政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/49564
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113822/144841 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51798089      線上人數 : 487
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 140.119/49564


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/49564


    題名: 董事會監督強度決定性因素之實證研究
    An empirical study on determinant factors of the intensiveness of board monitoring
    作者: 邱筱茜
    貢獻者: 汪泱若
    邱筱茜
    關鍵詞: 董事會監督功能
    總經理權力
    家族管理
    董事會特性
    Board monitoring
    CEO power
    Family management
    Board characteristics
    日期: 2008
    上傳時間: 2010-12-08 13:57:45 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 過去研究指出，增加董事會的開會次數將提高董事會的監督效能。本研究以董事會之開會次數為應變數，納入總經理特性、董事會特性與財務特性，探討影響董事會監督強度之決定性因素。本研究發現，總經理任期、總經理持股比例、董事會規模及前期經營績效對董事會監督強度存在顯著負向關係，而總經理與董事長為同一人對董事會的監督強度呈顯著正相關。進一步將樣本依總經理是否屬於控制家族成員，將樣本分成兩組樣本後，本研究發現，總經理之控制家族色彩會削弱總經理任期與董事會監督強度關聯性，但也具有增強總經理與董事長為同一人、董事會規模與董事會監督強度關聯性的效果。
    Prior researches argue that board meeting time is an important resource in improving the effectiveness of a board (e.g., Vafeas, 1999; Ryan et al., 2007). We use a Poisson model with the number of board meetings as the dependent variable and examine the determinant factors of the intensiveness of board monitoring. We find that the intensiveness of board monitoring is driven by CEO characteristics, board characteristics, and prior performance. CEO tenure, CEO ownership, board size and prior performance are significantly inversely related to the intensiveness of board monitoring. CEO/chair duality positively influences the number of meetings (significant at the 0.1 level). We analyze separately the relations between CEO characteristics, board characteristics, prior performance and meeting frequency for non-family CEOs and CEOs who are numbers of the controlling family, and use interaction term between independent proxies and the controlling family dummy variable to test for the significance of these differences. We find that the relation between the number of board meetings and CEO tenure is weaker when the CEO is a member of the founding family. We also find that the relations between the intensity of board monitoring and CEO duality, board size are stronger when the CEO is a member of the founding family.
    參考文獻: 工商時報，2006.4.7，和艦殷鑑 許士軍：如果可以 最好拒絕獨董聘任。
    林宗輝與蔡彥卿，2007，獨立董事兼職與盈餘管理關聯性之研究，二零零七當前會計理論與實務研討會論文集。
    林秀鳳與李建然，2008，家族管理、外部董事會連結與企業價值之關聯，二零零八會計理論與實務研討會論文集。
    林宛瑩、戚務君與許崇源，2008，公司治理對企業公司價值與信用評等之不對稱影響，二零零八會計理論與實務研討會論文集，國立政治大學會計系。
    李秀玲與李佩陵，2008，淺談「公開發行公司董事會會議事辦法」強化董事會功能及相關配套機制推動情形，證券暨期貨月刊，第二十六卷，第3期：5-27。
    周行一、陳錦村與陳坤宏，1996，家族企業、聯屬持股與公司價值之研究，中國財務學刊，第四卷，第1期：115-139。
    孫秀蘭，1995，董事會制度與經營績效之研究，國立台灣大學財務金融學系碩士論文。
    張正源，2005，獨立董監制度與關係人交易關係之研究，國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。
    張志裕，2005，董事會特性、資訊揭露與經營績效之關聯性研究，私立中原大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
    陳錫銘，2005，經營者更迭、繼任者特性與股東附加價值關係之研究，國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
    陳吉祥，2007，董事會組成及特性、總經理更換與公司績效變化，私立真理大學管理科學研究所在職碩士專班碩士論文。
    黃惠雯，2006，談證券交易法引進獨立董事及審計委員會等制度之緣起及重點，證券暨期貨月刊，第二十四卷，第3期：4-14。
    曾偉倫，2007，企業實施員工認股權制度與公司治理機制之關聯性研究，國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。
    傅迺婷，2003，二十一世紀公司治理的探索-台灣、美國比較性的觀點，私立中原大學會計學系碩士論文。
    劉連煜，2006，公開發行公司董事會、監察人之重大變革-證交法新修規範引進獨立董事與審計委員會之介紹與評論，證券櫃檯月刊，第116期（2月）：12-21。
    謝錦堂，2008，董事會功能理論模型之驗證：台灣上市公司董監事的觀點，管理學報，第二十六卷，第2期：127-144。
    薩門等著，2001，公司治理-哈佛商業評論精選，林宜賢與蔡慧菁譯，台北：天下遠見出版股份有限公司。 
    Adams, R. 2005. What do boards do? Evidence from board committee and director compensation data, Working paper, Stockholm School of Economics.
    Almazan, A. and J. Suarez. 2003. Entrenchment and severance pay in optimal governance structures. Journal of Finance 58(April): 519-547.
    Beasley, M. 1996. An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. Accounting Review 71 (October): 443-465.
    Bebchuk, L., J. Fried, and D. Walker. 2002. Managerial power and rent extraction in the design of executive compensation. University of Chicago Law Review 69: 751-846.
    Borokhovish, K., R. Parrino, and T. Trapani. 1996. Outside directors and CEO selection. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 31 (September): 337-355.
    Boyd, B. K. 1994. Board control and CEO compensation. Strategic Management Journal 15 (June): 335-344.
    Boyd, B. K. 1995. CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model. Strategic Management Journal 16 (November): 301-312.
    Brick, I. E. and N. K. Chidambaran. 2007. Board meetings, committee structure, and firm performance. Working Paper, Rutgers Business School.
    Brickley, J., J. Coles, and G. Jarrell. 1997. Leadership structure: Separating the CEO and chairman of the board. Journal of Corporate Finance 3 (June): 189-220.
    Byrne, J. 1996. Listen up: The national association of corporate directors’ new guidelines won’t tolerate inattentive, passive, uninformed board members. Business Week, November 25.
    Claessens, S., S. Djankov, and L. H. P. Lang. 2000. The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporation. Journal of Financial Economics 58 (1-2): 81-112.
    Coles, J. W., V. B. McWilliams, and N. Sen. 2001. An examination of the relationship of governance mechanisms to performance. Journal of Management 27: 23-50.
    Cotter, J., A. Shivdasani, and M. Zenner. 1997. Do independent directors enhance target shareholder wealth during tender offers? Journal of Financial Economics 43 (2): 195-218.
    Conger, J., D. Finegold, and E. III. Lawler. 1998. Appraising boardroom performance. Harvard Business Review 76: 136-148.
    Core, J., R. Holthausen, and D. Larcker. 1999. Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics 51 (3): 371-406.
    Dalton, D. R. and Kesner, I. F. 1987. Composition and CEO duality in boards of directors: An international perspective. Journal of International Business Studies 18:33-42.
    Davidson, W. N. III, C. Nemec, and D. L. Worrell. 2001. Succession planning vs. agency theory: A test of Harris and Helfats interpretation of plurality announcement market returns. Strategic Management Journal 22(February): 179-184.
    Denis, D. J.; D. K. Denis, and A. Sarin. 1997. Ownership structure and top executive turnover. Journal of Financial Economics 45 (2): 193-221.
    Davis, J., R. Schoorman, and L. Donaldson. 1997. Towards a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review 22: 20-47.
    DeFond, M. L. and C. W. Park. 1999. The effect of competition on CEO turnover. Journal of Accounting and Economics 27: 35-56.
    Erickson, J., Y. W. Park, J. Reising, and H. H. Shin. 2005. Board composition and firm value under concentrated ownership: The Canadian evidence. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal 13: 387-410.
    Fama, E. F. 1980. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy 88: 288-307.
    Fama, E. F. and M. C. Jensen. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics 26: 301-325.
    Fan, J. P. H. and T. J. Wong. 2002. Corporate ownership structure and the informativeness of accounting earnings in East Asia. Journal of Accounting and Economics 33: 401-425.
    Ferris, S., M. Jagannathan, and A. Pritchard. 2003. Too busy to mind the business? Monitoring by directors with multiple board appointments. Journal of Finance 58 (June): 1087-1111.
    Goayal, V. K. and C. W. Park. 2002. Board leadership structure and CEO turnover. Journal of Corporate Finance 8 (January): 49-66.
    Huson, M., R. Parrino, and L. Starks. 2001. Internal monitoring mechanisms and CEO turnover: A long term perspective. Journal of Finance 56 (December): 2265-2297.
    Hermalin, B. and M. Weisbach. 1998. Endogenously chosen boards of directors and their monitoring of the CEO. American Economic Review 88: 96-118.
    Harris, D. and C. Helfat. 1998. CEO duality, succession, capabilities and agency theory: Commentary and research. Strategic Management Journal 19 (September): 901-904.
    Huson, M., R. Parrino, and L. Starks. 2001. Internal monitoring mechanism and CEO turnover: A long term perspective. Journal of Finance 56 (December): 2265-2297.
    Jensen, M. 1993. The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance 48 (July): 831-880.
    Jiraporn, P., W. N. Davidson III, P. DaDalt, and Y. Ning. 2008. Too busy to show up? An analysis of directors’ absences. Working Paper, Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies.
    Johnson, J. L., C.M. Daily, and A. E. Ellstrand. 1996. Borads of directors: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management 22: 185-208.
    Laux, V. 2007. Board independence and CEO turnover. Journal of Accounting Research 46 (March): 137-171.
    Leuz, C., D. Nanda, and P. D. Wysocki. 2003. Earnings management investor protection: An international comparison. Journal of Financial Economics 69 (3): 507-527.
    Lipton, M. and J. Lorsch. 1992. A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Business Lawyer 48(1): 59-77.
    Lorsch, J. and E. MacIver. 1989. Pawns or potentates. Harvard Business School Press.
    Morck, R., A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1988. Managerial ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics 20 (1-2): 293-315.
    McConnell, J. and S. Henri. 1990. Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value. Journal of Financial Economics 27 (2): 595-612.
    Maury, B. 2006. Corporate performance, corporate governance and top executive turnover in Finland. European Financial Management 12 (2): 221-248.
    Mizruchi, M. S. 1983. Who controls whom? An examination of the relation between management and boards of directors in large American corporations. Academy of Management Review 8: 426-435.
    National Association of Corporate Directors. 1996. Report of the NACD blue ribbon commission on director professionalism. November.
    Perry, T. 2000. Incentive compensation for outside directors and CEO turnover. Working Paper, Indiana University.
    Parrino, R. 1997. CEO turnover and outside succession: A cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Financial Economics 46 (2): 165-197.
    Pearce, J. A. and S. A. Zahra. 1992. Boards of compensation from a strategic contingency perspective. Journal of Management Studies 29: 53-58.
    Rüdiger, F., L. Angie, and M. S. René. 2008. Why do firms appoint CEOs as outside directors? Working Paper, Ohio State University.
    Ryan, H. and R. Wiggins. 2002. Whose is in whose pocket? Director compensation, bargaining power, and board independence. Working paper.
    Ryan, H. and R. Wiggins. 2004. Whose is in whose pocket? Director compensation, board independence, and barriers to effective monitoring. Journal of Financial Economics 73 (3): 497-524.
    Ryan, H., L. Wang, and R. Wiggins. 2007. Learning, CEO power and board-of-director monitoring: Evidence from CEO tenure. Working Paper, Georgia State University.
    Shivdasani, A. 1993. Board composition, ownership structure, and hostile takeovers. Journal of Accounting and Economics 16: 167-198.
    Shivdasani, A. and D. Yermack. 1999. CEO involvement in the selection of new board members: an empirical analysis. Journal of Finance 54 (October): 1829-1853.
    Shivdasani, A. and E. M. Fich. 2006. Are busy boards effective monitors? Journal of Finance 61 (April): 689-724.
    Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny. 1997. A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance 52 (June): 737-783.
    Tsai, W. H., J. H. Hung, Y. C. Kuo, and L. Kuo. (2006). CEO tenure in Taiwanese family and nonfamily firms: An agency theory perspective. Family Business Review 19 (March): 11-28.
    Vafeas, N. 1999. Board meeting frequency and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics 53 (January): 113-142.
    Warner, J.B., R. L. Watts, and K. H. Wruck. 1988. Stock prices and top management changes. Journal of Financial Economics 20 (January-March): 461-492.
    Weisbach, M. 1988. Outside directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics 20 (January-March): 431-460.
    Yermack, D. 1996. Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics 40 (2): 185-211.
    Yeh, Y. H., T. S. Lee, and T. Woidtke. 2001. Family control and corporate governance: Evidence from Taiwan. International review of finance 2: 21-48.
    Zahra, S. A. and J. A. Pearce. 1989. Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A revise and integrated model. Journal of Management: 291-334.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    會計研究所
    96353005
    97
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096353005
    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
    300501.pdf181KbAdobe PDF2736檢視/開啟
    300502.pdf248KbAdobe PDF2759檢視/開啟
    300503.pdf300KbAdobe PDF2788檢視/開啟
    300504.pdf120KbAdobe PDF2784檢視/開啟
    300505.pdf197KbAdobe PDF22168檢視/開啟
    300506.pdf216KbAdobe PDF23965檢視/開啟
    300507.pdf228KbAdobe PDF21946檢視/開啟
    300508.pdf211KbAdobe PDF21225檢視/開啟
    300509.pdf163KbAdobe PDF21839檢視/開啟
    300510.pdf143KbAdobe PDF21609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