管理层权力、公司治理与盈余预测质量关系研究
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Managerial Power, Corporate Governance and the Quality of Performance Forecasting
  • 作者:孔晨 ; 陈艳
  • 英文作者:KONG Chen;CHEN Yan;Economics and Management School, Qingdao Agricultural University;School of Accounting, Dongbei University of Finance and Economics;China Internal Control Research Center;
  • 关键词:管理层权力 ; 公司治理 ; 产权性质 ; 盈余预测质量
  • 英文关键词:management rights;;corporate governance;;nature of property right;;performance forecasting
  • 中文刊名:JJTG
  • 英文刊名:Reform of Economic System
  • 机构:青岛农业大学管理学院;东北财经大学会计学院;中国内部控制研究中心;
  • 出版日期:2019-01-25
  • 出版单位:经济体制改革
  • 年:2019
  • 期:No.214
  • 基金:国家社会科学基金项目“认知偏差视角下的国有企业CEO职务舞弊行为研究”(15BGL005)
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:JJTG201901019
  • 页数:7
  • CN:01
  • ISSN:51-1027/F
  • 分类号:130-136
摘要
本文以2012~2017年发布盈余预测公告的A股上市公司为样本,探讨了管理层权力、公司治理与盈余预测质量的关系。研究发现:管理层权力强度越大,上市公司盈余预测偏离程度越大,相应预测质量就越低;公司治理质量越高的上市公司,其盈余预测质量会越高,且公司治理能够抑制管理层权力强度对于盈余预测质量的负面影响;国有产权性质不会对盈余预测质量产生显著的负面影响,但产权性质强化了管理层权力强度对于盈余预测质量的负面影响。
        Based on the data of A-share listed companies from 2012 to 2017 in China, this paper discusses the correlation between managerial power, the quality of corporate governance and the quality of performance forecast.The study finds that the higher the level of managerial power, the greater the deviation from the performance forecasting, corresponding the lower the quality of the performance forecasting. The higher the quality of corporate governance, the higher the quality of the performance forecasting.And corporate governance can effectively suppress the negative impact of corporate governance on the quality of performance forecasting. The nature of property right has no significant negative impact on the quality of performance forecasting, but reinforces the negative impact of excessive corporate governance on the quality of performance forecasting.
引文
[1]操巍,谭怡,邓伟.管理者过度自信对自愿性盈利预测披露质量的影响[J].财经问题研究,2017,(01):55-61.
    [2]黎文靖.股东和管理层的权力博弈与会计信息质量——来自中国证券市场的经验证据[J]. 暨南学报(哲学社会科学版),2009,(06):114-123.
    [3]袁振超,岳衡,谈文峰.代理成本、所有权性质与业绩预告精确度[J].南开管理评论,2014,(03):49-61.
    [4]Matsumoto, D. A. Management’s Incentives to Avoid Negative Earnings Surprises[J]. Accounting Review, 2002, 77(03): 483-514.
    [5]Baginski, S. Kimbrough, M. The Effect of Legal Environment on Voluntary Disclosure: Evidence from Management Earnings Forecasts Issued in U. S. and Canadian Markets[J].The Accounting Review,2002,77(01):25-50.
    [6]Barber, B. M. Odean, T. Boys Will be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2001, 116(01): 261-292.
    [7]Bertrand, M.,A. Schoar. Managing with Style: The Effects of Managers on Firm Policies[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2003, 118(04) : 1169-1208.
    [8] Jensen, M., W. Meckling. Theory of The Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 1976, 3(04): 305-360.
    [9] Nagar, V., D. Nanda, P. Wysocki. Discretionary Disclosure and Stock-Based Incentives[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2003, 34(01): 283-309.
    [10]Langer, E. J. The Illusion of Control[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32(02): 311-328.
    [11]Simon, G., Odean, T. Overconfidence, Compensation Contracts, and Capital Budgeting[J]. Journal of Finance, 2011, 66(05):1735–1777.
    [12]伊闽南,陈国辉.CEO过度自信、公司治理与盈余预测质量[J].改革,2018,(08):149-159.
    [13]白重恩,刘俏,陆洲. 中国上市公司治理结构的实证研究[J].经济研究,2005,(02):81-91.
    [14]王烨,叶玲,盛明泉.管理层权力、机会主义动机与股权激励计划设计[J].会计研究,2012,(10):35-41.
    [15]Fang, L., Yasuda, A. The Effectiveness of Reputation as a Disciplinary Mechanism in Sell-Side Research[J].Review of Financial Studies, 2009, 22(09):3735-3777.

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700