Basic Search / Detailed Display

Author: 童靜文
Ching-Wen Tung
Thesis Title: 以公司生命週期觀點探討智慧資本調整機制在股權結構與公司績效關聯性之角色
Exploration of the role of intellectual capital as a moderator in the correlation between ownership structure and corporate performance through a corporate life cycle perspective
Advisor: 梁瓊如
Chiung-Ju Liang
Committee: 王孔政
Kung-Jeng Wang
陳俊男
Chun-Nan Chen
簡雪芳
Hsueh-Fang Chien
林瑞青
Ruei-Cing Lin
Degree: 博士
Doctor
Department: 管理學院 - 財務金融研究所
Graduate Institute of Finance
Thesis Publication Year: 2018
Graduation Academic Year: 106
Language: 英文
Pages: 49
Keywords (in Chinese): 股權結構公司績效智慧資本生命週期階段層級程序分析法
Keywords (in other languages): ownership structure, corporate performance, intellectual capital, life cycle stage, analytical hierarchical process method
Reference times: Clicks: 445Downloads: 0
Share:
School Collection Retrieve National Library Collection Retrieve Error Report
  • 本研究藉由生命週期觀念的重要性,及智慧資本所提供價值創造之相關資訊,來檢定股權結構與公司績效的關係及關係的持續性。本研究使用非平衡縱橫資料樣本,以台灣上市630家公司2002年到2011年的4,313個年觀察值,採用動態的觀點來發展股權結構與公司績效關係的持續性;以相關專家學者之諮詢意見,應用層級程序分析法剖析智慧資本價值趨動因子之間的重要性及優先性,選擇優先次序居前的指標,配合股權結構與公司價值,進行進一步分析。實證研究發現股權與公司績效的關係上具有潛在非線性關係,證據顯示股權對績效的影響是一種公司生命週期的函數,特別是在生命週期的成熟階段,以及高科技產業特別明顯。然而,股權對公司績效的影響也同時受到期間效應的影響,隱含不只是公司生命週期的一個函數,也是期間效應的一個函數。更重要的是,透過動態設計方式,智慧資本的觀念及不同產業屬性的股權機制,在不同生命週期過程中,提供不同的價值創造有關資訊。為了穩健起見,進一步把股權的衡量變數落後一期,以減緩潛在同時性的問題。整體而言,本研究主要的貢獻,在於擴大公司生命週期的重要性,並由此更細緻地評估股權與公司績效的影響。


    This study is to verify the relationship between ownership structure and corporate performance, as well as the persistence of the relationship, by means of the importance of life cycle concept and the relevant information of value creation provided by intellectual capital. This study uses an unbalanced panel data sample of 4,313 annual observation data of 630 Taiwan listed companies over the period of 2002 to 2011. Dynamic perspective is adopted to develop the persistence of the relationship between ownership structure and corporate performance. Analytical Hierarchical Process Method is applied to analyze the importance and priorities of the value driving factors of intellectual capital, according to the advice from relevant experts and scholars. The indicator of top priority is selected to undergo further analysis in coordination with ownership structure and corporate value. Empirical study suggests that potentially non-linear relationship exists in the relationship between ownership and corporate performance. Evidence demonstrates that the impact of ownership on performance is a kind of corporate life cycle function, especially in the maturity stage as well as in the high-tech industry where it is particularly obvious. However, the impact of ownership on corporate performance is affected by period effect as well, implying that it is a function of not only corporate life cycle, but also period effect. More importantly, the concept of intellectual capital and the ownership mechanism of different industry attributes provide different information about value creation in different life cycle processes through dynamic design approach. For robustness, the measured variables of ownership are further lagged by a period to alleviate potential endogeneity issue. Overall, this study mainly contributes to extending the importance of corporate life cycle, and through this, more finely assessing the effect of ownership and the impact on corporate performance.

    CONTENTS Chinese Abstract....................................................... I English Abstract....................................................... .II Acknowledgements....................................................... .IV Contents............................................................... .V Chart Index.............................................................VII Chapter 1. Introduction................................................ 1 Chapter 2. Literature Review and Research Hypotheses..................... 6 2.1. Literature Review............................................. .6 2.2. Research Hypotheses............................................ 9 Chapter 3. Research Design, Variable Development and Model Design........12 3.1. Research Design................................................12 3.2. Variable Development and Model Design........................ 22 Chapter 4. Analysis of empirical results................................ 25 4.1 Analysis of the priorities of correlation between intellectual capital perspectives and performance.............................................25 4.2 Major regression results........................................26 4.3 Robustness of results........................................ 35 Chapter 5. Conclusion....................................................39 References...............................................................43

    References
    1.Agrawal, A., & Knoeber, C. R. (1996), "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders." Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3), 377-397.
    2.Amir, E., & Lev B. (1996), "Value-relevance of Nonfinancial Information: The Wireless Communications Industry." Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22(1-3), 3-30.
    3.Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. ( 2003), "Founding-family Ownership and Firm Performance: Evidence from the S&P 500." Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301-1328.
    4.Anthony, J. H., & Ramesh, K. (1992), "Association between Accounting Performance Measures and Stock Prices: A Test of the Life Cycle Hypothesis." Journal of Accounting and Economics, 15(2), 203-227.
    5.Barnhart, S. W., & Rosenstein, S. (1998), "Board Composition, Managerial Ownership, and Firm Performance: An Empirical Analysis." The Financial Review, 33(4), 1-16.
    6.Berle, A. A., & Means, G. G. C. (1932), The modern corporation and private property. Transaction Books.
    7.Black, E. L. (1998), "Life-cycle Impacts on the Incremental Value-relevance of Earnings and Cash Flow Measures." The Journal of Financial Statement Analysis, 4(1), 40-56.
    8.Bontis, N. (1998), "Intellectual Capital: An Exploratory Study that Develops Measures and Models." Management Decision, 36(2), 63-76.
    9.Bukh, P. N., Larsen, H. T. & Mouritsen, J. (2001), "Constructing Intellectual Capital Statements." Sc&inavian Journal of Management, 17(1), 87-108.
    10.Chan, S. H., Martin, J. D., & Kensinger, J. W. (1990), "Corporate Research and Development Expenditures and Share Value." Journal of Financial Economics, 26(2), 255-276.
    11.Chen, C. R., Guo, W., & Mande, V. (2003), "Managerial Ownership and Firm Valuation: Evidence from Japanese Firms." Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 11(3), 267-283.
    12.Cho, M. H. (1998), "Ownership Structure, Investment, and the Corporate Value: An Empirical Analysis." Journal of Financial Economics, 47(1), 103-121.
    13.Davies, J. R., Hillier, D., & McColgan, P. (2005), "Ownership Structure, Managerial Behavior and Corporate Value." Journal of Corporate Finance, 11(4), 645-660.
    14.Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985), "The Structure of Corporate Ownership: Causes and Consequences." The Journal of Political Economy, 93(6), 1155-1177.
    15.Demsetz, H., & Villalonga, B. (2001), "Ownership Structure and Corporate Performance." Journal of Corporate Finance, 7(3), 209-233.
    16.Deng, Z., Lev, B., & Narin, F. (1999), "Science and Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance." Financial Analysts Journal, 55(3), 20-32.
    17.Dikmen, I., & Birgonul, M. T. (2006), "An Analytic Hierarchy Process Based Model for Risk and Opportunity Assessment of International Construction Projects." Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 33(1), 58-68.
    18.Dodge, H. R., & Robbins, J. E. (1992), "An Empirical Investigation of the Organizational Life Cycle Model for Small Business Development and Survival." Journal of Small Business Management, 30(1), 27-37.
    19.Dzinkowske, R. (2000), "The Measurement and Management of Intellectual Capital: An Introduction." Management Accounting, London, 78(2), 32-36.
    20.Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. S. (1997). Intellectual capital: realizing your company\'s true value by finding its hidden brainpower.
    21.Faccio, M., & Lasfer, M. A. (2000), Do Occupational Pension Funds Monitor Companies in which They Hold Large Stakes?" Journal of Corporate Finance, 6(1), 71-110.
    22.Fan, J. P., & Wong, T. J. (2002), "Corporate ownership structure and the informativeness of accounting earnings in East Asia." Journal of accounting and economics, 33(3), 401-425.
    23.Himmelberg, C. P., Hubbard, R. G., & Palia, D. (1999), "Understanding the Determinants of Managerial Ownership and the Link between Ownership and Performance." Journal of Financial Economics, 53(3), 353-384.
    24.Holderness, C. G., Kroszner, R. S., & Sheehan, D. P. (1999), "Were the Good Old Days that Good? Changes in Managerial Stock Ownership Since the Great Depression." The Journal of Finance, 54(2), 435-469.
    25.Hudson, C. D., Jahera, J. S., & Lloyd, W. P. (1992), "Further evidence on the relationship between ownership and performance." Financial Review, 27(2), 227-239.
    26.Hurwitz, J., Lines, S., Montgomery, B., & Schmidt, J. (2002). The Linkage Between Management Practices, Intangibles Performance and Stock Returns." Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(1), 51-61.
    27.Jensen, G. R., Solberg, D. P., & Zorn, T. S. (1992), "Simultaneous Determination of Insider Ownership, Debt, and Dividend Policies." Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 27(02), 247-263.
    28.Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976), "Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure." Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
    29.Jensen, M. C., & Ruback, R. S. (1983), "The Market for Corporate Control: The Scientific Evidence." Journal of Financial economics, 11(1), 5-50.
    30.Johanson, U., Märtensson, M., & Skoog, M. (2001a), "Measuring to Understand Intangible Performance Drivers." European Accounting Review, 10(3), 407-437.
    31.Johanson, U., Märtensson, M., & Skoog, M. (2001b), "Mobilizing Change Through the Management Control of Intangibles." Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26(7), 715-733.
    32.Hai-Chin Yu (1994), “The Relationship between Insider Ownership Structure and Financing Strategy” 8, 13(2), 109-131.
    33.Hudson, C. D., Jahera, J. S., & Lloyd, W. P. (1992), "Further evidence on the relationship between ownership and performance." Financial Review, 27(2), 227-239.
    34.Kamath, G. B. (2008), "Intellectual capital and corporate performance in Indian pharmaceutical industry." Journal of Intellectual Capital, 9(4), 684-704.
    35.Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992), "The Balanced Scorecard: Measures That Drive Performance." Harvard Business Review, January-February, 71-79.
    36.Kapopoulos, P., & Lazaretou, S. (2007), "Corporate Ownership Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence From Greek Firms." Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(2), 144-158.
    37.Knight, D. J. (1999), "Performance Measures for Increasing Intellectual Capital." Strategy & Leadership, 27(2), 22-27.
    38.Lewis, V. L., & Churchill, N. C. (1983), "The Five Stages of Small Business Growth." Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 30-50.
    39.Liang, C. J., & Yao, M. L. (2005), The Value-Relevance of Financial and Nonfinancial Information—Evidence from Taiwan’s Information Electronics Industry." Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 24(2), 135-157.
    40.Lichtenberg, F. R., & Pushner, G. M. (1994)' "Ownership Structure and Corporate Performance in Japan." Japan and the World Economy, 6(3), 239-261.
    41.Loderer, C., & Martin, K. (1997), "Executive Stock Ownership and Performance Tracking Faint Traces." Journal of Financial Economics, 45(2), 223-255.
    42.Mavridis, D. G. (2005), "Intellectual Capital Performance Determinants and Globalization Status of Greek Listed Firms." Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(1), 127-140.
    43.McConnell, J. J., & Servaes, H. (1990). "Additional Evidence on Equity Ownership and Corporate Value." Journal of Financial economics, 27(2), 595-612.
    44.McConnell, J. J., Servaes, H., & Lins, K. V. (2008), "Changes in Insider Ownership and Changes in the Market Value of the Firm." Journal of Corporate Finance, 14(2), 92-106.
    45.Moh'd, M. A., Perry, L. G., & Rimbey, J. N. (1998), "The Impact of Ownership Structure On Corporate Debt Policy: a Time‐Series Cross‐Sectional Analysis." Financial Review, 33(3), 85-98.
    46.Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1988), "Management Ownership and Market Valuation: An Empirical Analysis." Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 293-315.
    47.Myers, S. C. (1977), "Determinants of Corporate Borrowing." Journal of Financial Economics, 5(2), 147-175.
    48.Oswald, S. L., & Jahera, J. S. (1991), "The Influence of Ownership on Performance: An Empirical Study." Strategic Management Journal, 12(4), 321-326.
    49.Podvezko, V. (2009), "Application of AHP Technique." Journal of Business Economics and Management, (2), 181-189.
    50.Pound, J. (1988), "Proxy Contests and the Efficiency of Shareholder Oversight." Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 237-265.
    51.Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P., & Finkelstein, S. (1996), "Leveraging Intellect." The Academy of Management Executive, 10(3), 7-27.
    52.Ramaswamy, V., Ueng, C. J., & Carl, L. (2008), "Corporate Governance Characteristics of Growth Companies: An Empirical Study." Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 7(1), 21-23.
    53.Roos, G., & Roos, J. (1997), "Measuring Your Company's Intellectual Performance." Long range planning, 30(3), 413-426.
    54.Saaty, T. L. (2005), "The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Processes for the Measurement of Intangible Criteria and for Decision-Making." In Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys,345-405.
    55.Stein, E. W., & Ahmad, N. (2009), Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to Construct a Measure of the Magnitude of Consequences Component of Moral Intensity." Journal of Business Ethics, 89(3), 391-407.
    56.Steiner, T. L. (1996), "A Reexaminaron of the Relationships between Ownership Structure, Firm Diversification, and Tobin's Q." Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 35(4), 39-48.
    57.Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005), "The Influence of Intellectual Capital on the Types of Innovative Capabilities." Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 450-463.
    58.Tseng, C. Y., & James Goo, Y. J. (2005), "Intellectual Capital and Corporate Value in an Emerging Economy: Empirical Study of Taiwanese Manufacturers." R&D Management, 35(2), 187-201.
    59.Van Buren, M. E. (1999), "A Yard Stick for Knowledge Management." Training & development, 53(5), 71-78.
    60.Vance, S. (1995), "Inside or outside directors: Is there really a difference." Across The Board, 27, 15-17.
    61.Wallman, S. M. (1995), "The Future of Accounting and Disclosure in an Evolving World: The Need for Dramatic Change." Accounting Horizons, 9(3), 81-91.
    62.Yermack, D. (1996), "Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors." Journal of financial economics, 40(2), 185-211.

    無法下載圖示 Full text public date 2023/01/15 (Intranet public)
    Full text public date This full text is not authorized to be published. (Internet public)
    Full text public date This full text is not authorized to be published. (National library)
    QR CODE