非国有大股东对国企超额雇员的影响:成本效应还是激励效应

基于竞争理论的国企改革思路强调减少政策性负担摊派,基于产权理论的改革思路侧重于引入非国有资本,以解决产权不清晰与所有者缺位问题.本文尝试融合两种理论,以国企超额雇员问题为研究对象,从非国有大股东视角探究混合所有制改革成效.研究发现:非国有大股东能够显著降低国企超额雇员,减弱超额雇员对公司价值的损害作用,且该治理作用会随非国有大股东相对力量的提高而增强;从作用机制来看,该治理作用不仅表现为劳动力成本尤其是员工薪酬的节约,还表现为内部薪酬差距和管理层薪酬业绩敏感性的提高,兼具成本效应与激励效应;该作用在地区就业压力较小、劳动密集度较低以及劳动保护水平更低的环境下更为显著.     

异质机构持股、政府补贴与企业技术创新

机构投资者与政府补贴等优惠政策作为企业经营的重要资本来源和制度保障，势必对企业技术创新产生重要影响。以我国沪深两市战略性新兴上市企业2010-2015年面板数据为研究样本，对异质机构持股、政府补贴与企业技术创新的关系进行实证分析。结果发现：机构持股对企业技术创新没有显著影响，政府补贴可以促进机构持股对企业技术创新尤其是实质性技术创新产生显著正向影响；基金持股对企业技术创新存在显著负向影响，券商持股与QFII持股对企业技术创新分别存在不显著和显著正向影响；政府补贴能够降低基金持股对企业技术创新的负向影响，有效促进基金持股对企业技术创新的正向影响，并通过调节作用促进券商持股和QFII持股对企业技术创新产生更加显著的正向效应；政府补贴对基金持股与企业非实质性技术创新关系的正向调节作用更加显著，对券商持股和QFII持股与企业实质性技术创新关系的正向调节作用更加显著。     

Agency costs and tax planning when the government is a major Shareholder

In state owned enterprises (SOEs), taxes are a dividend to the controlling shareholder, the state, but a cost to other shareholders. We examine publicly traded firms in China and find significantly lower tax avoidance by SOEs relative to non-SOEs. The differences are pronounced for locally versus centrally-owned SOEs and during the year of SOE term performance evaluations. We link our results to managerial incentives through promotion tests, finding that higher SOE tax rates are associated with higher promotion frequencies of SOE managers. Our results suggest managerial incentives and tax reporting are conditional on the ownership structure of the firm.     

Institutional investors and international investments in emerging economy firms: A behavioral risk perspective

While the extant literature has examined the influence of controlling and non-controlling principals on the internationalization decisions of emerging market firms, heterogeneity among non-controlling principals is largely ignored. The risk characteristics of different groups of owners, shaped by their institutional environments, could contribute to the differences in their preferences for firm internationalization. In this paper, we draw insights from institutional theory and behavioral risk perspective to examine the risk propensities and risk perceptions of various non-controlling principals, such as pressure-resistant (FIIs and mutual funds) and pressure-sensitive (banks, insurance companies and lending institutions) institutional investors. Empirical results from a sample of 2364 unique Indian firms during the 2005–2014 time-period show that, after controlling for firm-level resources and capabilities identified in prior literature, the ownership share of different types of institutional investors is associated with firms’ international investments differently. While pressure-sensitive institutional investors, such as banks and insurance companies, are not supportive of foreign investments by firms, pressure-resistant institutional investors, such as FIIs and mutual funds, are supportive of this strategic decision. Furthermore, our results show that the family ownership in a firm (measured in terms of family shareholding) further lowers the preference of pressure sensitive institutional investors for internationalization, whereas family ownership positively moderates the pressure resistant investors towards internationalization.     

Ownership discrimination and private firms financing in China

This study examines the financing/funding of private firms in China. Our results show that private firms are significantly less funded through formal financing channels such as bank loans than state-owned firms, and hence have to resort to alternative financing such as trade credit. Consistent with the theoretical expectation and literature, there is a substitution effect between trade credit and bank loans for private firms, but this effect is much weaker compared to that of state-owned firms. Moreover, while the univariate comparisons indicate that private firms obtain more notes payable than state-owned firms, the multivariate regression analyses show that the relation between bank loan and notes payable is positive and indifferent between private and state-owned firms.     

Host country risk and foreign ownership strategy: Meta-analysis and theory on the moderating role of home country institutions

Empirical evidence for the relationship between host country risk and a firm’s ownership level in its foreign entry strategy is inconclusive. We revisit this relationship by integrating the internalisation logic with an institution-based view to examine the moderating effects of formal and informal institutions in the home country. By meta-analysing 64 empirical studies involving 52,229 ownership decisions on foreign market entry, this study gives support to theoretical arguments that the focal relationship is positively moderated by institutional constraints on policymakers and risk-taking tendencies in the home country but is negatively moderated by the joint effect of these two institutional factors. These findings shed new light on the literature of host country risk and foreign ownership strategy. Besides describing the implications of the findings for theory and practice, we discuss the agenda for future theory development in international business.     

Independence in bank governance structure: Empirical evidence of effects on bank risk and performance

We investigate how different governance arrangements affect risk and return in banks. Using a new data set for UK banks over the period 2003–2012, we employ a simultaneous equations framework to control for the reciprocal relationship between risk and return. We show that separation of the roles of CEO and Chairman increases bank risk without causing a concurrent increase in return. We also find that oversight by a Remuneration Committee and Non-Executive Directors (NEDs) lowers the probability of bank failure, indicating that empowering an independent Chairman has different effects from empowering independent NEDs. Overall, our results underline the importance of accounting for the heterogeneity in corporate governance arrangements within banks.     

Institutional ownership,cross-shareholdings and corporate cash reserves in Japan

Cross-country studies document a negative relation between corporate governance and cash holdings. In contrast, this relation is found to be positive in the United States. In this paper, we examine the case of Japanese firms. Using institutional ownership and cross-shareholdings as the main governance variables, we show that better governance is associated with higher cash balances as in the United States. The reason is that better-governed firms make better investment decisions. Their investments are not driven by excess liquidity and result in higher profitability and higher firm valuation. Overall, our findings indicate that management profligacy is a bigger concern to shareholders than management propensity to hoard cash because of risk aversion.     

Does economic policy uncertainty raise corporate precautionary cash holdings? Evidence from China

Using China as the research setting, this paper investigates the relationship between economic policy uncertainty and corporate precautionary cash holdings. Empirical results show a U-shaped relation between economic policy uncertainty and corporate precautionary cash holdings. Empirical analysis, in terms of ownership structure, firm size, corporate competitiveness and geographical location, further shows that (i) the effects for economic policy uncertainty in both state-owned and non-state-owned enterprises are significant, but the effect is stronger for state-owned enterprises; (ii) such significant effect is also found more strongly in small and medium-sized enterprises and highly competitive enterprises; and (iii) the effects for eastern, central and western China are all statistically significant, but the effect is strongest for eastern China.     

企业创新资源配置结构对创新绩效的影响：基于不同产权性质视角

产权性质与企业创新投入及创新绩效的关系一直是学术界争论的焦点之一。尽管整合制度逻辑和效率逻辑有助于调和现有矛盾，但是采用投入—产出模型忽略了影响创新绩效的微观要素与配置结构间的差异。以要素配置为切入点，将企业创新资源配置划分为人员结构、人员层次结构与经费结构3部分，从产权性质视角打开企业创新投入的“黑箱”。结果发现：①与民营企业相比，国企倾向于配置更多创新资源；②在国企的3种资源配置结构中，仅经费结构配置合理，能够显著提升创新绩效，人员结构配置对创新绩效的提升作用不显著；③相比之下，民企人员结构配置较为合理，对创新绩效的提升发挥着重要作用；④国企、民企人员层次结构配置均不合理且无显著差异。研究表明：民企善于发挥人的优势，而国企更能发挥物的优势。研究结论可为解释产权性质与创新绩效差异提供新视角。