:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:“懲一”能否“儆百”?--曝光機制對高管超額在職消費的威懾效應探究
書刊名:會計研究
作者:薛健汝毅竇超
出版日期:2017
卷期:2017(5)
頁次:60-66+89
主題關鍵詞:額在職消費腐敗曝光威懾效應省份行業影響因素公司業績
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(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:9
本研究應用犯罪經濟學中的威懾理論,考察了高管腐敗曝光對可比企業高管超額在職消費的威懾效應。基于2008-2015年A股國有上市公司數據的實證結果,我們發現高管腐敗曝光對同省份或同行業企業的超額在職消費行為有一定威懾作用。被曝光企業規模越大,懲罰力度越高,威懾效應越明顯。可比企業原有腐敗水平越高,公司治理質量越差,威懾效應越明顯。進一步研究發現,曝光作為一種外部機制能夠改善同行業可比企業的未來業績。本研究拓展了威懾效應理論在微觀實證領域的研究,對于客觀評價高壓反腐的政策實施效果也具有一定參考價值。
Based on deterrent theory in crime economics,this paper examines the deterrent effect of top-executive corruption exposure on peer firm executives’ excess perquisites in the capital market. Using sample of Chinese listed state-owned enterprises on A stock market during years 2008-2015,the empirical results show that to a certain extent the deterrent effect exists within the same province or the same industry. The characteristics of both the exposed firms and peer firms can exert significant influence on the extent of such effect. Specifically,this relationship is more eminent when the exposed firm is larger or the penalties are stronger. Besides,as for the peer firm,this relationship is more significant when its degree of original corruption is higher or its internal governance quality is worse. Further result shows that as an external mechanism,the exposure can improve the future performance of peer firms in the same industry. This study extends the studies of crime deterrent effect in micro empirical research and is of valuable reference when making objective evaluation of the effects of anti-corruption campaign.
期刊論文
1.Rajan, R. G.、Wulf, J.(2006)。Are Perks Purely Managerial Excess?。Journal of Financial Economics,79(1),1-33。  new window
2.陳冬華、陳信元、萬華林(2005)。國有企業中的薪酬管制與在職消費。經濟研究,2005(2),92-101。  延伸查詢new window
3.Luo, W.、Zhang, Y.、Zhu, N.(2011)。Bank ownership and executive perquisites: New evidence from an emerging market。Journal of Corporate Finance,17(2),352-370。  new window
4.權小鋒、吳世農、文芳(2010)。管理層權力、私有收益與薪酬操縱。經濟研究,2010(11),73-87。  延伸查詢new window
5.王曾、符國群、黃丹陽、汪劍鋒(2014)。國有企業CEO''政治晉升''與''在職消費''關係研究。管理世界,2014(5),157-171。  延伸查詢new window
6.陳仕華、姜廣省、李維安、王春林(2014)。國有企業紀委的治理參與能否抑制高管私有收益?。經濟研究,2014(10),139-151。  延伸查詢new window
7.褚劍、方軍雄(2016)。政府審計能夠抑制國有企業高管超額在職消費嗎?。會計研究,2016(9),82-89。  延伸查詢new window
8.耿雲江、王明曉(2016)。超額在職消費、貨幣薪酬業績敏感性與媒體監督--基於中國上市公司的經驗證據。會計研究,2016(9),55-61。  延伸查詢new window
9.徐細雄(2012)。企業高管腐敗研究前沿探析。外國經濟與管理,34(4),73-80。  延伸查詢new window
10.楊德明、趙璨(2015)。內部控制、媒體曝光率與國有企業高管腐敗。財務研究,2015(5),66-73。  延伸查詢new window
11.葉康濤、臧文佼(2016)。外部監督與企業費用歸類操縱。管理世界,2016(1),121-128+138。  延伸查詢new window
12.翟勝寶、徐亞琴、楊德明(2015)。媒體能監督國有企業高管在職消費麼?。會計研究,2015(5),57-63。  延伸查詢new window
13.Chen, D.、Liu, Q.、Luo, L.、Yao, Y.(2014)。Executive Corruption, Contagion Effect, and Investor Protection--Empirical Evidence from the Bai Peizhong Case。China Accounting & Finance Review,16(3),63-120。  new window
14.Kedia, Simi、Koh, Kevin、Rajgopal, Shivaram(2015)。Evidence on Contagion in Earnings Management。The Accounting Review,90(6),2337-2373。  new window
15.Li, V.(2016)。Do False Financial Statements Distort Peer Firms' Decisions?。The Accounting Review,91(1),251-278。  new window
16.Finkelstein, Sydney(1992)。Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation。Academy of Management Journal,35(3),505-538。  new window
17.Yermack, D.(2006)。Flights of Fancy: Corporate Jets, CEO Perquisites and Inferior Shareholder Returns。Journal of Financial Economics,80(1),211-242。  new window
18.Becker, Gary S.(1968)。Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach。Journal of Political Economy,76(2),169-217。  new window
19.Core, John E.、Holthausen, Robert W.、Larcker, David F.(1999)。Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation, and firm performance。Journal of Financial Economics,51(3),371-406。  new window
研究報告
1.Su, L.、Wu, D.(2016)。Is Audit Behavior Contagious? Teamwork Experience and Audit Quality by Individual Auditors。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE