English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 116849/147881 (79%)
Visitors : 63794956      Online Users : 32
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 會計學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/157674
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/157674


    Title: 投資人如何評價經理人團隊年齡:以股東大會議案贊成率為例
    How Do Investors Evaluate Vintage of the Top Management Team? Evidence from Voting Approval Rate in the Shareholders' Meeting
    Authors: 蔣明珊
    Jiang, Ming-Shan
    Contributors: 潘健民
    Pan, Chien-Min
    蔣明珊
    Jiang, Ming-Shan
    Keywords: 年齡
    經理人團隊
    投資人認可
    Board Age
    Top Management Team
    Shareholder Approval
    Date: 2025
    Issue Date: 2025-07-01 14:17:13 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 管理階層的個人特質日益成為投資人關注焦點,投資人對經理人團隊與個別成員特質的認知,尤其是年齡,可能是影響股東決策的重要依據。本研究以日本東京證券交易所之上市企業為樣本,探討經理人團隊與個人年齡結構對投資人認可之影響。實證結果顯示,經理人團隊平均年齡及最高年齡愈高,股東大會議案贊成率顯著降低;最年輕成員之年齡則對投資人認可無明顯影響。個人層級方面,經理人年齡愈高亦使股東認可度下降。惟追加測試顯示,投資人尤對年齡介於50至59歲之經理人團隊表現正面認可,且針對不同產業之年齡特質關注重點不一,突顯產業異質性對投資人認知之調節效果。
    The characteristics of management teams have been drawing significant public attention. Characteristics of the top management teams and top executives, particularly age, may influence shareholders’ decisions. This study investigates the relationship between the age structures of management team and shareholders’ approval, using data from firms listed in the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Empirical results show that average age and maximum age of the top management team is significantly associated with lower shareholder approval rates, while the age of the youngest board member is not. At the individual level, older CEO age is also linked to lower shareholder support in the main tests; however, additional tests reveal that this negative effect of CEO age is significant only among firms in the manufacturing industry. Moreover, when the sample is divided by team age structure, shareholders tend to view teams aged between 50 and 59 more favorably, while teams with members aged 60 and above are associated with reduced shareholder support. These findings highlight that both age structure and industry characteristics jointly shape investor perceptions of corporate leadership.
    Reference: 岡室博之, 2006. 〈高度成長期の新規上場企業のコーポレート・ガバナンスと企業家の役割〉. 《経済研究》57 (4): 303–313.
    Adams, R. B., and D. Ferreira. 2009. Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics 94 (2): 291–309.
    Agmon, T., and D. R. Lessard. 1977. Investor recognition of corporate international diversification. Journal of Finance 32 (4): 1049–1055.
    Bamber, L. S., J. X. Jiang, and I. Y. Wang. 2010. What's my style? The influence of top managers on voluntary corporate financial disclosure. Accounting Review 85 (4): 1131–1162.
    Bebchuk, L. A., A. Brav, and W. Jiang. 2015. The long-term effects of hedge fund activism. Columbia Law Review 115 (5): 1085–1155
    Belenzon, S., A. Shamshur, and R. Zarutskie. 2019. CEO's age and the performance of closely held firms. Strategic Management Journal 40 (6): 917–944.
    Bertrand, M., and A. Schoar. 2003. Managing with style: The effect of managers on firm policies. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118 (4): 1169–1208.
    Black, B. S. 1990. Shareholder passivity reexamined. Michigan Law Review 89 (3): 520–608.
    Borokhovich, K. A., R. Parrino, and T. Trapani. 1996. Outside directors and CEO selection. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 31 (3): 337–355.
    Brickley, J. A., R. C. Lease, and C. W. Smith Jr. 1988. Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics 20: 267-291.
    Cai, J., T. Nguyen, and R. Walkling. 2022. Director appointments: It is who you know. Review of Financial Studies 35 (4): 1933–1982.
    Conrad, H. 2010. From seniority to performance principle: The evolution of pay practices in Japanese firms since the 1990s. Social Science Japan Journal 13 (1): 115–135.
    Davis, J. G., and M. Garcia-Cestona. 2023. CEO age, financial reporting quality, and the role of clawback provisions. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting 12 (1): 1–20.
    Eckel, C. C., and P. J. Grossman. 2008. Men, women and risk aversion: Experimental evidence. Working paper, Virginia Tech and Saint Cloud State University.
    Ertimur, Y., F. Ferri, and V. Muslu. 2011. Shareholder activism and CEO pay. Review of Financial Studies 24 (2): 535–592.
    Fellner, G., and B. Maciejovsky. 2007. Risk attitude and market behavior: Evidence from experimental asset markets. Journal of Economic Psychology 28 (3): 338–50.
    Foerster, S. R., and G. A. Karolyi. 1999. The effects of market segmentation and investor recognition on asset prices: Evidence from foreign stocks listing in the United States. Journal of Finance 54 (3): 981–1013.
    Fujii, H., K. Iwata, S. Kaneko, and S. Managi. 2013. Corporate environmental and economic performance of Japanese manufacturing firms: Empirical study for sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment 22 (3): 187–201.
    Ge, W., D. Matsumoto, and J. L. Zhang. 2011. Do CFOs have style? An empirical investigation of the effect of individual CFOs on accounting practices. Contemporary Accounting Research 28 (4): 1141–1179.
    Geiger, M. A., and D. S. North. 2006. Does hiring a new CFO change things? An investigation of changes in discretionary accruals. Accounting Review 81 (4): 781–809.
    Gore, A., S. Matsunaga, and E. Yeung. 2008. The relation between financial monitoring and equity incentives for chief financial officers. Working paper, George Washington University, University of Oregon, and University of Georgia.
    Hambrick, D. C., and P. A. Mason. 1984. Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review 9 (2): 193–206.
    Hambrick, D. C. 2007. Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review 32 (2): 334–343.
    Haider, I., N. Sultana, H. Singh, and Y. H. Tham. 2020. CEO age and analysts forecast properties. Asian Review of Accounting 28 (1): 1–23.
    Haider, J., and H. X. Fang. 2016. Board size, ownership concentration and future firm risk. Chinese Management Studies 10 (4): 692–709.
    Holland, J. L. 1966. A psychological classification scheme for vocations and major fields. Journal of Counseling Psychology 13 (3): 278.
    Holland, J.L. 1973. Making vocational choices: A theory of careers. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
    Holland, J. L. 1997. Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Psychological Assessment Resources.
    Hong, G. H., A. Ito, Y. U. Saito, and A. T. N. Nguyen. 2020. Structural changes in Japanese firms: Business dynamism in an aging society. IMF Working Papers, 2020/182, International Monetary Fund.
    Keusch, T. 2023. Shareholder activists and frictions in the CEO labor market. Accounting Review 98 (5): 353–374.
    Kelly, D. J. 1990. Ethics: The tone at the top. Strategic Finance 71 (10): 12-13.
    King, M. R., and D. Segal. 2009. The long-term effects of cross-listing, investor recognition, and ownership structure on valuation. Review of Financial Studies 22 (6): 2393–2421.
    Kodama, N., and H. Li. 2018. Manager characteristics and firm performance. Discussion Paper 18-E-060, RIETI.
    Krause, R., K. A. Whitler, and M. Semadeni. 2014. Power to the principals! An experimental look at shareholder say-on-pay voting. Academy of Management Journal 57(1): 94–115.
    Lakatos, Z. 2020. Do larger boards improve shareholder value creation?—Effects of the board size on business performance in Eastern Central Europe. Society and Economy 42 (3): 245–279.
    Lehavy, R., and R. G. Sloan. 2008. Investor recognition and stock returns. Review of Accounting Studies 13: 327–361.
    Leland, H. E., and D. H. Pyle. 1977. Informational asymmetries, financial structure, and financial intermediation. Journal of Finance 32 (2): 371–387.
    Manner, M. H. 2010. The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 93: 53–72.
    Matemilola, B. T., A. N. Bany-Ariffin, W. N. W. Azman-Saini, and A. M. Nassir. 2018. Does top managers’ experience affect firms’ capital structure? Research in International Business and Finance 45: 488–498.
    Merkle, C., and C. J. Sextroh. 2021. Value and momentum from investors’ perspective: Evidence from professionals’ risk-ratings. Journal of Empirical Finance 62: 159-178.
    Merton, R. C. 1987. A simple model of capital market equilibrium with incomplete information. Journal of Finance 42 (3): 483–510.
    Mian, S. 2001. On the choice and replacement of chief financial officer. Journal of Financial Economics 60 (1): 143–75.
    Myers, S. C. and N. S. Majluf. 1984. Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics 13 (2): 187–221.
    Nakano, M. and P. Nguyen. 2012. Board size and corporate risk taking: Further evidence from Japan. Corporate Governance: An International Review 20 (4): 369–387.
    Nakano, M. and P. Nguyen. 2013. Board vintage and risk-taking: An empirical analysis based on Japanese firms. Working Paper, present at European Accounting Association 36th. Annual Congress, 7 May 2013, Paris, France.
    Ono, H., 2010. Lifetime employment in Japan: Concepts and measurements. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies 24 (1): 1–27.
    Osagie, J., G. S. Osho, and C. Sutton. 2005. The impacts of institutional stock ownership on stock returns and performance: A financial market perspective. Journal of Business and Economics Research 3 (3): 65-70.
    Pukthuanthong, K., R. Roll, and T. Walker. 2007. How employee stock options and executive equity ownership affect long-term IPO operating performance. Journal of Corporate Finance 13 (5): 695–720.
    Ranasinghe, D., L. A. Unda, and S. Wright. 2024. Do women mind the non-GAAP? Board gender diversity and non-GAAP disclosure quality. European Accounting Review 33 (3): 713–739.
    Sanders, W. G. and D. C. Hambrick. 2007. Swinging for the fences: The effects of CEO stock options on company risk taking and performance. Academy of Management Journal 50 (5): 1055–1078.
    Serfling, M. A. 2014. CEO age and the riskiness of corporate policies. Journal of Corporate Finance 25: 251–273.
    Shen, Y. 2021. CEO characteristics: a review of influential publications and a research agenda. Accounting and Finance 61: 361–385.
    Smith, M. P. 1996. Shareholder activism by institutional investors: Evidence from CalPERS. Journal of Finance 51 (1): 227–252.
    Tanaka, T. 2019. Gender diversity on Japanese corporate boards. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies 51: 19–31.
    Vroom, V. H., and B. Pahl. 1971. Relationship between age and risk taking among managers. Journal of Applied Psychology 55 (5): 399–405.
    Waelchli, U. and J. Zeller. 2013. Old captains at the helm: Chairman age and firm performance. Journal of Banking and Finance 37 (5): 1612–1628.
    Wiersema, M. F. and A. Bird. 1993. Organizational demography in japanese firms: Group heterogeneity, individual dissimilarity, and top management team turnover. Academy of Management Journal 36 (5): 996–1025.
    Wiersema, M. F. and K. A. Bantel. 1992. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal 35 (1): 91–121.
    Yermack, D. 2010. Shareholder voting and corporate governance. Annual Review of Financial Economics 2 (1): 103–125.
    Yim, S. 2013. The acquisitiveness of youth: CEO age and acquisition behavior. Journal of Financial Economics 108 (1): 250–273.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    會計學系
    112353016
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112353016
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[會計學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    301601.pdf2135KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    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 ©   - Feedback