Basic Search / Detailed Display

Author: 黃晉岳
Jim-Yuh Huang
Thesis Title: 運用混合式公司治理決策模型強化金融控股公司永續經營
Corporate Governance of Financial Holding Companies for Boosting Business Sustainability by Using a Hybrid Decision-Making Model
Advisor: 謝劍平
Joseph C.P. Shieh
Committee: 曾國雄
Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng
陳俊男
Chun-Nan Chen
沈高毅
Kao-Yi Shen
謝劍平
Joseph C.P. Shieh
劉建浩
James J.H.Liou
Degree: 博士
Doctor
Department: 管理學院 - 管理研究所
Graduate Institute of Management
Thesis Publication Year: 2019
Graduation Academic Year: 107
Language: 英文
Pages: 80
Keywords (in Chinese): 公司治理公司永續經營多準則決策分析模型決策實驗室分析法結合決策實驗室分析法的網路層級分析法模糊理論
Keywords (in other languages): corporate governance, business sustainability, multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM), decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL, VIKOR; DEMATEL-based analytical network process (DANP), fuzzy set theory
Reference times: Clicks: 397Downloads: 10
Share:
School Collection Retrieve National Library Collection Retrieve Error Report

中文摘要
雖然公司治理的重要性已在全球金融市場和學術研究中得到廣泛認可,但如何設計一個實用的評鑑系統在相對發展上仍處於起步階段。
本研究試圖改進自2014年以來台灣證券交易所(TWSE)建立的公司治理評鑑系統(CGES),目前的CGES在其複雜的設計中存在一些爭議性問題(例如,它包括80多個指標分屬於不同類型) ,為了解決這些問題,本研究邀請了10名資深領域專家從CGES的四個構面中萃取13個基本準則,專家們都曾在銀行或金融領域服務超過30年,有些專家來自學術界和政府部門,還有一些則是金融控股公司的執行長。此外,本研究還整合了多準則決策分析(MCDM)模型(例如:決策實驗室分析法(DEMATEL),層級分析法(AHP),修正的VIKOR,結合DEMATEL的網路層級分析法(DANP))以及模糊評價技術來對挑選的實證公司進行公司治理排名。最終排名結果與2017年CGES公布的版本呈現完全一致的情況ㄌ。
本研究還進行了另外的實證以確保結果的穩健性。新設計的混合式公司治理決策模型不僅改良有助於排名決策,還可協助企業探討可行的行動方案,以分析為基礎來強化公司治理。本實證結果不只能增強企業對公司治理的理解,亦能強化金融控股公司永續經營。


ABSTRACT
Although the importance of corporate governance has been widely recognized in global financial markets and academic research, how to design a practical evaluation system has not been relatively developed. This paper attempts to improve the Corporate Governance Evaluation System (CGES) established by the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TWSE) since 2014. The current CGES has some controversial issues in its complex design (for example, it includes more than 80 indicators in different types). In order to solve these problems, this study invited 10 senior domain experts to extract 13 basic criteria from the CGES in four dimensions. They have served in the banking or financial field for more than 30 years, some experts come from academia and government departments and others are CEOs of financial holding companies. In addition, the study also integrates multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods (i.e., decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL), analytic hierarchy process (AHP), modified VIKOR, DEMATEL-based analytical network process (DANP)) and the fuzzy evaluation technique to rank the exemplary companies. The final ranking is consistent with the 2017 CGES release. Additional evidence was provided in this study to ensure the robustness of the results. The newly designed model not only helps in ranking decisions, but also supports companies to explore viable action plans to strengthen analytics-based corporate governance. These empirical results enhance the understanding of corporate governance and help achieve sustainable business of financial holding companies.

Content 中文摘要 I ABSTRACT II Acknowledgements III List of figures VII List of tables VIII Chapter I Introduction 1 Chapter II Literature Review 8 2.1. Mainstream Research Topics of Corporate Governance Covered in The CGES 8 2.2. Impacts of Corporate Governance to Financial Institutions 12 2.3. MCDM Methods Adopted in This Corporate Governance Evaluation Model 13 Chapter III Combined VIKOR-DANP Decision-Making Model for Corporate Governance Evaluation 15 3.2. DEMATEL Technique and DEMATEL-Based ANP (DANP) Method 17 3.3. Modified VIKOR Method for Aggregating Performance Scores 20 3.4. The Advantages and Weaknesses of the Combined DEMATEL-Based ANP and Modified VIKOR 22 Chapter IV Empirical Case Study for Evaluating Five Financial Holding Companies in Taiwan… 24 4.1. Framework and the Latest Developments of Corporate Governance Evaluation System (CGES) 24 4.2. Data Description 24 4.3. Select critical criteria by the Delphi method 26 4.4. Forming a hybrid model by the DEMATEL technique and the DANP method 31 4.5. Integrating DANP influential weights and modified-VIKOR for performance ranking 33 Chapter V Result and Discussions 38 Chapter VI Concluding Remarks and Future Research Direction 42 Appendix A (Indicators of CGES) 44 Appendix B (DEMATEL and DANP Calculations) 53 Appendix C (Crisp and Fuzzy Semantic Evaluations of the Five Companies) 55 References 60

References
1. Shleifer, A.; Vishny, R.W. A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 1997, 52, 737–783, doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb04820.x.
2. Claessens, S.; Yurtoglu, B.B. Corporate governance in emerging markets: A survey. Emerging markets review, 2013, 15, 1–33, doi:10.1016/j.ememar.2012.03.002.
3. Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2002, 11, 130–141, doi:10.1002/bse.323.
4. Dittmar, A., Mahrt-Smith, J., & Servaes, H. International corporate governance and corporate cash holdings. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 2003, 38(1), 111-133. doi: 10.2307/4126766.
5. Belev, B. Institutional investors in Bulgarian corporate governance reform: obstacles or facilitators? Journal of World Business, 2003, 38(4), 361-374. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2003.08.021.
6. Cheung, Y. L., Jiang, P., Limpaphayom, P., & Tong, L. U. Does corporate governance matter in China? China Economic Review, 2008, 19(3), 460-479. doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2008.01.002.
7. Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. Information disclosure and corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 2012, 67(1), 195-233. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2011.01710.x.
8. Kim, Y., Lee, J., & Yang, T. Corporate transparency and firm performance: Evidence from venture firms listed on the Korean stock market. Asia‐Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 2013, 42(4), 653-688. doi: 10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2013.05.005.
9. Durnev, A., & Kim, E. H. To steal or not to steal: Firm attributes, legal environment, and valuation. The Journal of Finance, 2005, 60(3), 1461-1493. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00767.x.
10. Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 2011, 103(3), 351-383. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-0869-y.
11. Aebi, V., Sabato, G., & Schmid, M. Risk management, corporate governance, and bank performance in the financial crisis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2012, 36(12), 3213-3226. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.10.020.
12. CGES Official Website.
Available online:
http://cgc.twse.com.tw/evaluationCorp/listEn (accessed on 1/June, 2018).
13. OECD Principles of Corporate Governance 2004, Online Report.
Available online: http://www.oecd.org/corporate/ca/corporategovernanceprinciples/31557724.pdf (accessed on 1/Feb, 2018).
14. Simon, H.A. Theories of bounded rationality. Decision and Organization, 1972, 1, 161–176.
15. Okoli, C.; Pawlowski, S.D. The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Information & management, 2004, 42, 15–29, doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002.
16. Gabus, A.; Fontela, E. World Problems, an Invitation to Further Thought within the Framework of DEMATEL; A Technical Report; Battelle Geneva Research Center: Columbus, OH, USA, 1972.
17. Jeng, D.J.F.; Tzeng, G.H. Social influence on the use of clinical decision support systems: Revisiting the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology by the fuzzy DEMATEL technique. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2012, 62, 819–828, doi:10.1016/j.cie.2011.12.016.
18. Zavadskas, E.K.; Antucheviciene, J.; Turskis, Z.; Adeli, H. Hybrid multiple-criteria decision-making methods: A review of applications in engineering. Sci. Iran. Transactions A: Civil Engineering, 2016, 23, 1–20, doi:10.24200/sci.2016.2093.
19. Shen, K.Y.; Tzeng, G.H. Advances in Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainability: Modeling and Applications. Sustainability, 2018, 10, 600, doi:10.3390/su10051600.
20. Saaty, T.L. Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process: Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks; RWS Publication: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2005.
21. Tzeng, G.H.; Shen, K.Y. New Concepts and Trends of Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision Making; CRC Press (Taylor & Francis Group): Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017.
22. Opricovic, S.; Tzeng, G.H. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 2004, 156, 445–455, doi:10.1016/S0377-221700020-1.
23. Opricovic, S.; Tzeng, G.H. Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 2007, 178, 514–529, doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.020.
24. Parker, L.D. Corporate governance crisis down under: Post-Enron accounting education and research inertia. European Accounting Review, 2005, 14, 383–394, doi:10.1080/09638180500126876.
25. Laeven, L., & Levine, R. Bank governance, regulation and risk taking. Journal of Financial Economics, 2009, 93(2), 259-275. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.09.003.
26. Michel, A., Oded, J., & Shaked, I. Ownership structure and performance: Evidence from the public float in IPOs. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2014, 40, 54-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.11.018.
27. Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J. P., & Lang, L. H. Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholdings. The Journal of Finance, 2002, 57(6), 2741-2771. doi: 10.1111/1540-6261.00511.
28. Anderson, R. C., & Fraser, D. R. Corporate control, bank risk taking, and the health of the banking industry. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2000, 24(8), 1383-1398. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4266(99)00088-6.
29. Kim, Y., & Gao, F. Y. Does family involvement increase business performance? Family-longevity goals’ moderating role in Chinese family firms. Journal of Business Research, 2013, 66(2), 265-274. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.08.018.
30. Kiel, G. C., & Nicholson, G. J. Board composition and corporate performance: How the Australian experience informs contrasting theories of corporate governance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2013, 11(3), 189-205. doi: 10.1111/1467-8683.00318.
31. Brenes, E. R., Madrigal, K., & Requena, B. Corporate governance and family business performance. Journal of Business Research, 2011, 64(3), 280-285. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.11.013.
32. Klein, A. (2002). Audit committee, board of director characteristics, and earnings management. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2002, 33(3), 375-400. doi: 10.1016/S0165-4101(02)00059-9.
33. Chiou, J. R., Hsiung, T. C., & Kao, L. F. A study on the relationship between financial distress and collateralized shares. Taiwan Accounting Review, 2002, 3(1), 79-111. doi: 10.6538/TAR.
34. Musteen, M., Datta, D. K., & Kemmerer, B. Corporate reputation: Do board characteristics matter? British Journal of Management, 2010, 21(2), 498-510. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00676.x.
35. Schoar, A., & Zuo, L. Does the market value CEO styles? American Economic Review, 2016, 106(5), 262-66. doi: 10.1257/aer.p20161031.
36. Stevens, J. M., Kevin Steensma, H., Harrison, D. A., & Cochran, P. L. Symbolic or substantive document? The influence of ethics codes on financial executives' decisions. Strategic Management Journal, 2005, 26(2), 181-195. doi: 10.1002/smj.440.
37. Campbell, T. C., Gallmeyer, M., Johnson, S. A., Rutherford, J., & Stanley, B. W. CEO optimism and forced turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 2011, 101(3), 695-712. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.03.004.
38. ElKelish, W. W. Corporate governance risk and the agency problem. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 2018, 18(2), 254-269. doi: 10.1108/CG-08-2017-0195.
39. Core, J., & Guay, W. The use of equity grants to manage optimal equity incentive levels. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 1999, 28, 151–184, doi:10.1016/S0165-4101(99)00019-1.
40. Bebchuk, L.A.; Fried, J.M. Executive compensation as an agency problem. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2003, 17, 71–92, doi:10.1257/089533003769204362.
41. De Haan, J., & Vlahu, R. Corporate governance of banks: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 2016, 30(2), 228-277. doi: 10.1111/joes.12101.
42. McCrae, M., & Balthazor, L. Integrating risk management into corporate governance: the Turnbull guidance. Risk Management, 2000, 2(3), 35-45. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.rm.8240057.
43. Zagorchev, A., & Gao, L. Corporate governance and performance of financial institutions. Journal of Economics and Business, 2015, 82, 17-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconbus.2015.04.004.
44. Anginer, D., Demirguc-Kunt, A., Huizinga, H., & Ma, K. Corporate governance of banks and financial stability. Journal of Financial Economics, 2018, 130(2), 327-346. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2018.06.011.
45. Cao, Z., Leng, F., Feroz, E. H., & Davalos, S. V. Corporate governance and default risk of firms cited in the SEC’s Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Releases. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 2015, 44(1), 113-138. doi: 10.1007/s11156-013-0401-9.
46. Sikka, P. Financial crisis and the silence of the auditors. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 2009, 34(6-7), 868-873. doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2009.01.004.
47. Bushman, R. M., & Smith, A. J. Financial accounting information and corporate governance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2001, 32(1-3), 237-333. doi: 10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00027-1.
48. Ntim, C. G., Lindop, S., Osei, K. A., & Thomas, D. A. Executive compensation, corporate governance and corporate performance: a simultaneous equation approach. Managerial and Decision Economics, 2015, 36(2), 67-96. doi: 10.1002/mde.2653.
49. Gompers, P., Ishii, J., & Metrick, A. Corporate governance and equity prices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2003, 118(1), 107-156. doi: 10.1162/00335530360535162.
50. Giroud, X., & Mueller, H. M. Corporate governance, product market competition, and equity prices. The Journal of Finance, 2011, 66, 563-600. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01642.x.
51. Hong, B., Li, Z., & Minor, D. Corporate governance and executive compensation for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 2016, 136, 199–213, doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2962-0.
52. Ali, W., Frynas, J. G., & Mahmood, Z. Determinants of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure in developed and developing countries: a literature review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 2017, 24(4), 273-294. doi: 10.1002/csr.1410.
53. Abdallah, A. A. N., & Ismail, A. K. Corporate governance practices, ownership structure, and corporate performance in the GCC countries. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 2017, 46, 98-115. doi: 10.1016/j.intfin.2016.08.004.
54. Adrian, T., Covitz, D., & Liang, N. Financial stability monitoring. Ann. Review of Financial Economics, 2015, 7, 357-395, doi:10.1146/annurev-financial-111914-042008.
55. Grove, H., Patelli, L., Victoravich, L. M., & Xu, P. Corporate governance and performance in the wake of the financial crisis: Evidence from US commercial banks. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2011, 19(5), 418-436. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8683.2011.00882.x.
56. De Andres, P.; Vallelado, E. Corporate governance in banking: The role of the board of directors. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2008, 32, 2570–2580, doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2008.05.008.
57. Erkens, D.H.; Hung, M.; Matos, P. Corporate governance in the 2007–2008 financial crisis: Evidence from financial institutions worldwide. Journal of Corporate Finance, 2012, 18, 389–411, doi:10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2012.01.005.
58. Barth, J. R., Caprio Jr, G., & Levine, R. Bank Regulation and Supervision in 180 Countries from 1999 to 2011. Journal of Financial Economic Policy, 2013, 5(2), 111-219, doi:10.1108/17576381311329661.
59. Hu, K.H.; Chen, F.H.; Tzeng, G.H.; Lee, J.D. Improving corporate governance effects on an enterprise crisis based on a new hybrid DEMATEL with the MADM model. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 2014, 43, 1395–1412, doi:10.1520/JTE20140094.
60. Tzeng, G.H.; Huang, J.J. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications; Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2011.
61. Tzeng, G.H.; Huang, C.Y. Combined DEMATEL technique with hybrid MCDM methods for creating the aspired intelligent global manufacturing & logistics systems. Annals of Operations Research, 2012, 197, 159–190, doi:10.1007/s10479-010-0829-4.
62. Shen, K.Y.; Yan, M.R.; Tzeng, G.H. Combining VIKOR-DANP model for glamor stock selection and stock performance improvement. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2014, 58, 86–97, doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2013.07.023.
63. Zadeh, L.A. Fuzzy logic and approximate reasoning. Synthese, 1975, 30, 407–428, doi:10.1007/BF00485052.
64. Shen, K.Y.; Tzeng, G.H. A decision rule-based soft computing model for supporting financial performance improvement of the banking industry. Soft Computing, 2015, 19, 859–874, doi:10.1007/s00500-014-1413-7.
65. Dalkey, N.; Helmer, O. An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 1963, 9, 458–467, doi:10.1287/mnsc.9.3.458.
66. Hwang, C.L.; Yoon, K. Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple Attribute Decision Making; Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 1981; pp. 58–191, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3.
67. García-Cascales, M.S.; Lamata, M.T. On rank reversal and TOPSIS method. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 2012, 56, 123–132, doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2011.12.022.
68. Shen, K.Y. Compromise between short-and long-term financial sustainability: A hybrid model for supporting R&D decisions. Sustainability, 2017, 9, 375, doi:10.3390/su9030375.
69. Shen, K.Y.; Hu, S.K.; Tzeng, G.H. Financial modeling and improvement planning for the life insurance industry by using a rough knowledge based hybrid MCDM model. Information Sciences, 2017, 375, 296–313, doi:10.1016/j.ins.2016.09.055.
70. Li, Z. F. Mutual monitoring and corporate governance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2014, 45, 255–269, doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.12.008.
71. Misangyi, V. F., & Acharya, A. G. Substitutes or complements? A configurational examination of corporate governance mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, 57, 1681–1705, doi:10.5465/amj.2012.0728.
72. Cuomo, F., Mallin, C., & Zattoni, A. Corporate governance codes: A review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2016, 24, 222–241, doi:org/10.1111/corg.12148.
73. Oehmichen, J. East meets west—Corporate governance in Asian emerging markets: A literature review and research agenda. International Business Review, 2018, 27, 465–480, doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2017.09.013.

QR CODE