股權激勵薪酬之價值攸關性——以中國A股市場為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：22

、訪客IP：18.221.53.209

姓名

肖雪(Xiao Xue) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

會計研究所

論文名稱

股權激勵薪酬之價值攸關性——以中國A股市場為例
(The Relevance between Stock Ownership Incentive Compensation and Enterprise Value: Taking Chinese A-Share Market Firms as an Example)

相關論文

★ 以房養老貸款政策-由台灣金融業之觀點論析	★ 企業導入電子商務對經營績效之影響－以N公司為例
★ 台灣網通業應收帳款管理-論析信用保險之功能	★ 蘋果概念股金屬機殼產業之投資分析
★ 由鑑識會計角度偵測公司之舞弊－以某個案公司為例	★ 企業流程再造－以某食品原料加工公司之報價作業流程為例
★ 企業資源規劃系統導入之關鍵成功因素與效益評估－以某個案公司為例	★ 企業組織再造之分析－以某醫材業公司為例
★ 金融機構執行共同申報及盡職審查作業辦法之影響	★ 中美貿易戰對台灣企業之影響 -以某公司為例
★ 管理報表編制對企業經營績效之影響—以Ａ公司為例	★ 現金減資宣告之股價異常報酬-以台灣上市公司為例
★ 公司價值評估－以半導體產業某公司為例	★ 公司併購價格之決定-以電子業大聯大收購文曄為例
★ 製造業轉型之研究-以某個案公司為例	★ 鑑識會計於政府採購招標階段之應用

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

本研究探討中國之股權激勵薪酬（Equity-Based Incentive Compensation）與公司價值之攸關性。中國之股權激勵薪酬制度在股權分置改革之後得以快速發展。而根據中國之市場機制與政策規定，限制性股票薪酬與股票選擇權薪酬在授予價格以及權利與義務等方面存在差異，如限制性股票在授予初期最低可達到市價五折之折扣，對員工之激勵效果相對較為明顯。據此，本研究預期中國之股權激勵薪酬與公司價值具有显著正向攸關性，而因中國股票市場環境與股權激勵薪酬授予機制之特殊性，預期相較於股票選擇權薪酬而言，限制性股票薪酬會具有較高的價值攸關性。
本研究以2006年至2013年中國A股上市公司共1011個觀察值為樣本進行實證分析。當使用所有授予員工以股權激勵薪酬之公司樣本進行實證分析時，發現投資人對公司未來股價有正面看法，股權激勵薪酬與公司價值具有显著正向攸關性。再者，當使用同時授予員工股票選擇權薪酬與限制性股票薪酬之公司樣本進行實證分析時，發現限制性股票薪酬的價值攸關性比股票選擇權薪酬更為正面。

摘要(英)

This research investigates the relationships between equity-based incentive compensation and firm value in China. Since split-share structure reform, the equity-based incentive compensation system of China has developed rapidly. According to the market mechanisms and policies of China, the differences exist between restricted stock and stock option in grant price as well as other aspects like rights and obligations. For example, restricted stock could be granted to the employees at some a half of its market price. Incentive effects of restricted stock are relatively obvious. Based on the reasons above, our research expects Chinese equity-based incentive compensation has significant positive effects on firm value. Compared to the relevance between stock option compensation and firm value, the relevance between restricted stock compensation and firm value is expected to be higher under China’s special circumstance of stock market and the grant mechanism for equity-based incentives compensation.
Our research use the samples include 1011 observations of Chinese A-share market firms from 2006 to 2013 for empirical analysis. From the results of analyzing all the samples of firms which granted equity-based incentive compensations to their employees, we can draw a conclusion that equity compensation will affect firm value significantly when investors have a positive view of the firm’s future stock price. Besides, when we analyze the samples of firms based on granting restricted stocks and stock options to employees at the same time, the results show us that restricted stock compensation affects firm value a more positive way than option compensation does.

關鍵字(中)

★ 股權激勵薪酬
★ 股票選擇權
★ 限制性股票
★ 公司價值

關鍵字(英)

★ equity-based incentives compensation
★ restricted stock
★ stock option
★ firm value

論文目次

目錄
摘要 i
Abstract ii
致謝 iii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vi
一、緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 2
1.3 研究架構 3
二、股權分置改革以及股權激勵薪酬制度 4
2.1 中國證券市場 4
2.1.1 中國證券市場簡介 4
2.1.2 股票的分類 4
2.1.3 市場的分類 5
2.2 股權分置改革 7
2.3 股權激勵薪酬制度 8
2.3.1 股權激勵薪酬之定義 8
2.3.2 中國應用股權激勵薪酬之類型 8
2.3.3 股票選擇權與限制性股票之對比 9
2.3.4 中國股權激勵制度之發展——在股權分置改革前後 11
三、文獻探討與假說 13
3.1 股權激勵薪酬之價值攸關性 13
3.2 股票選擇權與限制性股票之價值攸關性對比 14
四、研究設計 17
4.1 研究期間、樣本篩選標準與資料蒐集 17
4.1.1 研究期間 17
4.1.2 樣本篩選標準與資料蒐集 17
4.2 實證模型及變數定義 19
4.2.1 衡量股權激勵薪酬價值攸關性之模型 19
4.2.2 股票選擇權薪酬與限制性股票薪酬價值攸關性比較之模型 20
五、實證結果 22
5.1 假說一之實證結果 22
5.1.1 敘述統計 22
5.1.2 實證結果 23
5.2 假說二之實證結果 26
5.2.1 第一階段回歸之敘述統計 26
5.2.2 第一階段回歸之實證結果 26
5.2.3 第二階段回歸之敘述統計 27
5.2.4 第二階段回歸之實證結果 28
5.3 敏感性分析 31
5.3.1 僅採用RS或SO樣本之內生性問題考量 31
5.3.2 假說二之第二階段回歸式變數設定考量 35
5.3.3 變數的衡量方式 36
六、結論 37
6.1 結論 37
6.2 研究貢獻、限制與建議 38
參考文獻 39
中文文獻 39
英文文獻 40
網路資料 42

參考文獻

中文文獻
王銳與龍子午，2010，股權激勵對公司價值影響因素的統計分析，現代財經（天津財經大學學報），第31卷第2期（2月）：87-91。
和君諮詢集團，2013，中國股權激勵年度報告2013：1-25。
經邦集團，2013，2013年股權激勵報告：1-26。
莊磊，2014，中國股市的制度變遷及改革路徑選擇，南方金融，總第449期：77-84。
楊青淳與王有森，2006，股權激勵的中國路徑，西部論叢，第三期：41-44。
陳薇薇，2011，後股改時代上市公司股權激勵問題研究，中國集體經濟，第21期（7月下）：83-84。
于妮，2008，淺析基於股權分置改革的股權激勵機制，黑龍江對外經貿，第1期：91-92。
謝華與王慧娟，2012，股權激勵和公司績效的實證分析——基於中國2006-2010年數據，無錫商業職業技術學院學報，第12卷第5期（10月）：10-17。
劉佑銘，2012，關於上市公司股權激勵效應的實證研究，華南師範大學學報（社會科學版），第3期（6月）：109-114。
林大龐與蘇冬蔚，2011，股權激勵與公司業績——基於盈餘管理視角的新研究，金融研究，第9期：162-177。
楊成炎、劉薇與劉珍，2011，股票期權和限制性股票激勵制度的比較與選擇，第26卷第4期（7月）：55-57。
周凌燕，2012，限制性股票與股票期權的實施效果差異，中小企業管理與科技，第12期：67-68。

英文文獻
[1]Aboody, D. 1996. Market valuation of employee stock options. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22(August/December): 357-391.
[2]Baber, W., S. Janakiraman and S. Kang. 1996. Investment opportunities and the structure of executive compensation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 21(June): 297-318.
[3]Barth, M. E., S. Kallapur. 1996. The effects of cross-sectional scale differences on regression results in empirical accounting research. Contemporary Accounting Research, 13(Fall): 527-567.
[4]Barth, M. E., W. H. Beaver, J. R. M. Hand and W. R. Landsman. 1999. Accruals, cash flows, and equity values. Review of Accounting Studies, 3(December): 205-229.
[5]Barth, M. E., W. H. Beaver, J. R. M. Hand and W. R. Landsman. 2005. Accruals, accounting-based valuation models, and the prediction of equity values. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 20(October): 311-345.
[6]Bell, T., W. Landsman, B. Miller and S. Yeh. 2002. The valuation implications of employee stock option accounting for profitable computer software firms. The Accounting Review, 77(October): 971-996.
[7]Core, J. and W. Guay. 1999. The use of equity grants to manage optimal equity incentive levels. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 28(December): 151-184.
[8]Coughlan, A. T. and R. M. Schmidt. 1985. Executive compensation, management turnover, and firm performance: An empirical investigation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 7(April): 43-66.
[9]Cyert, R., S. H. Kang, P. Kumar and A. Shah. 1997. Corporate governance and the level of CEO compensation. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University.
[10]Dechow, P. M., A. P. Hutton and R. G. Sloan. 1996. Economic consequences of accounting for stock-based compensation. Journal of Accounting Research, 34: 1-20.
[11]Dechow, P. M., A. P. Hutton and R. G. Sloan. 1999. An empirical assessment of the residual income valuation model. Journal of Accounting and Economics 26(January): 1-34.
[12]Feltham, G. A. and J. A. Ohlson. 1995. Valuation and clean surplus accounting for operating and financial activities. Comtemporary Accounting Research, 11(Spring): 689-732.
[13]Feltham, G. A. and M. G. H. Wu. 2001. Incentive Efficiency of Stock versus Options. Review of Accounting Studies, 6(March): 7-28.
[14]Gaver, J. J. and K. M. Gaver. 1993. Additional evidence on the association between the investment opportunity set and corporate financing, dividend, and compensation policies. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 16(January/July): 125-160.
[15]Hall, B. J. and J. B. Liebman. 1998. Are CEOs really paid like bureaucrats? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(August): 653-691.
[16]Hall, B. J. and K. J. Murphy. 2000. Optimal exercise prices for executive stock options. American Economic Review, 90(May): 209-214.
[17]Hanlon, M., S. Rajgopal and T. Shevlin. 2003. Are executive stock options associated with future earnings? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 36(December): 3-43.
[18]Himmelberg, C. P., R. G. Hubbard and D. Palia. 1999. Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 53(September): 353-384.
[19]Irving, J. H., W. R. Landsman and B. P. Lindsey. 2011. The valuation differences between stock option and restricted stock grants for US firms. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 38(April/May): 395-412.
[20]Jensen, M. C. and W. H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial Behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(October): 305-360.
[21]Kadan, O. and J. M. Swinkels. 2008. Stock or option? Moral hazard, firm viability, and the design of compensation contracts. Review of Financial Studies, 21(January): 451-482.
[22]Kole, S. R. 1997. The complexity of compensation contracts. Journal of Financial Economics, 43(January): 79-104.
[23]Lambert, R. and D. Larcker. 2004. Stock options, restricted stock, and incentives. Working paper, University of Pennsylvania.
[24]Landsman, W., K. Peasnell, P. Pope and S. Yeh. 2006. Which approach to accounting for employee stock options best reflects marketing pricing? Review of Accounting Studies, 11(September): 203-245.
[25]Landsman, W., M. Lang and S. Yeh. 2007. Governance and the split of options between executive and nonexecutive employees. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 22(Spring): 109-138.
[26]Lie, E. 2005. On the timing of CEO stock option awards. Management Science, 51(May): 802-812.
[27]Mehran, H. 1995. Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 38(June): 163-184.
[28]Morgan, A. G. and A. B. Poulsen. 2001. Linking pay to performance-compensation proposals in the S&P 500. Journal of Financial Economics, 62(December): 489-523.
[29]Ofek, E. and D. Yermack. 2000. Taking Stock: Equity-based compensation and the evolution of managerial ownership. The Journal of Finance, 55(June): 1367-1384.
[30]Ohlson, J. A. 1999. On transitory earnings. Review of Accounting Studies, 3(December): 145-162.
[31]Palia, D. 2001. The endogeneity of managerial compensation in firm valuation: A solution. Review of Financial Studies, 14(Fall): 735-764.
[32]Yermack, D. 1997. Good timing: CEO stock option awards and company news announcements. The Journal of Finance, 52(June): 449-476.
[33]Yermack, D. 1995. Do corporations award CEO stock options effectively? Journal of Financial Economics 39(October/November): 237-269.

網路資料
百度百科 http://www.baike.baidu.com/
中國政府網 http://www.gov.cn/

指導教授

王曉雯(Hsiao-wen Wang)

審核日期

2015-7-13

推文