臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：分紅入股制度對公司績效之影響：以台灣高科技產業為例
作者：汪美伶 引用關係
作者(外文)：Wang Mei-Ling
校院名稱：國立臺灣大學
系所名稱：商學研究所
指導教授：徐木蘭
劉念琪
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2002
主題關鍵詞：利潤分享；員工分紅入股；生產力；獲利力；流動率；高科技公司；遞延效果；Profit-sharing plans；productivity；profitability；turnover；high-tech firms；lagged effect
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(7) 博士論文(0) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:7
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:58
台灣高科技產業的發展，在世界上佔有一席之地，一般認為除了政府的大力支時、經營者的正確經營策略外，另一主要原因是員工分紅入股制度，吸引高素質人才加入，激勵員工生產力，提高公司整體績效所致。
許多國外研究證實利潤分享制度對生產力的影響，然而，台灣本身的實證研究卻十分匱乏。過去台灣地區員工分紅入股制的研究，範圍多集中於討論員工分紅入股制度與個別員工滿意度和工作投入、離職傾向的關聯性，或是員工分紅入股制度與勞資和諧相關的議題上；但對於此一制度對整體組織績效之影響的相關實證研究卻極其少見。為彌補此一研究缺口，本研究即以355家台灣上市上櫃之高科技公司為研究對象，利用台灣新報資料庫電子資訊類股1991~2000年的財務資料，採討台灣高科技產業的分紅入股制度對組織生產力的實際影響。
本研究首先說明分紅入股制度的理論基礎、國內分紅入股制度的相關規定，其後進行實證分析。結果發現，不論是實施現金分紅或股票分紅，僅能短暫提昇次年的生產力與獲利力，而且現金分紅的效果較股票分紅為佳。其次，股票分紅有助於降低次年度的流動率。然而，就長期而言，股票分紅會對公司績效帶來負面的影響。本研究建議，欲使現金、股票分紅入股制度發揮最大的效果，在制度的設計上要做到以績效為導向，並配合組織內部的管理制度。
Taiwan’s high-tech firms have been growing rapidly in the past decade. Profit-sharing plans, which are able to attract and retain high quality-employees for high-tech firms, have been thought as one the key successful factors of the high-tech firms in Taiwan.
However, there are very few empirical studies concerning about the effects of profit-sharing plans on firm performance in the high-tech industry in Taiwan. In order to fill the research gap, the study colleted a pooled time-series data during 1991-2000 from 335 listed high-tech firms to examine the effects of profit-sharing plans on firm performance
This study tested the effects of two types of profit-sharing plans- cash bonus and stock bonus plans. The results indicated that cash bonus and stock bonus only had positive effect on productivity and profitability in the next year, and cash bonus generated more effect on productivity than stock bonus on the whole. In addition, stock bonuses exerted negative effects on voluntary turnover in the next year. However, stock bonuses had negative lagged effects on productivity and ROA, and generated positive lagged effects on turnover. This finding implies that profit-sharing plans may damage firm’s long-term performance as well as benefit short-term performance.
In general, profit-sharing programs don’t necessarily increase firm performance. Only when the ratio of bonus payment to total compensation is large enough, can profit-sharing programs have positive effects on firm performance. It may suggest that the firms not only consider the amount of cash bonus and stock bonus, but also other management practices when they design the profit-sharing plans.
1. Alan, K. & Rita, M.N. (1999). Underlying labor market dimensions of “opportunities”: The cases of employee turnover. Human Relations, 52(10), 1233-1255.
2. Andrew, P., John, M., Andrew, R., & Nicholas, W. (1995) The impact of employee share ownership plans on employee participation and industrial democracy. Human Resource Management Journal, 5(4), 44-70.
3. Azfar, O., & Danninger, S. (2001). Profit-sharing, employment stability, and wage growth. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 54(3), 619-630.
4. Ben-Ner, A., & Jones, D.C. (1995). Employee participation, ownership, and productivity: A theoretical framework. Industrial Relations, 34(4), 532-554.
5. Chen, A., & Wang, S. (2002). The source of competitive strength for knowledge economics: The global unique Taiwan-style employees profit sharing & stock ownership system. Industry Forum, 3(2), 1-19.
6. Chung, K.H., & Pruitt, S.W. (1994). A simple approximation of Tobin’s q. Finance Management, 23(3), 70-74.
7. Conte, M.A., & Svejnar, J. (1988). Productivity effects of worker participation in management, profit-sharing, worker ownership of assets and unionization in U.S. firms. International Journal of industrial Organization, 6(1), 139-151.
8. Conte, M.A., & Kruse, D.L., (1991). ESOPs and profit-sharing plans: Do they link employee pay to company performance? Financial Management, 20(4), 91-103.
9. Conte, M.A. (1992). Contingent compensation: (How) Does it affect company performance? Journal of Economic Issues, 23(2), 583-592.
10. Dessler, G. (2000). Human resource management (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
11. Directors General of Budget Accounting and Statistics Executive Yuan, R.O.C. (2002). National statistics.
12. Doucouliagos, C. (1995). Worker participation and productivity in labor-managed and participatory capitalist: A meta-analysis. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 49(1), 58-76.
13. Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research methods in the social sciences (5th ed.). New York: St. Martin’s Press.
14. Gerhart, B., & Milkovich, G.T. 1990. Organizational differences in managerial compensation and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4): 663-691.
15. Gerhart, B., & Trevor, G.O. 1996. Employment variability under different managerial compensation systems. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6): 1692-1712.
16. Greene, W.H. (2000). Econometric analysis (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
17. Hill, C.W.L., & Snell, S.A. (1989). Effects of ownership structure and control on corporate productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 25-46.
18. Hirsch, B.T. (1991). Labor Unions and the Economic Performances of Firms. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
19. Huang, Tung-Chen. (1998). An investigation on the practices of employee stock ownership plan in Taiwan. Journal of Human Resource Development, 9,19-34.
20. Huselid, M.A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 635-672.
21. Huselid, M.A., & Becker, B.E. (1996). Methodological issues in cross-sectional and panel estimates of the human resource-firm performance link. Industrial Relations, 35(3), 400-423.
22. Ichniowski, C., Kochan, T.A., Levine, D., Olson, C., & Strauss, G. (1996). What works at work: Overview and assessment. Industrial Relations, 35(3), 299-333.
23. James, P.G. (2000). Alternative pay practices and employee turnover: An organization economics perspective. Group & Organization Management, 25(4), 419-439.
24. Johnson, D.R. (1995). Alternative Methods for the Quantitative Analysis of Panel Data in Family Research: Pooled Time-Series Models. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 1065-1077.
25. Jones, D.C. & Kato, T. (1995). The productivity effects of employee stock-ownership plans and bonuses: Evidence from Japanese panel data. The American Economic Review, 85(3), 391-413.
26. Kennedy, P. (1992). A guide to econometrics (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
27. Kim, M. (1999). Where the grass is greener: Voluntary turnover and wage premiums. Industrial Relations, 38(4), 584-592.
28. Kim, S. (1998). Does profit sharing increase firm’s profits? Journal of Labor Research, 19(2), 351-370.
29. Ko, Jin-Ying. (1999). Whether ESOP increases firm’s performance? Taipei Bank Monthly Journal, 29(5), 51-68.
30. Kruse, L.D. (1993). Profit sharing: Does it make a difference: The productivity and stability effects of employee profit-sharing plans. Michigan.
31. Kumbhakar, S.C., & Dunbar, A.E. (1993). The elusive ESOP-productivity link: Evidence from U.S. firm-level data. Journal of Public Economics, 52, 273-283.
32. Kunkel, J.G.., & Lau, C.T. (1995). Does employee ownership translate into higher company profits? Business Forum, 20(3), 4-10.
33. Liu, Nien-Chi., & FanChiang, Ju-Hsuan. (2001). The effects of profit sharing on productivity in Taiwan’s high-tech firm- A cross-sectional analysis. Paper presented at Conference of Human Resource in Hi-Tech Industry. Chung-Li, Taiwan.
34. Long, R.J. (2000). Employee profit sharing: Consequence and moderators. Industrial Relations, 55(3), 477-504.
35. Mathews, J.A. (1997). A Silicon Valley of the east: Creating Taiwan’s semiconductor industry. California Management Review, 39(4), 26-54.
36. McConaughy, D.L., & Mishra, C.S. (1996). Debt, performance-based incentives, and firm performance. Financial Management, 25(2), 37-51.
37. Nalbantian, H.R., & Schotter, A. (1997). Productivity under group incentives: An experimental study. The American Economic Review, 87(3), 314-341.
38. Pfeffer, J. (1998). Seven practices of successful organizations. California Management Review, 40(2), 96-124.
39. Powell, J., Montgomery, M., & Cosgrove, J. (1994). Compensation structure and establishment quite and fire rates. Industrial Relations, 33(2), 229-248.
40. Schuster, J. R., & Zingheim, P.K. (1993). The new variable pay: Key design issues. Compensation & Benefits Management, 25(2), 27-34
41. Shaw, J.D., Delery, J., Jenkins, Jr. G. D., & Gupta, N. (1998) An organizational level analysis of voluntary and involuntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 511-525.
42. Spector, P.E. 1997. Job Satisfaction. Sage Publication: Thousand Oaks, CA.
43. Steel, R.P., Shane, G.S., & Griffeth, R.W. 1990. Correcting turnover statistics for comparative analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 33: 179-187.
44. Stroh. L.K., Brett, J.M., Baumann, J.P., & Reilly, A.H. 1996. Agency theory and variable pay compensation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3):751-767.
45. Wang, Chien-An. (1998). The influence and design of ESOP in high-tech industry. Industries and Finance Quarterly, 100, 89-95.
46. Weitzman, M.L., & Kruse, D.L. (1990). Profit sharing and productivity. In Alan S. Blinder (Eds.), Paying fro productivity (pp. 95-141). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
47. Werner, S., & Tosi, H.L. (1995). Other people’s money: The effects of ownership on compensation strategy and managerial pay. Academy of Management Journal, 38(6), 1672-1691.
48. Wilson, N., & Peel, M.J. (1991). The impact on absenteeism and quits of profit-sharing and other forms of employee participation. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 44(3), 454-468.
49. Yao, S. (1997). Profit sharing, bonus payment, and productivity: A case study of Chinese state-owned enterprises. Journal of Comparative Economics, 24, 281-296.
50. Zingheim, P.K., & Schuster, J. R. (2001). Long-term variable pay: Accelerator pedal for total rewards. Compensation & Benefits Management, 17(1), 36-48.
51. Website: www.9999.com.tw/vote0689.htm (2002/5/30)
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1114（臺灣：1102，外國：12） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1753550 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67568712
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上