. The Journal of Finance LIV(2): 471-517.
    La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 2002. Investor protection and corporate valuation. The Journal of Finance LVII(3): 1147-1170.
    Manne, H. G. 1965. Mergers and the market for corporate control. Journal of Political Economy 73 (2): 110 - 120
    Maury B. 2006. Corporate performance, corporate governance and top executive turnover in Finland. European Financial Management 12(2): 221-248.
    Morck, R., A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1988. Management ownership and market valuation , an empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics 20(1): 293-315.
    Murphy, K. J., and J. L. Zimmerman. 1993. Financial performance surrounding CEO turnover. Journal of Accounting and Economics 16(1): 273-315.
    O’Sullivan, N. and P. Wang. 1999. Board composition, ownership structure and hostile takeovers: some UK evidence. Accounting and Business Research 29(2): 139-155.
    Oviatt, B. M. 1988. Agency and transaction cost perspectives on the manager-shareholder relationship, incentives for congruent interests. Academy of Management Review 13(2): 214-225.
    Shekhar, C. 2005. Takeovers, ownership, and shareholder wealth- the Australian evidence. Review of Accounting & Finance 4(3):101-120.
    Shleifer, A. and R. W. Vishny. 1997. A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance LII(2): 737-783.
    Subramanian, N., A. Chakrabotry, and S. Sheikh. 2002. Performance incentives, performance pressure and executive turnover. Working paper.
    Volpin P. F. 2002. Governance with poor investor protection: Evidence from top executive turnover. Journal of Financial Economics 64(1): 61-90.
    Yeh, Y. H.,T. S. Lee, and T. Woidtke, 2001, Family control and corporate governance: evidence for Taiwan. International Review of Finance 2: 21-48.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    會計研究所
    95353054
    96
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095353054
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[會計學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    305401.pdf56KbAdobe PDF2442檢視/開啟
    305402.pdf221KbAdobe PDF2558檢視/開啟
    305403.pdf128KbAdobe PDF2497檢視/開啟
    305404.pdf97KbAdobe PDF2518檢視/開啟
    305405.pdf442KbAdobe PDF2643檢視/開啟
    305406.pdf546KbAdobe PDF2636檢視/開啟
    305407.pdf585KbAdobe PDF2601檢視/開啟
    305408.pdf355KbAdobe PDF2628檢視/開啟
    305409.pdf237KbAdobe PDF2526檢視/開啟
    305410.pdf203KbAdobe PDF2571檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋