Effective Incentives or Abuse of Power for Personal Gain: Executive Excess Compensation and Stock Crash Risk——An Empirical Study Based on the Different Ownership of Companies

›› 2017, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (9): 74-82.

Previous Articles Next Articles

Effective Incentives or Abuse of Power for Personal Gain: Executive Excess Compensation and Stock Crash Risk——An Empirical Study Based on the Different Ownership of Companies

Fu Qi¹, Le Ting², Xu Jing¹

1.Accounting School, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China
2. PBC Cixi Branch, Ningbo 315300, China

Received:2016-10-28 Online:2017-09-10 Published:2017-09-10

有效激励还是以权谋私:超额高管薪酬与股价崩盘风险——基于不同产权性质的实证研究

傅颀¹, 乐婷², 徐静¹

1.浙江财经大学会计学院,浙江杭州 310018
2.中国人民银行慈溪市支行,浙江宁波 315300

作者简介:傅颀(1979),女,浙江绍兴人,浙江财经大学会计学院教授,博士;乐婷(1991),女,浙江宁波人,中国人民银行慈溪市支行助理经济师;徐静(1982),女,浙江丽水人,浙江财经大学会计学院讲师,博士。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金青年项目(71502161);国家自然科学基金青年项目(71602179)

Abstract

Abstract:

In recent years, executive excesss compensation of listed companies in China has aroused wide attention in the society. Using data of Chinese listed companies from 2010 to 2014, this paper examines the relationship between executive excess compensation and stock crash risk, and analyzes the effect of executive excess compensation in companies with different property rights. The findings are as follows: (1)In state-owned listed companies,executive excess compensation is positively related to stock crash risk, which shows that executive excess compensation is self-interested in state-owned listed companies, but this phenomenon only exists in local state-owned listed companies; (2)In private listed companies, executive excess compensation is more incentive than in state-owned listed companies, but this incentive is very limited; (3)The relationship between executive excess compensation and stock crash risk is affected by the different ownership of companies. This paper provides the theoretical foundation for the construction of executive compensation system in companies with different ownership, and also reflects the stock crash risk effect based on the incentive motivation.

Key words: Property Rights of Companies, Executive Excess Compensation, Stock Crash Risk

摘要：

近年来中国上市公司的高管高薪引起社会的广泛关注。本文搜集了2010~2014年中国A股上市公司前三名高管的薪酬水平,考察高管的超额薪酬与股价崩盘风险的相关关系,分析不同产权性质下高管高薪的激励效果。研究发现:国有上市公司的高管超额薪酬与股价崩盘风险正相关,证明国企中高管高薪的自利性,但该现象仅在地方国企显著;民营上市公司的高管薪酬相对国企而言更具激励性,但激励效果十分有限;超额高管薪酬与股价崩盘风险的关系受产权性质的影响,证明不同产权性质的企业在高管激励方面存在明显差异。本文为不同产权性质上市公司的高管薪酬制度建设提供了理论依据,并同时反映了基于激励动机的股价崩盘效应。

关键词: 产权性质, 超额高管薪酬, 股价崩盘风险

CLC Number:

F244

Fu Qi, Le Ting, Xu Jing. Effective Incentives or Abuse of Power for Personal Gain: Executive Excess Compensation and Stock Crash Risk——An Empirical Study Based on the Different Ownership of Companies[J]. , 2017, 33(9): 74-82.

傅颀, 乐婷, 徐静. 有效激励还是以权谋私:超额高管薪酬与股价崩盘风险——基于不同产权性质的实证研究[J]. 财经论丛, 2017, 33(9): 74-82.

References

[1] 涂士华. 超额高管薪酬对非效率投资的影响研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽大学硕士学位论文, 2015.
[2] 姜付秀, 朱冰, 王运通. 国有企业的经理激励契约更不看重绩效吗?[J]. 管理世界, 2014, (9): 143-159.
[3] 方军雄. 高管超额薪酬与公司治理决策[J]. 管理世界, 2012, (11): 144-155.
[4] 李四海, 江新峰, 宋献中. 高管年龄与薪酬激励: 理论路径与经验证据[J]. 中国工业经济, 2015, (5): 122-134.
[5] 陈胜蓝, 卢锐. 股权分置改革、盈余管理与高管薪酬业绩敏感性[J]. 金融研究, 2012, (10): 180-192.
[6] 卢锐, 柳建华, 许宁. 内部控制、产权与高管薪酬业绩敏感性[J]. 会计研究, 2011, (10): 42-48.
[7] Jin, L., Myers, S. C. Raround the World: New Theoryand New Tests[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2006, 79(2): 257-292.
[8] Kim, J. B., L. D. Zhang. Does Accounting Conservatism Reduce Stock Price Crash Risk? Firm-level Evidence[Z]. 2015, Contemporary Accounting Research, Forthcoming.
[9] Defond, M., Hung, M., Li, S., Li, Y. Does Mandatory IFRS Adoption Affect Crash Risk?[J]. The Accounting Review, 2015, 90(1): 265-299.
[10] 刘春, 孙亮. 税收征管能降低股价暴跌风险吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2015, (8): 159-174.
[11] 王化成, 曹丰, 高升好, 李争光. 投资者保护与股价崩盘风险[J]. 财贸经济, 2014, (10): 73-82.
[12] 许年行, 于上尧, 伊志宏. 机构投资者羊群行为与股价崩盘风险[J]. 管理世界, 2013, (7): 31-43.
[13] 俞震, 冯巧根. 薪酬差距: 对公司盈余管理与经营绩效的影响[J]. 学海, 2010, (1): 118-123.
[14] 杨志强, 王华. 公司内部薪酬差距、股权集中度与盈余管理行为——基于高管团队内和高管与员工之间薪酬的比较分析[J]. 会计研究, 2014, (6): 57-65.
[15] 权小锋, 吴世农, 文芳. 管理层权力、私有收益与薪酬操纵[J]. 经济研究, 2010, (11): 73-87.
[16] Peng, L. and A. Rêell. Executive Pay and Shareholder Litigation[J]. Review of Finance, 2008, (12): 141-184.
[17] 陈信元, 朱红军. 转型经济中的公司治理[M]. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2007. 22-24.
[18] 潘红波, 夏新平, 余明桂. 政府干预、政治关联与地方国有企业并购[J]. 经济研究, 2008, (4): 41-52.
[19] 傅颀, 汪祥耀. 所有权性质、高管货币薪酬与在职消费——基于管理层权力的视角[J]. 中国工业经济, 2013, (12): 104-116.
[20] Chen, J., Hong, H., Stein, J. C. Forecasting Crashes: Trading Volume, Past Returns, and Conditional Skewness in Stock Prices[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2001, 61(3): 345-381.
[21] Xu, N. Li, X., Yuan Q. and Chan X. C. Excess Perks and Stock Price Crash Risk: Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Corporate Finance, 2014, 25(2): 419-434.
[22] Core, J. E., W. Guay, D. F. Lsrcker. The Power of the Pen and Executive Compensation[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 88(1): 1-25.
[23] Hutton, A. P., A. J. Marcus, and H. Tehranian. Opaque Financial Reports, R2, and Crash Risk[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2009, 94(1): 67-86.
[24] 权小锋, 吴世农, 尹洪英. 企业社会责任与股价崩盘风险: “价值利器”或“自利工具”?[J]. 经济研究, 2015, (11): 49-64.
[25] 韦志林, 芮明杰. 薪酬心理折扣、薪酬公平感和工作绩效[J]. 经济与管理研究, 2016,(4): 59-65.

Effective Incentives or Abuse of Power for Personal Gain: Executive Excess Compensation and Stock Crash Risk——An Empirical Study Based on the Different Ownership of Companies

有效激励还是以权谋私:超额高管薪酬与股价崩盘风险——基于不同产权性质的实证研究

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 5

Recommended Articles

Metrics

[1]	MAO Yufei, HU Wenxin, ZENG Xiangquan. Expanding or Narrowing: The Impact of Internet Use on Household Wage Gap——Empirical Evidence Based on CGSS Data [J]. , 2021, 37(2): 3-12.
[2]	FU Qi, JIA Qiuguo, XU Jing. Research on the Influence of Salary Gap on Enterprise Innovation [J]. , 2020, 36(5): 75-82.
[3]	ZHANG Jian, WANG Yufeng, ZHOU Ziqi. A Study on the Mechanism of the Impact of the Minimum Wage on Employment——Evidence from China's Provincial Dynamic Panel Data [J]. , 2019, 35(10): 12-20.
[4]	ZHAO Xiaoxia, ZHAO Haiyi, WANG Li. Analysis on the Relationship between Fragmentation of Production and Wage Growth/Gap——Based on the Data of WIOD [J]. , 2017, 33(5): 11-18.
[5]	DING Shulei. Wage Differentials Between Formal Employment and Informal Employment——The Perspective of Quantile Regression [J]. , 2017, 33(4): 3-10.