管理层权力、薪酬标杆与高管薪酬制定

本文分析了管理层权力通过薪酬标杆的选取影响自身薪酬制定的过程和机理,并以2011~2014年我国A股上市公司为研究对象,实证检验管理层权力对上市公司高管薪酬的影响,探究了薪酬标杆在管理层权力和高管薪酬制定之中的传导作用。实证结果表明,管理层权力以及薪酬标杆与上市公司高管薪酬均存在正相关关系,上市公司高管利用管理层权力影响薪酬制定的路径之一,是通过影响董事会对薪酬标杆的选取进而达到操纵自身薪酬的目的。     

管理层权力、薪酬与业绩敏感性分析——来自中国上市公司的经验证据

薪酬激励并不必然减轻企业代理问题,管理层权力可能弱化公司治理使得薪酬机制成为代理问题的来源.本文基于中国证券市场研究了管理层权力对高管薪酬业绩敏感性的影响.研究结果表明,管理层权力大的企业与其他企业相比,高管的货币薪酬更大,但业绩并没有更好;而且,管理层薪酬与盈利业绩的敏感度更高,与亏损业绩的敏感度更低,部分企业出现薪酬业绩弱相关甚至不相关.本研究为理解我国上市公司治理和薪酬激励的现状提供了新的视角和证据.     

管理层权力与高管薪酬粘性

最优契约论与管理权力论是目前管理者激励领域研究的两种主要理论基础。我国上市公司高管薪酬与国外资本市场上公司高管薪酬一样具有粘性特征,这与最优契约论的观点不符。薪酬粘性是指高管薪酬的业绩敏感性存在不对称的特征,业绩上升时薪酬的增加幅度显著高于业绩下降时薪酬的减少幅度。笔者研究发现,管理层权力型企业的高管薪酬显著高于非管理层权力型企业的高管薪酬,并具有更高薪酬粘性。     

经理权力与租金

管理层利用权力获取超过最优薪酬的超额薪酬或者影响薪酬结构,这些超额薪酬构成了租金。管理层获取租金会产生激怒成本,在管理层均衡租金水平,边际激怒成本等于边际租金。管理层降低激怒成本的重要途径是掩饰,薪酬咨询是掩饰的重要手段。经理权力假说对若干管理层薪酬现象进行了解释。     

管理者权力、外部薪酬差距与公司业绩

外部薪酬差距因引导管理层行为而具有一定的激励作用,管理者权力又是影响薪酬激励有效性的重要因素.本文选取2006-2010年的上市公司为样本,结合管理者权力,研究了外部薪酬差距对公司业绩的影响,并从在职消费的视角探讨了管理层行为在外部薪酬差距影响公司业绩中所起的中介作用.研究结果发现,我国上市公司管理层外部薪酬差距与公司业绩正相关,外部薪酬差距具有正面的价值激励效应,但是管理者权力抑制了外部薪酬差距的激励效应.进一步拓展检验发现,外部薪酬差距能够抑制管理层的在职消费,但管理者权力弱化了外部薪酬差距对在职消费的抑制作用.     

大股东掏空、管理层权力与高管薪酬——基于薪酬辩护理论视角的分析

笔者从薪酬辩护理论的视角,对大股东掏空行为给高管薪酬激励带来的影响进行了分析.研究发现,大股东掏空对公司业绩造成不利影响后,高管会将大股东掏空作为卸责的借口,降低高管薪酬业绩敏感性、增加在职消费.特别是在上市公司管理层权力较大的情形下,辩护能力增强,这种现象更加突出.这说明大股东掏空会成为高管薪酬卸责的借口,降低高管薪酬激励的效果.上市公司应注重优化股权结构,限制管理层权力的膨胀,才能促进高管薪酬激励效果的有效发挥.     

高管薪酬与运气关系的非对称性研究

笔者以沪深两市2001年～ 2007年度的上市公司为样本,从管理层权力理论出发,实证研究了高管薪酬与运气(行业整体业绩变动)之间的关系,解释了经济不景气时期高管薪酬只升不降、升多降少的现象.研究发现:高管薪酬与运气正相关;区分行业整体业绩下滑与上升之后,发现高管薪酬与运气的关系呈现出非对称性,高管因为好运气(行业整体业绩上升)得到了额外的报酬,却躲避了坏运气(行业整体业绩下滑)对其的不利影响;且这种非对称性只存在于国有控制的公司,薪酬委员会的设立可以有效地抑制这种非对称性.上述结论支持高管薪酬的管理层权力理论,对完善我国上市公司薪酬契约的制定与执行有重要的指导意义.     

产品市场竞争、管理层权力与高管薪酬—规模敏感性

高管薪酬契约一直被作为缓解企业委托—代理矛盾的必要手段,如何设计薪酬契约中各影响因素的权重将决定着契约的效率。规模因素作为薪酬契约中重要的因素,在契约中占据着极其重要的地位。本文从管理层权力视角出发,研究管理层权力对规模因素的影响,以及公司治理对权力滥用的抑制作用。研究发现,企业高管可以凭借管理层权力提高薪酬—规模敏感性,降低自身薪酬风险,而作为企业外部治理机制的产品市场竞争对这种权力滥用有显著的治理效应。此外,企业所处的成长性环境差异对薪酬契约有重要影响,高成长性企业既有着相对较高的薪酬—规模敏感性,又能为产品市场竞争提供较大的治理空间,从而提高竞争对薪酬契约的治理效应。     

管理层薪酬对公司经营绩效的影响研究

现代企业制度理论和实践的发展,使企业高管人员薪酬激励的研究成为一个人们关注的问题。报酬水平偏低,或者报酬结构安排不合理,都将在一定程度上影响管理者的努力意愿进而可能影响企业绩效。因此,管理层薪酬对于公司的生存发展有着深远的意义。对管理层薪酬对公司经营绩效的影响进行分析,提出降低管理层薪酬对公司经营绩效不良影响的策略。     

高管薪酬研究文献综述

文章从代理理论、管理层权力论出发,分析目前国内外高管薪酬研究现状,并提出中国高管薪酬的研究方向。     

Managerial Bargaining Power in the Determination of Compensation Contracts and Corporate Investment

This paper considers the design of managerial compensation contracts and their impact on corporate investment decisions and the managerial effort decision. The model relates the compensation scheme to outside share ownership and managerial bargaining position. Using the methods of mechanism design under asymmetric information, a shift in favor of effort is documented in the case where managerial bargaining strength is weak, while a shift toward more use of capital investment results from strong managerial bargaining power. The model distinguishes managerial equity holdings from contingent compensation contracts. Our results are related to the empirical literature on pay-performance sensitivities.     

国有企业管理者激励补偿效应——政府的角色

本文突出制度环境,研究了政府干预对国有企业管理者薪酬激励效应的影响。同时,比较了政府这一制度约束与管理者权力这一契约安排之间的制衡关系。通过实证分析发现,政府干预程度越低,管理者盈余管理的空间越有限,薪酬与企业真实绩效的敏感度越强,但这一现象只存在于管理者权力较小的企业。在管理者权力较大的企业,薪酬自定现象明显,政府干预的减少并未弱化管理者的权力,也没有提高薪酬激励效应。本文的结论进一步验证了制度环境对管理者激励契约的重要影响,并对现有相关文献加以扩展,指出了契约安排内的权力取向会削弱制度环境的影响。     

Managerial compensation and R&D investments: the role of the external managerial labour market

This paper investigates the importance of the external managerial labour market in the determination of managerial compensation and in the influence of the compensation incentives on a firm’s R&D investments. I design an empirical model including the compensation adjustment regression, of which the focus is the role of the external labour market, and the R&D regression that examines how the compensation incentives derived from the external labour market affect a firm’s R&D intensity. Empirical results suggest that the R&D intensity is positively related to the premium of the actual pay adjustments over the expected pay adjustments based on the external labour market comparisons. The effect of the compensation incentives on the R&D investments is strongest when managers expect pay to decrease but actually experience an increase in pay.     

中国民营上市公司高管薪酬的影响因素——基于动态面板模型的实证分析

选取2003至2010年间三大地区、十一大类行业的207家民营上市公司作为样本,基于系统广义矩估计方法分析民营上市公司高管薪酬的影响因素。结果显示:产权更为清晰、市场化导向更为明确的民营上市公司高管薪酬具有显著的粘性特征,高管薪酬还受到公司经营业绩、公司资本结构、公司规模等因素的正向影响。中国民营上市公司高管薪酬在一定程度上发挥了激励作用。     

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 effect of price targets on the composition of CEO pay

This article analyzes the impact of price targets from the IBES Detail Price History Target database on CEO compensation retained from Execucomp. The two databases are merged at fiscal year frequency and an OLS regression with fixed effect is used to analyze the impact of price target on CEO compensation. The analysis reveals that analysts’ price targets affect top executives’ compensation: when analysts predict a growth in the share price for a company, the compensation package tilts towards stock options, when analysts forecast a drop in the share price, the compensation package tilts towards cash-based compensation and restricted stocks. I argue that the result is more aligned with the managerial power model of compensation (which assumes the board of directors maximizes managers’ compensation) than with the arm’s length bargaining model (that states that managers’ compensation is set to maximize shareholders’ profit).     

管理层权力、内外部监督与企业风险承担*

本文以2005—2014年中国沪深A股上市公司为样本，采用主成分分析法构建管理层权力的衡量指标，实证检验管理层权力对企业风险承担的影响。研究结果表明，管理层权力越大，风险规避的倾向越明显，企业风险承担水平越低；良好的内外部监督机制能弱化管理层权力对企业风险承担的抑制作用；渠道测试表明，管理层权力通过削弱企业的融资水平规避风险，而对企业投资无显著影响。本文拓展了管理层权力的经济后果及企业风险承担影响因素领域的文献，对引导管理者积极承担风险、加强上市公司内外部治理体系建设、维护中小股东权益具有重要的现实意义。     

Managerial compensation and the underinvestment problem

This paper studies the effect of managerial compensation terms on the well-known “underinvestment” incentive. We extend the Mauer and Ott (2000) real-option model of corporate expansion, and show that, when the manager maximizes the value of his compensation package (rather than equity value), the underinvestment problem can be substantially mitigated. Further, by designing an appropriate compensation contract, it is possible to eliminate the underinvestment incentive altogether. This managerial contract, consisting of fixed salary and equity ownership, is explicitly derived in the model. The equity ownership level is found to be an increasing function of the manager's fixed salary and the company's earnings growth rate, and a decreasing function of leverage ratio, earnings volatility, tax rate, bankruptcy costs, and the manager's severance pay at bankruptcy.     

Founders versus non-founders in large companies: financial incentives and the call for regulation

This paper is intended to question some of the premises in the ever increasing calls to regulate executive pay. We focus on founders, and extend Shleifer and Vishny’s (1989, Journal of Political Economy, 94, 461–488) manager-specific investments model by explicitly modeling managerial effort and pay performance sensitivity. Tests of this model on a data set of large companies, controlling for the endogeneity of managerial compensation, indicate that founders tend to be less responsive to performance incentives and generally more entrenched. At the same time, founders’ led firms are more valuable, supporting our predictions. This suggests that for founders, regulation of compensation may not be very effective.