Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and State Ownership in China: Evidence from New Panel Data

Contents:

Author Info

  • Takao Kato

    ()

  • Cheryl Long

    ()

Abstract

This paper provides the first systematic evidence on compensation for executives of firms listed in China’s emerging stock market (currently the eighth largest of the world with market capitalization of over $550 billion). Specifically, using comprehensive financial and accounting data on China’s listed firms from 1998 to 2002 (data modeled after Compustat and CRSP in the U.S.), augmented by unique data on executive compensation, we find for the first time statistically significant sensitivities and elasticities of annual cash compensation (salary and bonus) for top executives with respect to shareholder value in China. The size of the estimated sensitivities imply that a 1000 RMB increase in shareholder value yields a 0.020 RMB to 0.053 RMB increase in annual cash compensation, whereas the size of the estimated elasticities suggest that a 10 percent increase in shareholder value results in 3.7 to 4.0 percent increase in annual cash compensation for top executives. The estimated sensitivities and elasticities of cash compensation for top executives in China’s listed firms are greater than what has been reported for Japan and the U.S. However, we also find that state ownership of China’s listed firms is weakening executive pay-performance link and thus possibly making China’s listed firms less effective in solving the agency problem. As such, ownership restructuring may be needed for the “shareholding experiment” to fully succeed in transforming China’s emerging listed firms to efficient modernized corporations and for the overall successful economic transition of China. Finally, we find that sales growth is significantly linked to executive compensation and that Chinese executives are penalized for making negative profit although they are neither penalized for declining profit nor rewarded for rising profit insofar as it is positive.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.wdi.umich.edu/files/Publications/WorkingPapers/wp690.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan in its series William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series with number 2004-690.

as in new window
Length: 39 pages
Date of creation: 01 May 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wdi:papers:2004-690

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 724 E. University Ave, Wyly Hall 1st Flr, Ann Arbor MI 48109
Phone: 734 763-5020
Fax: 734 763 5850
Email:
Web page: http://www.wdi.umich.edu
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: transition economies; China; executive compensation; firm performance; corporate governance; and ownership structure.;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Jan Svejnar, 2001. "Transition Economies: Performances and Challenges," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 415, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  2. Schmidt Klaus M. & Schnitzer Monika, 1993. "Privatization and Management Incentives in the Transition Period in Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 264-287, June.
  3. Sun, Qian & Tong, Wilson H. S., 2003. "China share issue privatization: the extent of its success," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 183-222, November.
  4. Campbell, Terry II & Keys, Phyllis Y., 2002. "Corporate governance in South Korea: the chaebol experience," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 373-391, October.
  5. Chang, Chun & McCall, Brian P. & Wang, Yijiang, 2003. "Incentive contracting versus ownership reforms: evidence from China's township and village enterprises," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 414-428, September.
  6. Richard M. Cyert & Sok-Hyon Kang & Praveen Kumar, 2002. "Corporate Governance, Takeovers, and Top-Management Compensation: Theory and Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(4), pages 453-469, April.
  7. Cindy A. Schipani & Liu Junhai, 2001. "Corporate Governance in China: Then and Now," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 407, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  8. Fleisher, Belton M. & Wang, Xiaojun, 2003. "Potential residual and relative wages in Chinese township and village enterprises," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 429-443, September.
  9. Andrei Shleifer, 1998. "State Versus Private Ownership," NBER Working Papers 6665, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Gibbons, Robert & Murphy, Kevin J, 1992. "Optimal Incentive Contracts in the Presence of Career Concerns: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(3), pages 468-505, June.
  11. Conyon, Martin J., 1997. "Corporate governance and executive compensation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 493-509, July.
  12. Chong-En Bai & Qiao Liu & Joe Lu & Frank Song & Junxi Zhang, 2003. "Corporate Governance and Market Valuation in China," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2003-564, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  13. Jensen, M.C. & Murphy, K.J., 1988. "Performance Pay And Top Management Incentives," Papers 88-04, Rochester, Business - Managerial Economics Research Center.
  14. Xu, Peng, 1997. "Executive Salaries as Tournament Prizes and Executive Bonuses as Managerial Incentives in Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 319-346, September.
  15. Lucian Arye Bebchuk & Jesse M. Fried, 2003. "Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(3), pages 71-92, Summer.
  16. Volpin, Paolo, 2002. "Governance with Poor Investor Protection: Evidence from Top Executive Turnover in Italy," CEPR Discussion Papers 3229, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  17. Harvey, Keith D & Shrieves, Ronald E, 2001. "Executive Compensation Structure and Corporate Governance Choices," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association & Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 24(4), pages 495-512, Winter.
  18. Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1995. "A Survey of Corporate Governance," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1741, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  19. Takao Kato, 1999. "Chief Executive Compensation and Corporate Groups in Japan: New Evidence From Micro Data," Macroeconomics 9906003, EconWPA.
  20. Kato, Takao & Kubo, Katsuyuki, 2006. "CEO compensation and firm performance in Japan: Evidence from new panel data on individual CEO pay," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-19, March.
  21. Sherwin Rosen, 1990. "Contracts and the Market for Executives," NBER Working Papers 3542, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  22. Randall Morck & Masao Nakamura, 1999. "Banks and Corporate Control in Japan," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(1), pages 319-339, 02.
  23. Gibbons, Robert & Waldman, Michael, 1999. "Careers in organizations: Theory and evidence," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 36, pages 2373-2437 Elsevier.
  24. Kang, Jun-Koo & Shivdasani, Anil, 1995. "Firm performance, corporate governance, and top executive turnover in Japan," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 29-58, May.
  25. Perotti, Enrico C, 1995. "Credible Privatization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 847-59, September.
  26. Bai, Chong-En & Liu, Qiao & Lu, Joe & Song, Frank M. & Zhang, Junxi, 2004. "Corporate governance and market valuation in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 599-616, December.
  27. Liu, Deqiang & Otsuka, Keijiro, 2004. "A Comparison of Management Incentives, Abilities, and Efficiency between SOEs and TVEs: The Case of the Iron and Steel Industry in China," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(4), pages 759-80, July.
  28. Core, John E. & Holthausen, Robert W. & Larcker, David F., 1999. "Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation, and firm performance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 371-406, March.
  29. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2001. "Are Ceos Rewarded For Luck? The Ones Without Principals Are," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(3), pages 901-932, August.
  30. Sung Wook Joh, 1999. "Strategic Managerial Incentive Compensation In Japan: Relative Performance Evaluation And Product Market Collusion," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(2), pages 303-313, May.
  31. Murphy, Kevin J., 1999. "Executive compensation," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 38, pages 2485-2563 Elsevier.
  32. Kubo, Katsuyuki, 2001. "The Determinants of Executive Compensation in Japan and the UK: Agency Hypothesis or Joint Determination Hypothesis?," CEI Working Paper Series 2001-2, Center for Economic Institutions, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  33. Xiaonian Xu & Yan Wang, 1997. "Ownership structure, corporate governance, and corporate performance : the case of Chinese stock companies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1794, The World Bank.
  34. Brian J. Hall & Kevin J. Murphy, 2003. "The Trouble with Stock Options," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(3), pages 49-70, Summer.
  35. Denis, David J. & Denis, Diane K. & Sarin, Atulya, 1997. "Ownership structure and top executive turnover," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 193-221, August.
  36. Brian J. Hall & Kevin J. Murphy, 2003. "The Trouble with Stock Options," NBER Working Papers 9784, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  37. Rosen, S., 1990. "Contracts and Market for Executives," University of Chicago - Economics Research Center 90-12, Chicago - Economics Research Center.
  38. Derek C. Jones & Takao Kato, 1998. "Chief Executive Compensation During Early Transition: Further Evidence from Bulgaria," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 146, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  39. Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Fried, Jesse M., 2003. "Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt81q3136r, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
  40. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
  41. Ke, Bin & Petroni, Kathy & Safieddine, Assem, 1999. "Ownership concentration and sensitivity of executive pay to accounting performance measures: Evidence from publicly and privately-held insurance companies," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 185-209, December.
  42. Zhang, Anming & Zhang, Yimin & Zhao, Ronald, 2003. "A study of the R&D efficiency and productivity of Chinese firms," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 444-464, September.
  43. Ang, James S. & Constand, Richard L., 1997. "Compensation and performance: the case of Japanese managers and directors," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 275-304, December.
  44. Kaplan, Steven N, 1994. "Top Executive Rewards and Firm Performance: A Comparison of Japan and the United States," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(3), pages 510-46, June.
  45. Michael I. Cragg & I. J. Alexander Dyck, 2003. "Privatization and Management Incentives: Evidence from the United Kingdom," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 176-217, April.
  46. Cosh, Andy & Hughes, Alan, 1997. "Executive remuneration, executive dismissal and institutional shareholdings," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 469-492, July.
  47. Dong, Xiao-Yuan & Putterman, Louis, 2003. "Soft budget constraints, social burdens, and labor redundancy in China's state industry," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 110-133, March.
  48. Jay C. Hartzell & Laura T. Starks, 2003. "Institutional Investors and Executive Compensation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(6), pages 2351-2374, December.
  49. Kaplan, Steven N. & Minton, Bernadette A., 1994. "Appointments of outsiders to Japanese boards: Determinants and implications for managers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 225-258, October.
  50. Groves, Theodore & Yongmiao Hong & John McMillan & Barry Naughton, 1995. "China's Evolving Managerial Labor Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 873-92, August.
  51. Saul Estrin, 2002. "Competition and Corporate Governance in Transition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 101-124, Winter.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Kato, Takao & Kim, Woochan & Lee, Ju Ho, 2005. "Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and Chaebols in Korea: Evidence from New Panel Data," IZA Discussion Papers 1783, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  2. Kato, Takao & Long, Cheryl, 2006. "Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and Corporate Governance in China: Evidence from Firms Listed in the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 945-83, July.
  3. Intan Oviantari Author_Email: ioviantari@yahoo.com, 2011. "Directors And Commissioners Remuneration And Firm Performance: Indonesian Evidence," 2nd International Conference on Business and Economic Research (2nd ICBER 2011) Proceeding 2011-287, Conference Master Resources.
  4. Kato, Takao & Long, Cheryl, 2006. "CEO Turnover, Firm Performance and Enterprise Reform in China: Evidence from New Micro Data," IZA Discussion Papers 1914, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wdi:papers:2004-690. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Laurie Gendron).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.