Firm efficiency: Domestic owners,coalitions, and FDI

In this paper we analyze the evolution of firm efficiency in the Czech Republic. Using a large panel of more than 190,000 Czech firm/years we study whether firms fully utilize their resources, how firm efficiency evolves over time, and how firm efficiency is determined by ownership structure. We employ a panel version of a stochastic production frontier model for the period 1996–2007 with time-varying efficiency. We differentiate among various degrees of ownership concentration and domestic or foreign origin. In a two-stage set-up we first estimate the degree of firm inefficiency and then the effect of ownership structure on the distance from the efficiency frontier. Our results support the hypothesis that concentrated ownership is positively related to efficiency. FDI has beneficial effects at the microeconomic level. However, we show that a simple majority is not necessarily the best structure to improve efficiency. We further analyze the effects of ownership coalitions and shed light on many other subtleties of how ownership and the specific industry affect firm efficiency.     

Corporate Governance,Investment, and Firm Valuation in Asian Emerging Markets

We investigate the effects of corporate governance and family ownership on firm valuation through investment efficiency in Asian emerging markets. Using 3 years of time series data from the Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia corporate governance score for 10 Asian emerging markets, we find that good corporate governance leads to better or more efficient investment decisions and eventually to higher firm value. We also find that investors reward firms for improvement in corporate governance. The findings do not hold for Asian firms with a family or concentrated ownership structure. The results are not driven by changes in accounting standards in these markets.     

Are Related‐Party Sales Value‐Adding or Value‐Destroying? Evidence from China

Prior literature provides mixed and relatively little evidence on the economic consequences of related‐party transactions. We examine a hitherto underexplored issue of whether transactions among firms within the same business group increase or reduce firm value. Using a large sample of Chinese listed firms, we find that related‐party sales increase firm value. However, this value enhancement disappears for firms with (i) large percentage of parent directors, (ii) high government ownership, or (iii) tax avoidance incentives that often couple with management's rent extraction activities. Although we find that intragroup sales improve firm value in general, we also find that corporate insiders use intragroup sales to deprive value from minority shareholders. Overall, our findings highlight the interplay between ownership structure and tax avoidance incentives in determining the economic consequences of related‐party transactions.     

Large shareholders and firm value: Are high-tech firms different?

This paper explores the relationship between ownership structure and firm value in firms listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange. The results of the estimations, taking into account simultaneity and reverse causality, show that the relationship between ownership concentration and firm value differs across firms belonging to the sector of innovative technologies and more ‘mature’ firms. The results give support to the hypothesis that ‘mature’ firms with higher ownership concentration are likely to perform better than firms with more dispersed ownership. In contrast, in high-tech companies, with large share of knowledge related activities, higher ownership concentration is associated with lower firm value. This effect is robust to various alternative specifications.     

Ownership structure,information asymmetry and growth of the firm: Implications from nonfinancial firms listed in S&P500

This paper investigates the association between growth of the firm and ownership structure under conditions of information asymmetry. The objective is to show the effects of information asymmetry (favorable vs. adverse selection) on the choice of the ownership structure that helps firms grow. Our sample includes nonfinancial firms listed in the S&P500 over the period 2000 to 2016. The dependent variable is growth of the firm measured by growth in sales. The independent variables are proxies for changes in ownership structure, individual investors, investment managers, and brokerage firms. Observations are grouped according to level of information asymmetry (high or low) using three proxies for information asymmetry: beta of return on equity (ROE), probability of default of ROE, and q ratio. The results conclude that (a) changes in ownership structure affect growth of the firm positively and (b) the effect of ownership structure is more significant and consistent at low level of information asymmetry. The contribution of the paper is threefold. First, it extends the arguments of corporate governance by showing the impact of ownership structure on growth of the firm. Second, the paper offers robust evidence that growth of the firm is associated with low level of information asymmetry. Third, the paper shows that fundamental financial information can help lessen the level of information asymmetry and thus help firms grow.     

CEO ownership and firm value

This paper examines the hypothesis that the amount of CEO ownership has a dominating effect on the value of the firm. Using a diverse sample of firms, firm value as measured by Tobin's q is found to be a nonmonotonic function of CEO ownership. Specifically, Tobin's q rises when the CEO owns between 0 and 15% and declines as CEO ownership increases to 50%. Beyond 50%, the value starts to rise. Firm value also is found not to be a function of management ownership when CEO ownership is separated out, indicating that CEO ownership does have a dominating effect on firm value. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Corporate Value, Managerial Stockholdings and Investments of Japanese Firms

We use a simultaneous equation model which treats firm value, investments and management ownership as endogenous to the firm. Our results show a feedback relation between corporate value and management ownership, i.e., corporate value is positively impacted by management ownership, which in turn is positively impacted by corporate value. Corporate value also affects investments made by the firm. We also find that the effect of the main bank on corporate value is positive but only up to a certain point; then, it turns negative. Supporting the argument that keiretsu firms have lower agency cost, we find that firms belonging to a keiretsu have higher valuations during the sample period. Finally, we find that management ownership increases as the ownership of the main bank, ownership of institutional holders and cross‐holdings decreases, suggesting a substitution effect among these monitoring forces. Our results indicate that ignoring the web of these relationships leads to incorrect inferences.     

Employee ownership and firm performance: a meta‐analysis

Employee ownership has been an area of significant practitioner and academic interest for the past four decades. Yet, empirical results on the relationship between employee ownership and firm performance remain mixed. To aggregate findings and provide potential direction for future theoretical development, we conducted a meta‐analysis of 102 samples representing 56,984 firms. Employee ownership has a small, but positive and statistically significant relation to firm performance ( = 0.04). The effect is generally positive for studies with different sampling designs (samples assessing change in performance pre‐employee–post‐employee ownership adoption or samples on firms with employee ownership), different performance operationalisation (efficiency or growth) and firm type (publicly held or privately held). Suggesting benefits of employee ownership in a variety of contexts, we found no differences in effects on performance in publicly held versus privately held firms, stock or stock option‐based ownership plans or differences in effects across different firm sizes (i.e. number of employees). We do find that the effect of employee ownership on performance has increased in studies over time and that studies with samples from outside the USA report stronger effects than those within. We also find little to no evidence of publication bias.     

上市公司股权激励机制与政策思考

高级管理层股权激励是西方企业缓解代理冲突的重要的风险激励机制,但我国对管理层股权激励的作用还缺乏清晰的认识。本文对中外管理层股权激励的理论和经验进行比较分析后发现,我国上市公司管理层持股已从单纯的福利制度安排向激励制度安排过渡。基于此,公司应尊重内生性,以长效考核机制为基础推行适度的股权激励计划,但要注意降低股权激励过程中新的代理成本和防止股权激励后的“内部人交易“。     

On the different styles of large shareholders’ activism

This paper extends Noe’s (Rev Financial Studies 15:289–317, 2002) model of large shareholder activism in two directions. First, it considers a framework in which large shareholders can choose not only when to monitor, but also how intensively they want to monitor the firm. Second, it considers the impact of laws and regulations by introducing a governance quality parameter that makes monitoring more cost effective. The model yields a new and rich characterization of activism. We find that share wealth (ownership concentration) induces monitoring for higher firm value through more frequent monitoring with unchanged intensity. Cash wealth motivates activism for trading gains, not higher firm value, through less frequent monitoring coupled with higher intensity. We also find that better governance leads to higher firm value through more frequent but less intense activism. When asymmetries within the group of large shareholders exist, the model predicts that the larger/wealthier/more efficient shareholders are more active. These results are broadly consistent with the empirical evidence.     

股权结构、隧道挖掘与公司价值的实证研究

本文应用大小股东之间代理冲突的理论分析框架,研究了股权结构对于大股东隧道挖掘行为以及公司价值的影响。研究发现,大股东的隧道挖掘行为与其持股比例成显著的倒U型关系,股权制衡能够抑制隧道挖掘行为和缓解大、小股东之间的代理冲突;公司价值与第一大股东持股比例成显著的U型关系,股权制衡能在一定程度上提升公司价值,但效果不显著。研究结果证明,投资者能够识别股权结构所代表的代理问题,并给代理问题较大的公司予以较低的定价。     

Ownership structure and firm performance: Some empirical evidence from Spain

The ‘managerial’ and the ‘contractual’ theories of the firm imply different causes and consequences for the relationship between ownership and performance of firms. This paper provides a test of the two conflicting theories, using ownership and performance data from a sample of Spanish family- and non-family-controlled firms. We find evidence in support of the contractual theory of the firm, according to which firms choose their ownership structure maximizing economic value, net of contractual costs.     

Do institutional investors monitor management? Evidence from the relationship between institutional ownership and capital structure

We examine the dynamic relations between institutional ownership and a firm's capital structure. We find that a firm's leverage decreases when institutional ownership increases. This result implies that a firm reduces its debt level as institutional investors substitute for the monitoring role of debt. More importantly, we find that a firm's suboptimal leverage decreases when the institutional ownership increases, and institutional ownership decreases when a firm's suboptimal leverage increases. This finding shows that institutions not only effectively monitor a firm's capital structure but they also passively sell their shares when dissatisfied with it. In addition, we find that the monitoring evidence on a firm's leverage and suboptimal leverage are more pronounced when the institutional investors are less likely to have business relationships with a firm or the information asymmetry is high in the market.     

Friend or foe? Employee ownership and CEO dismissal

This paper examines 2 research questions. First, does the level of employee stock ownership impact the likelihood of dismissing poorly performing chief executive officers (CEOs)? Second, does the level of employee stock ownership affect the likelihood of appointing an outsider or an insider after the dismissal of an incumbent CEO? We suggest that employee stock ownership reinforces the firm performance—CEO dismissal link because employee shareholders' welfare consisting of fixed claims (wages, bonuses, etc.), residual claims (dividends, increase in stock value, etc.), and human capital (generic and idiosyncratic) are highly linked to their firm performance. Moreover, under conditions of poor performance, employee shareholders are likely to favor an outsider CEO because he or she is more likely to initiate and implement drastic changes to the strategy of the firm, and therefore, he or she is more likely to improve firm performance. Drawing on a longitudinal sample of French firms, we find that employee stock ownership strengthens the negative relationship between firm performance and CEO dismissal likelihood. We find also that the higher employee ownership, the more likely that the underperforming CEO is replaced by an outsider. In contrast, employee ownership has no moderating impact on the likelihood of insider CEO appointment.     

Parasites and Paragons: Ownership Reform and Concentrated Interest among Minority Shareholders

Do investors with concentrated shareholding infringe on the value of more-fragmented shareholders (‘parasites’) or facilitate the growth of firm value for all shareholders (‘paragons’)? In a major ownership reform of Chinese listed firms, we obtain evidence which suggests that larger minority shareholders undertook certain actions both for a rent-seeking purpose – that these actions allowed them to reap private benefits at the expense of smaller minority shareholders, and for a value-creating purpose – to potentially increase firm value after the reform. It is plausible that both drivers co-existed, but they generated different implications of wealth redistribution. When institutional constraints on rent-seeking were ineffective, higher concentration of minority shares decreased the immediate gains captured by the small investors who held minority shares at the time of the reform, but increased the future value of the firm to be divided among for all investors, large and small, who held firm shares after the reform.     

Firm Productivity and the Foreign‐Market Entry Decision

We use Japanese firm‐level data to examine how a firm’s productivity affects its foreign‐market entry strategy. The firm faces a choice between exporting and foreign direct investment (FDI). In the case of FDI, the firm has two options: greenfield investment or acquisition of an existing plant (M&A). If it selects greenfield investment, it has two ownership choices: whole ownership or a joint venture with a local company. Controlling for industry‐ and country‐specific characteristics, we find that the more productive a firm is, the more likely it is to choose FDI rather than exporting and greenfield investment rather than M&A.     

Bank monitoring,managerial ownership and Tobin's Q: an empirical analysis for India

The paper examines how banking relationships and managerial ownership relate to firm valuation. It is argued that both the number of banking relationships (which serves as an external monitoring function) and managerial ownership (which serves as an internal monitoring function) affect firm value, while internal monitoring by managers and external monitoring by banks were viewed as substitutes or complements. After controlling for the effect of exogenous variables, the results reveal the existence of a complementary monitoring effect between banks and the managerial group. On the other hand, the results indicate that increased external monitoring by banks will simultaneously raise the incentive on the part of managers to engage in internal monitoring. Also, firm valuation is found to be a significant determinant of managerial ownership. A disaggregated analysis of firms according to size and leverage suggests the existence of a complementary monitoring effect between banks and managers, except for small‐sized firms. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

上市公司分散化战略分析

本文调查了747家上市公司的成长性及其产业特征,考察了分散化的价值效应,探索了分散化战略对企业价值的影响方向。研究结果显示,分散化企业较之非分散化企业具有更高的成长性,即使在控制了企业规模、资产结构、财务杠杆以及股权结构等因素的影响之后,分散化对企业价值仍然存在显著的正向解释力。通过分析企业成长性的产业效应,进一步验证了分散化的溢价效应。同时还预测了分散化组织优势源于债务融资的税盾收益以及有效的内部资本市场所产生的财务协同效应。研究表明,在不发达的金融体系中分散化战略具有价值创造功能。     

Director Ownership and Voluntary Segment Disclosure: Hong Kong Evidence

Weakness of corporate governance and lack of transparency are often considered causes of or contributors to the Asian Financial Crisis. Publicly listed companies in Hong Kong, like other Asian firms, have concentrated director ownership. The study uses voluntary segment disclosure above the benchmark minimum as a proxy for transparency and examines its relationship to the ownership structure and composition of corporate boards in Hong Kong. We find that: (1) high (concentrated) board ownership explains the extent of low voluntary segment disclosure and this negative relationship is stronger when firm performance is very poor; (2) the contribution of non‐executive directors to enhance voluntary segment disclosure is effective for firms with low director ownership but not for concentrated‐ownership firms. These results have implications for policy makers and regulators in the Asia‐Pacific region striving to improve governance and transparency.     

The Effect of Founding Family Influence on Firm Value and Corporate Governance

We examined a sample of 120 Norwegian, founding family controlled and non‐founding family controlled firms, to address two important research questions: (1) is founding family control associated with higher firm value; and (2) are there unique corporate governance conditions under which a founding family controlled firm can be more valuable? We find a positive association between founding family control and firm value for four alternative definitions of founding family control. We find that the association between founding family CEOs and firm value is stronger among younger firms, firms with smaller boards, and firms with a single class of shares. However, the impact of founding family directors on firm value is not affected by corporate governance conditions such as firm age, board independence, and number of share classes. We also find that the relation between founding family ownership and firm value is greater among older firms, firms with larger boards, and particularly when these firms have multiple classes of shares. Our results imply that founding family controlled firms are more valuable and governed differently than firms without such influence. Furthermore, our results also suggest that founding family CEOs can enhance firm performance when family influence does not create shareholder entrenchment or when their cash flow rights are more aligned with their control rights.