English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113648/144635 (79%)
Visitors : 51618770      Online Users : 526
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 140.119/48910
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/48910


    Title: R&D對內部董事與經營績效之關聯性影響
    R&D, Inside Directors, and Firm Performance
    Authors: 游順合
    Yu, Shun Ho
    Contributors: 林宛瑩
    游順合
    Yu, Shun Ho
    Keywords: R&D
    內部董事
    經營績效
    Date: 2009
    Issue Date: 2010-12-08 01:53:03 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究同時考量代理理論及資源依賴理論之觀點,認為內部董事雖因任職於公司而造成其獨立性受損,監督誘因較低,但內部董事因具備有企業特定知識與內部有用資訊,故可有效評估策略並作成適當決策,尤以在高R&D投入之企業中,更需要具備企業特定知識之人,因此,本研究探討R&D支出與內部董事席次比率間之關係,並進一步分析R&D對內部董事與經營績效關聯性之影響。
    實證結果顯示,高R&D投入與內部董事席次比率間呈顯著正相關,表示在R&D密度高的公司中,其公司的董事會中會有較高的內部董事席次。在高R&D密度的公司,內部董事席次比率與公司經營績效呈顯著正向關係。表示在高研發投入公司,公司特定專業知識之需求較高,內部董事資源提供之功能強於監督之需求,因而有較多內部董事席次之公司會有較佳之經營績效。
    This paper considered both agency theory and resource-dependence theory. Although hired by the firm, inside directors may have lower monitoring incentives, they have firm-specific knowledge and useful information and can evaluate strategies effectively and make better decisions. Especially in those high-R&D firms need firm-specific knowledge, therefore, this paper examines the relationship between R&D and the percentage of inside director, and also examines the relationship between inside director and firm performance in high-R&D firms.
    The empirical results finds that R&D and inside director are significantly positive. It shows that high-R&D firms will have higher percentage of inside directors in their boards. And the empirical results also finds that in high-R&D firms, they will have more specific professional knowledge need, and inside directors’ resource-provision function is stronger than the monitoring function, therefore, firms with higher percentage of inside directors will have better firm performance.
    Reference: 李馨蘋、莊宗憲,2007,公司治理機制與公司績效之實證研究,東吳經濟商學學報,第五十七期,p.1-27。
    林美倫,2007,研發支出對經營績效及股權評價影響之研究,台南科大學報第26 期,p.115-134。
    邱毅、張訓華,股權結構﹑董事會組成與企業財務績效,台北市銀行月刊,第二十二卷,第五期,民國八十年五月。
    洪世馨,2003,設立外部董事與企業經營績效之關係,成功大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
    許戍,2002,研究發展、廣告支出與企業經營績效關聯性之研究,政治大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
    歐進士,1998,我國企業研究發展與經營績效關聯之實證研究,中山管理評論,第六卷第二期,pp.357-386。
    Aboody, D., and B. Lev. 2001. R&D productivity in the chemical industry. Working papers. New York University.
    Baysinger, B., and H. Butler. 1985. Corporate governance and the board of directors: performance effects of changes in board composition. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 1: 101–124.
    Baysinger, B., and R. Hoskisson. 1990. The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: effects of corporate strategy. Academy of Management Review 15: 72–87.
    Baysinger, B. D., R. H. Kosnik, and T. A. Turk. 1991. Effects of Board and Ownership Structure on Corporate R&D Strategy. Academy of Management Journal 34: 205-214.
    Becker, G. 1964. Human capital. New York: Columbia Univer-sity Press.
    Bhagat, S., and B.S. Black. 1996. Do independent directors matter? Working paper. Center for Law Economic studies, Columbia University, New York.
    Bhagat, S., and B. Black. 2002. The Non-Correlation Between Board Independence and Long-Term Firm Performance. Journal of Corporation Law 27: 231-273.
    Boyd, B. 1990. Corporate linkages and organizational envi-ronment: A test of the resource dependence model. Strategic Management Journal 11: 419-430.
    Brenner, M. S., and B. M. Rushton. 1989. Sales Growth and R&D in the Chemical Industry. Research Technology Management 32(2): 8-15.
    Brickley, J.A. and C.M. James, 1987. The Takeover Market, Corporate Board Composition, and Ownership Structure: The case of banking. Journal of Law Economics 30: 161-180.
    Brickley, J., J. Coles, and R. Terry. 1994. Outside directors and the adoption of poison pills. Journal of Financial Economics 35: 371–390.
    Burkart, M., D. Gromb, and F. Panunzi. 1997. Large shareholders, monitoring, and the value of the firm. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(3): 693-728.
    Burt, R. 1980. Cooptive corporate actor networks: A reconsideration of interlocking directorates involving American manufacturing. Administrative Science Quarterly 25: 557-581.
    Bushee, B. J. 1998. The Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment Behavior. Accounting Review 73(3): 305-333.
    Chan, S. H., J. D. Martin, and J. W. Kensinger. 1990. Corporate research and development expenditures and share value. Journal of Financial Economics 26(2): 255-276.
    Claessens, S., S. Djankov, J. P. H. Fan, and L. H. P. Lang. 2002. Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholders. Journal of Finance 57: 2741-2771
    Coleman, J. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94(Supplement): S95-S120.
    Coles, J.H., D. D. Naveen, and L. Naveen. 2008. Does one size fit all? Journal of Financial Economics 87(2): 329-356.
    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: 371-406.
    Dalton, D. R., and I.F. Kesner, 1987.Composition and CEO duality in Boards of Directors: An Internaational Persective. Journal of International Busienss Studies 18: 33-42.
    Dalton, D., and C. Daily. 2001. Director stock compensation: An invitation to a conspicuous conflict of interest? Business Ethics Quarterly 11: 89-108.
    Daily, C. 1995. The relationship between board composition and leadership structure and bankruptcy reorganization outcomes. Journal of Management 21: 1041-1056.
    Dalton, D., C. Daily, J. Johnson, and A. Ellstrand. 1999. Number of directors and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal 42(6): 674-686.
    Davidson, W. N., T. Pilger, and A. Szakmary. 1998. Golden Parachutes, Board and Committee Composition, and Shareholder Wealth. The Financial Review 33: 17-32.
    Eisenberg, T., S. Sundgren, and M. Wells. 1998. Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms. Journal of Financial Economics 48(1): 35-54.
    Fama, E. 1980. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy 88(1): 288-307.
    Fama, E., and M. Jensen. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics 26(2): 301-325.
    Haunschild, P., and C. Beckman. 1998. When do interlocks matter? Alternate sources of information and interlock influence. Administrative Science Quarterly 43: 815-844.
    Hill, C. W. L., and S. A. Snell. 1988. External control, corporate strategy, and firm performance in research-intensive industries. Strategic Management Journal 9(6): 577-590.
    Hillman, A., G. Keim, and R. Luce. 2001. Board composition and stakeholder performance: Do stakeholder directors make a difference? Business and Society 40: 295-314.
    Hillman J. and T. Dalziel. 2003. Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review 28(3): 383-396.
    Hula, G. 1989. Intangible Capital, Market Share and Corporate Strategy. Applied Economics 14: 15-24.
    Jacobs, J. 1965. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Penguin.
    Jensen, M., and W. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Manage-rial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305-360.
    Jensen, M. 1986. Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance and Takeovers. American Economic Review 76(2): 323-329.
    Jensen, M. 1993. The modern industrial revolution, exit and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance 48(3): 831-880.
    Judge, W., and C. Zeithaml. 1992. Institutional and strategic choice perspectives on board involvement in the strate-gic decision process. Academy of Management Journal 35: 755-794.
    Kesner, I. F. 1987. Directors Stock Ownership and Organization Performance:An Investigation of Fortune 500 Companies. Journal of Management13(3):499-507.
    Klein, L. R. 1998. Evaluating the potential of interactive media through a new lens: Search versus experience goods. Journal of Business Research 41: 195-203.
    La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and RW Vishny. 2002. Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation. Journal of Finance 57(3): 1147-1170.
    Lee. C.I., S. Rosenstein, N. Rangan, and W.N. Davidson Ⅲ. 1992. Board composition and shareholder wealth: The case of management buyouts. Financial Management 21: 58-72.
    Lev, B., and T. Sougiannis. 1996. The capitalization, amortization and value relevance of R&D. Journal of Accounting and Economics 21(2): 107-138.
    Lipton, M., and J. Lorsch. 1992. A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Business Lawyer 48(1): 59-77.
    Lorsch, J., E. MacIver. 1989. Pawns or Potentates: The Reality of America’s Corporate Boards. Harvard Business School Press, Boston,MA.
    Mintzberg, H. 1983. Power in and around organizations. En-gelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Mishra, C. S., and J.F. Nielsen. 2000. Board independence and compensation policies in large bank holding companies. Financial Management 29(3): 51-70.
    Mizruchi, M., and L. Stearns. 1988. A longitudinal study of the formation of interlocking directorates. Administrative Science Quarterly 33: 194-210.
    Morck, R., A. Shleifer and R. W. Vishny. 1988. Management Ownership and Market Valuation: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Financial Economics 20(1-2): 293-315.
    Pearce J.A., and S. A. Zahra. 1992. Board composition from a strategic contingency perspective. Journal of Management Studies29(4): 411-438.
    Pfeffer, J. 1972. Size and composition of corporate boards of directors: the organization and its environment. Administrative Science Quarterly 17: 218-229.
    Pfeffer, J., Salancik, G., 1978. The External Control of Organizations: a Resource Dependence Perspective. Harper and Row, New York.
    Rosenstein, S.. and J. G. Wyatt. 1990. Outside directors, board independence and shareholders wealth. Journal of Financial Economics 26: 175-191.
    Selznick, P. 1949. TVA and the grass roots: A study of the sociology of formal organizations. New York: Harper & Row.
    Singh, J., R. House, and D. Tucker. 1986. Organizational change and organizational mortality. Administrative Science Quarterly 32: 367-386.
    Sougiannis, T. 1994. The accounting based valuation of corporate R&D. The Accounting Review 69(1):44-68.
    Weisbach, M. 1988. Outside directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics 20, 421–460.
    White, H. 1965. Management conflict and sociometric struc-ture. American Journal of Sociology 67: 185-199.
    Williamson, O. 1975. Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications. Free Press, New York.
    Williamson, O. 1984. Corporate governance. Yale Law Journal 93: 1197-1229.
    Weisbach, M. 1988. Outside directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics 20(1-2): 421-460.
    Yermack, D. 1996. Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics 40: 185–212.
    Zhang, J. 2008. The contracting benefits of accounting conservatism to lenders and borrowers. Journal of Accounting and Economics 45(January): 27-54.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    會計研究所
    97353032
    98
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097353032
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[會計學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    There are no files associated with this item.



    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