对我国应用利益相关者治理模式的思考

我国公司治理的改革在很大程度上是模仿日德的内部监控模式——利益相关者模式。由于我国的历史国情以及利益相关者模式本身的缺陷,注重所有利益相关者的利益,强调所有利益相关者都参与公司治理是不现实的,也是不可能的。实际上当前我国公司利益相关者最重要的三极是股东、经营者与员工,所以公司治理需要在股东、经营者和员工三者利益协调一致的基础上进行。     

基于S-O-E理论的龙煤集团公司治理模式选择性研究

股份制理论强调,公司治理的目标就是保护股东的利益。但过于强调股东利益,最终可能会使公司可持续发展能力丧失;而利益相关者模式主张所有利益相关者都参与公司治理,又可能会出现"搭便车"行为。S-O-E公司治理模式依然强调股东在公司治理中的重要作用,但提出员工应作为公司治理的主体之一,而且强调经营者不应仅仅被看作是治理的对象,更应该被看作是治理的一个主体。公司治理需要在三者利益协调一致的基础上进行。     

公司治理:对股东价值导向的反思与替代

股东价值导向的公司治理不是最优的治理模式。以利益相关者为导向的公司治理符合企业发展要求。在新的导向下,“平坦”的管理者补偿计划,正确导向的经理人市场,非控制权利益相关者契约性保护条件下的股东专一控制权是利益相关者导向公司治理新的基本模式。     

利益相关者治理模式的理论与现实分析

随着传统的"股东至上"的公司治理模式的内在缺陷越来越突出以及人力资本作用的加强和地位的上升,现代公司治理模式越来越偏离"股东至上"的逻辑,而越来越青睐于利益相关者理论。利益相关者理论认为股东并不是公司唯一的所有者,债权人、管理者、雇员等利益相关者都拥有公司的剩余索取权和控制权,公司的经营目标应该是利益相者利益最大化而并非股东财富最大化。论文对利益相关者理论进行探讨,提出其相应的公司治理模式,并据此模式对现实进行了分析。     

论利益相关者公司治理模式

公司治理模式是一套治理公司交易关系的制度安排。传统的公司治理理论遵循“股东至上”的逻辑。随着公司的发展演变,“股东至上”的治理模式开始受到人们的诘责,“利益相关者”治理模式开始为人们所青睐。“利益相关者”治理模式的理论基础在于对传统“股东至上”逻辑的质疑;其实践常见于德国与日本的公司治理中;“利益相关者”治理模式是公司长期发展演变的产物,它有其存在的合理性,也面临着进一步演变的挑战。     

公司治理对实证会计理论的影响

会计信息能够影响公司价值创造和分配的进程,完善公司治理体系能降低资本提供者（股东与债权人）与管理层之间的代理成本,创造公司价值。公司治理应从维护股东利益向维护公司各利益相关者的利益转变,实证会计理论受到实证代理理论的很大影响：在会计实务的研究中也反映了公司利益相关者价值最大化的观点。     

面向利益相关者的公司治理模式重构

公司治理模式是一套治理公司交易关系的制度安排。传统的股东中心的治理模式开始受到人们的诘责 ,“利益相关者”治理模式越来越为人们所关注。文章通过对公司所有权主体的再确定讨论了面向利益相关者的公司治理模式重构问题 ,并提出了利益相关者共同治理的参考模型。     

股东治理与利益相关者共同治理理论比较研究

在公司治理结构争论上有倾向于以保护股东利益为重点和以保护相关者共同利益为重点两种学派。两种治理观各有其优缺点,股东治理观是目前的主流观点,但利益相关者治理观代表一种趋势,有着重大的理论和实践意义。     

我国上市银行公司治理现状分析

上市银行内部科学、规范的公司治理是维护所有股东及相关者的利益、防范和化解金融风险、提高银行经营绩效、防止出现重大决策失误的制度保障.本文从股东与股东大会、董事会、监事会、高级管理层、监督机制、激励与约束机制和公司治理信息披露等方面分析了目前我国五家上市商业银行的公司治理现状.     

利益相关者、公司治理与企业的社会责任

企业的经营活动,受到包括资本提供者在内的全社会的委托,必须在经济社会的协调中最大效率地与各种生产要素结合,不能片面地追求一己利益,而要为整个社会履行社会责任。该文认为:传统的公司治理理论遵循"股东至上"的逻辑,而现代的公司治理中心不仅仅局限于股东,所有利益相关者都应拥有明确的公司控制权和收益权。利益相关者治理模式是公司长期发展演变的产物,在公司治理机制中引入利益相关者、考虑社会责任是公司治理的必然趋势。     

公司治理理论的现代演变——从股东利益最大化到相关利益者理论

全球的公司治理模式简要分为两类:股东模式和相关利益者模式。以最大化股东利益为目标的股东模式在董事会、大股东和公司控制权市场这些内部和外部治理机制上都存在明显的缺陷或失败。相关利益者理论的发展导致了公司治理理论的现代演变。相关利益者理论认为,公司治理从本质上说是各相关利益者之间制衡关系的有机整合,其目标是最大化整个公司的财富创造。相关利益者公司治理成为可替代股东模式的公司治理形式。     

NEGOTIATED BLOCK TRADE AND REBUILDING OF TRUST

We investigate the impact of corporate governance on customers' trust using a dynamic model of experience-goods firm. In the optimal equilibrium, customers' trust in the firm is linked to its behavior in the market for corporate control, so that the controlling shareholder has incentives to ensure high product quality while noncontrolling shareholders' interests are protected. Following a trust-damaging event, turnover of the controlling share block restores customers' trust and enhances total shareholder value. Our analysis identifies an endogenous cost of corporate control, offers implications for the control premium, and provides a novel rationale for the separation of ownership and control.     

Managerial Compensation and the Cost of Moral Hazard

This article investigates managerial compensation and its incentive effects. Our econometric framework is derived from a multiperiod principal-agent model with moral hazard. Longitudinal data on returns to firms and managerial compensation are used to estimate the model. We find that firms would incur large losses from ignoring moral hazard, whereas managers only require moderate additional compensation for accepting a contract that ties their wealth to the value of the firm. Thus the costs of aligning hidden managerial actions to shareholder goals through the compensation schedule are much less than the benefits from the resulting managerial performance.     

The governance of innovative firms: An evolutionary perspective

Corporate governance has been in the recent years one of the most debated issues in conventional economic approaches. Agency theory combined with financial indicators has particularly contributed to the development of shareholder value as a key concept in companies’ governance both at a theoretical and empirical level. We argue that an evolutionary perspective can be developed on the governance of innovative firms since (1) conventional economic approaches only consider a restricted part of this complex issue, and (2) this restricted vision applied in practice has driven the economic system into major coordination problems and turbulences. On the basis of empirical investigations into the telecommunications industry, and guided by a simple model of evolutionary game, we propose new principles of corporate governance centered upon managerial entrepreneurship and its role on innovation and industry dynamics. The outcome is a set of rules of conduct for the manager and the shareholder.     

Managerial value diversion and shareholder wealth

The agents to whom shareholders delegate the management of corporateaffairs may transfer value from shareholders to themselves througha variety of mechanisms, such as self-dealing, insider trading,and taking of corporate opportunities. A common view in thelaw and economics literature is that such value diversion doesnot ultimately produce a reduction in shareholder wealth, sincevalue diversion simply substitutes for alternative forms ofcompensation that would otherwise be paid to managers. We questionthis view within its own analytical framework by studying, ina principal-agent model, the effects of allowing value diversionon managerial compensation and effort. We suggest that the standardlaw and economics view of diversion overlooks a significantcost of such behavior. Many common modes of compensation canprovide managers with incentives to enhance shareholder value;replacing such compensation would reduce these incentives. Asa result, even if the consequences of a rule permitting valuediversion can be fully taken into account in setting managerialcompensation, such a rule might still produce a reduction inshareholder wealth - and would not do so only if value diversionwould have some countervailing positive effects (a possibilitywhich our model considers) that are sufficiently significantin size.     

Dividend policy and investor pressure

The economics of dividend policy has focused on the single tight narrative that dividends keep managers honest, mitigating concerns that they over-invest. This article provides a critique of that agency narrative, arguing that pressure from short-term focused investors, executives and board members pushes the firm into preemptive actions of returning too much cash via dividends. We analyze three channels of influence for investor pressure through 1) threat of takeovers, 2) shareholder value oriented corporate governance, measured by director independence and board equity incentives, and 3) trading and institutional ownership patterns. We find that firms adopt a higher dividend payout to discourage takeover bids. Also, FTSE 100 firms, that are most focused on shareholder value governance in the form of equity-based compensation and a higher share of independent directors, display a higher dividend payout. Frequency of trading and ownership by transient investors seeking current profits also predict increased dividend payout. Traditional agency theory, focused on dividends as a tool for managerial discipline, is not strongly supported by the results, which rather support a narrative of short-term investor pressure on firms irrespective of investment opportunities.     

Production externalities: internalization by voting

We study internalization of production externalities in perfectly competitive markets where production plans are decided by majority voting. Since shareholders want firms to maximize dividends of portfolios rather than profits, they are interested in some internalization. Two governances, namely the shareholder governance (one share, one vote) and the stakeholder democracy (one stakeholder, one vote), are compared. We argue that perfect internalization is more likely to be the outcome of the stakeholder democracy than the shareholder governance.     

后凯恩斯主义的企业理论

后凯恩斯主义者认为在典型的两权分离的现代企业制度条件下，企业的目标是多元化的。但企业所有者和经理人的目标函数存在根本差别，所有者更偏好于企业利润目标，而经理人更偏好于企业增长目标。后凯恩斯主义者还区分了经理人资本主义化的企业和金融演化下的股东控制型企业两种模式。     

Regulation of State-Owned and Privatized Utilities: Ukraine Electricity Distribution Company Performance*

Both ownership and regulation affect the behavior of utility managers. Private ownership rewards managerial decisions that enhance shareholder value. Regulatory incentives reward behavior that affects profits and costs. An empirical analysis of 24 Ukraine electricity distribution companies from 1998 to 2002 indicates that privately owned firms do respond to incentives that add to net cash flows (associated with reducing commercial and non-commercial network losses). However, they also respond more aggressively than do state-owned distribution utilities to mark-up (cost-plus) regulatory incentives that increase shareholder value but decrease cost efficiency. This study was initiated while Val Tsaplin was a PURC Visiting Scholar with funding from the FSA Contemporary Issues Fellowship Program. Michael Pollitt, David Sappington, Fernando Damonte, and an unknown reviewer provided very helpful comments on earlier drafts. We thank Patricia Mason for copy-editing the paper. The conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of organizations with which the researchers are affiliated.     

我国民营与国有上市公司投资价值的比较研究

鉴于学界在民营与国有上市公司的绩效、治理结构和投资价值上存在较大的争议,本文对2000年底前上市的1 026个公司在2001-2003年间的数据进行了全面的比较分析,发现:(1)民营上市公司的投资收益和账面值-市值比显著小于国有上市公司,因此具有较低的投资价值.(2)与国有上市公司相比,民营上市公司的盈利能力、发展潜力、资本运营能力和尝债能力均较低,但其股权结构较为分散,而且其经理层激励方式与国有上市公司差别不大.(3)民营上市公司投资价值较差的根源在于其盈利能力、发展潜力和资产运营能力较低.(4)与杨兴君、苏启林及张俊喜和张华的实证结果不同,民营与国有上市公司在股权结构、经理层激励、企业规模及地理位置上的差别无法解释两者投资价值的差异.在上述实证结果的基础上,本文提出了相关的政策建议.