高质量审计如何影响高管薪酬业绩敏感度？

高管薪酬激励是缓解委托代理问题的重要治理机制，高管薪酬业绩敏感度影响着高管薪酬激励的效果。通过实证检验高质量审计影响高管薪酬业绩敏感度的作用渠道与影响机理，发现：高质量审计通过提高会计信息质量，显著增强了高管薪酬业绩敏感度；基于股权结构、市场竞争环境以及竞争战略的异质性检验发现：股权制衡、机构投资者持股、市场竞争地位、创新强度能够强化高质量审计对高管薪酬业绩敏感度的影响，而管理层持股、市场竞争程度、政府关系将弱化这种影响。研究结果丰富了高管薪酬激励影响因素领域、外部审计治理效应领域以及审计信号效用领域的研究，同时对优化高管薪酬激励具有现实指导意义。     

内部控制对国有企业高管薪酬业绩敏感性的影响研究——基于国有企业分类改制的背景北大核心CSSCISSCI

在国有企业分类改制的背景下,文章以2009-2015年上市国有企业为样本研究内部控制质量对国有企业高管薪酬业绩敏感性的影响,并按公益类和商业类国有企业进行分组研究,结果表明:内部控制质量的提高对公益类国有企业高管薪酬业绩敏感性影响不显著;对商业类国有企业进行细分后发现,内部控制质量的提高对竞争型和行政垄断型国有企业的高管薪酬业绩敏感性影响显著增强,而对自然垄断型国有企业的影响不显著。由此可见,内部控制的实施在不同类型国有企业中影响不同,内部控制并不是提高全类型国有企业高管薪酬业绩敏感性的良药,国有企业分类改革必须对症下药。     

经营环境、高管薪酬与会计信息质量

将我国转型时期企业外部经营环境和内部治理相结合,以2007—2014年沪深两市A股上市公司为样本,实证检验了经营环境对高管薪酬之于会计信息质量的影响。研究发现,经营环境越好,高管薪酬越高;企业经营环境对于高管薪酬之于会计信息质量具有显著的抑制作用;进一步回归结果表明,经营环境对民营企业高管薪酬之于会计信息质量的抑制作用比国有企业更强;另外,经营环境对保护性行业高管薪酬之于会计信息质量的影响明显小于竞争性行业。该研究结果丰富了会计信息质量影响因素的相关文献,不仅为宏观经营环境对微观企业的影响提供了经验证据,也为企业薪酬契约的设计提供参考依据。     

基于内生视角的高管薪酬激励与公司资本投资研究

基于内生视角检验了高管薪酬激励机制与公司投资行为之间的交互关系。以我国上市公司高管薪酬制度为背景,选取2004~2010年上市公司数据研究发现:(1)公司投资强度越大导致高管薪酬水平显著降低。公司投资活动通过公司会计业绩显著地影响了高管薪酬水平。(2)基于会计业绩的高管薪酬契约无法对高管长期投资活动产生激励作用,提高高管薪酬水平显著地降低了公司投资强度。而基于股票和期权的激励机制能够显著地提高公司投资强度。(3)进一步研究表明,当期和滞后期的公司投资强度均对高管薪酬水平产生了负面效应,并且影响程度逐渐减弱。(4)研究还发现,高管薪酬业绩敏感性并没有对公司投资产生显著影响。研究结果说明,目前我国上市公司高管薪酬激励机制并没有对公司投资行为产生治理效应。     

薪酬政策、经营业绩与国有上市公司高管薪酬——基于国有上市公司分类的实证研究

国有企业员工薪酬体系优化与员工激励机制建设一直是国企改革的重点。为此,对高管薪酬制度现状以及国有企业高管薪酬政策等相关文献进行系统分析,梳理影响国有上市公司高管薪酬的因素,建立面板数据分析模型,选取2010—2020年中国国有上市公司样本,探究不同类型的国有上市公司高管薪酬与经营业绩、薪酬政策的关系。研究发现,高管薪酬政策与经营业绩对两种类型的国有上市公司的高管薪酬具有显著的正向影响。基于研究结论,从政府薪酬管制、公司治理、增强高管薪酬的业绩敏感性、改进薪酬激励的方式等角度,分别对两类国有上市公司提出管理建议。     

机构持股改善了企业高管的薪酬治理吗

选取我国沪深两市2007 年-2021 年上市公司样本，在使用PSM+DID 有效控制机构选股偏好引致的内生性前提下，检验了机构持股、机构持股结构对公司高管薪酬的影响。结论表明：机构投资者持股确实能够显著抑制高管薪酬操纵并提升上市公司高管薪酬- 业绩敏感性，但这一作用需要机构持股相对集中才能实现，机构持股集中度成为机构投资者影响高管薪酬的调节变量。同时机构持股对高管业绩- 薪酬敏感性的影响存在非对称性，在公司业绩下滑区间薪酬影响更为强烈。此外，机构持股的薪酬影响实现，主要是通过管理层限权而实现，在高管理层权力样本组中，机构持股对高管薪酬的影响被大大削弱。     

高管薪酬、股权结构与公司业绩关系研究

高管在企业的运营中起着至关重要的作用,通过分析2015—2019年沪深A股上市公司的数据,来研究高管薪酬和股权结构对公司业绩的影响以及股权结构对高管薪酬和公司业绩关系的调节作用。研究结果表明:上市公司的高管薪酬与公司业绩呈显著正相关,高管薪酬越高,公司的业绩越好;股权集中度与公司业绩呈显著正相关,而股权制衡度与公司业绩呈负相关,股权制衡度削弱高管薪酬与公司业绩的正相关关系,股权集中度增强高管薪酬与公司业绩的正相关关系。     

高管薪酬、会计信息透明度与审计收费——基于中国制造业上市公司的数据

选取 2007-2017 年中国制造业上市公司数据,以会计信息透明度为中介效应变量,从新视 角研究了高管薪酬对审计收费产生的影响。研究结果表明：高管薪酬水平与审计收费呈正相关的 关系,与会计信息透明度呈负相关的关系。在高管薪酬激励对审计收费的影响过程中,会计信息 透明度起到了部分中介作用。并且这种影响机制在进行了相关稳健性检验后仍然存在。研究结论 丰富了高管薪酬经济后果以及审计收费影响因素的相关研究。     

公司治理与会计信息披露质量——来自深圳证券交易所的最新证据

一系列会计丑闻发生后,上市公司的会计信息披露质量成为了众人关注的焦点。本文以2009年深市617家A股上市公司为研究样本,采用逐步回归法,从公司治理角度实证检验其对会计信息披露质量的影响程度,结果发现:①国有股持股比例越高、监事会会议次数越多,会计信息披露质量越高;②董事长与总经理两职兼任、独立董事比例与高管持股比例对上市公司会计信息披露质量无显著影响。     

垄断行业企业高管薪酬问题研究:基于年报重述的视角北大核心CSSCISSCI

本文以2000～2008年曾发生过年报重述的我国代表性垄断行业上市公司作为研究对象,考察了高管以年报重述为路径,通过影响企业财务业绩来提高薪酬的可能性。研究发现:高管控制与高管薪酬显著"正相关"。虽然更正报告及补充更正报告与高管薪酬"负相关",但是在高管控制下,垄断企业高管仍然可以通过补充年报重述路径影响其薪酬。     

上市金融企业高管薪酬体系及其监管制度催生

以我国上市金融企业为样本,采用实证研究的方法分析金融企业高管薪酬与绩效的相关性及其影响因素。研究发现,我国上市金融企业高管薪酬与公司绩效之间没有明显的相关性,高管的固定薪酬在整体薪酬中仍然占有较大比重并且相对稳定,其整体薪酬受到市场绩效指标影响的程度比财务绩效指标的程度高。这说明我国上市金融企业薪酬结构设计存在基本薪酬过于稳定且在整体薪酬中占比较高;薪酬设计缺乏弹性;对高管的薪酬激励主要以短期为主,缺乏与绩效挂钩的中长期激励等问题。须结合我国国情,对我国上市金融企业高管薪酬进行制度设计。     

Abstracts/Résumés

We investigate how private information and monitoring affect the role of accounting quality in reducing the investment–cash flow sensitivity. We argue that access to private information and direct restrictions on investments are likely to affect the extent to which accounting quality reduces financing constraints. Our results suggest that, for financially constrained firms, banks’ access to private information decreases the value of accounting quality. We further find that, for both financially constrained and unconstrained firms, covenants directly restricting capital expenditures also mitigate the importance of accounting quality. Our results suggest that, when information asymmetry problems are likely to be the largest, accounting quality is most important. However, the importance of accounting quality is mitigated if outside capital suppliers have access to private information and is eliminated if they impose contractual restrictions on investment. We also provide evidence that banks’ access to private information reduces the cash flow sensitivity of cash and mitigates the importance of accounting quality in reducing this sensitivity. This additional evidence suggests that our investment–cash flow sensitivity results are not driven by measurement error of the investment opportunity set.     

高管薪酬、股权激励与公司绩效的相关性检验

国内外理论界对于高管薪酬激励与公司绩效关系的研究尚未得出较为一致的结论,尤其是在高管薪酬与其自身持股比例、高管薪酬与公司股权集中度上,在实证结果中存在较大分歧。因此,如何把影响高管薪酬激励水平和公司绩效的种种因素合理的纳入模型中就显得尤为关键。在综述前人研究成果的基础上,将上证180和深证100指数中的成分股作为样本,通过多元回归分析检验我国大型上市公司高管薪酬、股权激励与公司绩效的相关性,从而在理论上为我国高管薪酬制度改革提供一定的理论依据和实证支持。     

CEO Hedging Opportunities and the Weighting of Performance Measures in Compensation Contracts

This study examines the rather controversial practice of managerial hedging, which allows CEOs to delink their compensation from stock price performance. We presume that boards are aware of these practices and adjust the weights placed on accounting‐based and stock‐based performance measures in executive compensation contracts to mitigate the problem. Empirically, we find that, in the presence of managerial hedging opportunities, accounting‐based performance measures receive more weight, whereas stock‐based performance measures receive less weight in determining executive compensation. Moreover, these results are more pronounced when managerial hedging needs are high. Regarding the effects of earnings management resulting from accounting‐based incentives, we find that good auditing and strong governance mechanisms strengthen the benefit of placing more weight on accounting‐based performance measures. Taken together, our findings suggest that corporate boards shift the relative weights of performance measures in compensation contracts in response to managerial hedging opportunities, which is consistent with optimal contracting.     

Corporate governance and incentive contracts: Historical evidence from a legal reform

This paper proposes to exploit a reform in legal rules of corporate governance to identify contractual incentives from the correlation of executive pay and firm performance. In particular, we refer to a major shift in the legal and institutional environment, the reform of the German joint-stock companies act in 1884. We analyze a sample of executive pay for 46 firms for the years 1870–1911. In 1884, a legal reform substantially enhanced corporate control, strengthened the monitoring incentives of shareholders, and reduced the discretionary power of executives in Germany. The pay–performance sensitivity decreased significantly after this reform. While executives received a bonus of about 3–5% in profits before 1884, after the reform this parameter decreased to a profit share of about 2%. At least the profit share that is eliminated by the reform most likely was incentive pay before. This incentive mechanism was replaced by other elements of corporate governance.     

CEO compensation and firm performance in Japan: Evidence from new panel data on individual CEO pay

Prior studies on Japanese executive compensation have been constrained by the lack of longitudinal data on individual CEO pay. Using unique 10-year panel data on individual CEO's salary and bonus of Japanese firms from 1986 to 1995, we present the first estimates on pay-performance relations for Japanese CEO compensation. Specifically we find consistently that Japanese CEO's cash compensation is sensitive to firm performance (especially accounting measures), and that the “semi-elasticity” of CEO's cash compensation with respect to ROA is 1.3 to 1.4, which is in general agreement with prior estimates elsewhere. As such, our estimates do not support that Japanese corporate governance is unusually defunct with regard to the significance and size of the sensitivity of CEO compensation to accounting profitability. On the other hand, to be consistent with the literature on Japanese corporate governance that tends to downplay the role of shareholders and stress the role of banks and employees, we find that stock market performance tends to play a less important role in the determination of Japanese CEO compensation. Finally, we find that the bonus system makes CEO compensation more responsive to firm performance in Japan. The finding is in contrast to the literature on compensation for regular employees in Japan which often argues that bonus is a disguised base wage. J. Japanese Int. Economies 20 (1) (2006) 1–19.     

Executive pay in Japan: the role of bank-appointed monitors and the Main Bank relationship

A feature of tournament models is that executive compensation is not independent of the wages paid at lower levels of the corporate hierarchy. Agency models show that compensation based on firm performance is a means by which incentives can be provided to executives once a promotion tournament has been resolved. In this paper, we combine elements of both models and show that the existence of an outsider who monitors the firm’s activities will lower the sensitivity of pay to firm performance for top executives and reduce the importance of tournament-based incentives. Using panel data for 55 Japanese electronics firms, we find support for the notion that bank-appointed Board members help monitor top executives and that tournament considerations are a particularly important feature of executive compensation in Japan.     

A comparison of shareholder identity and governance mechanisms in the monitoring of CEOs of listed companies in China

This paper compares the relative effectiveness of two measures by which the Chinese government attempted to improve the monitoring of listed companies: shifting the ownership of state shares from government agencies (GAs) to the corporate form of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), and strengthening corporate governance through statutory regulations and guidelines. The results show that SOEs are better able than GAs to monitor top executives, as indicated by a higher sensitivity of top executive turnover to firm performance. However, corporate governance mechanisms have no significant impact on the sensitivity of top executive turnover to firm performance. This study suggests that incentives for controlling shareholders are more important than governance mechanisms in replacing executives due to poor performance in a transitional economy such as China's, where institutions that support governance mechanisms are still being developed.