shares (which can only be purchased by foreign investors in foreign currencies (Cao 2000). In addition, Chinese law classifies shares by reference to the status of the shareholders: state shares, legal person shares, and individual shares. State shares are purchased with state assets by governmental departments and usually constitute fifty percent or more of all issued shares, which means that the state is a majority shareholder in most instances. Legal person shares are owned by entities such as companies and institutions -- usually other state enterprises (Cao 2000).
By contrast, individual shares are held by employees or individual investors from the general public. Only individual shares of listed companies can be traded on the stock exchanges. State shares and legal person shares, on the other hand, are nontransferable, thus ensuring that the state and its agencies retain their respective dominance. For example, in 1996, when the Shanghai-listed Beijing Light Bus sold a twenty-five percent stake in non-transferable legal person shares to two Japanese companies, Isuzu Motors and Itochu, the government allowed the transaction only reluctantly and promptly decreed that no similar transactions would be permitted in the future (Cao 2000)
Likewise, when the board of directors of Harbin Pharmaceutical, a Shanghai-listed company, approved a transfer of fifty two million state shares to individual shareholders in 1993, the CSRC allowed the transfer only after it issued a stern warning and only after it determined that the company had recognized its mistake. Given the fact that state shares comprise the majority of a company's total shares -- Harbin's state shares, for instance, represented 74% of the company's total (Cao 2000). Consequently, the illiquidity of state-owned shares "makes it difficult for stock markets to exercise their function of adjusting state owned assets structurally, causing the market to be marked by excessive state domination" (Cao 2000, p. 13)
Although there remains a dearth of relevant research in this area, a seminal study of the role of institutional shareholders in the performance of publicly listed Chinese companies by Wang and Xu (1997) found that the effect of ownership concentration is greater for companies that are dominated by legal person shares than they are for those companies dominated by the state.
3.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS and HYPOTHESES
Research Questions
The proposed study will be guided by the following research questions, together with any additional research questions that emerge during the research process:
3.1
What is the relationship of Chinese listed state-owned companies before and after the stock reform program of 1992?
3.2
How does the performance of these state-owned companies compare with respect to market performance by their peers?
Hypothesis
The effects of managerial ownership on firm value have been of particular research interest in the corporate finance literature (Denis & McConnell 2003). It would seem that there is a growing consensus that managers' and shareholders' interests are not fully aligned. This conflict of interest produces agency problems that reduce firm value. Thus, an increase of managerial ownership helps to connect the interests of insiders and shareholders, and leads to better decision-making and higher firm value; however, when the equity owned by management reaches a certain level, further increase of managerial ownership may provide managers with sufficient shares to pursue their own benefit without concern for decreasing firm value. When managerial ownership approaches a considerably high level, the agency problem can be largely mitigated due to the full alignment between the interests of managers and shareholders. Therefore, it is hypothesized that among Chinese listed companies, managerial ownership and firm value have a nonlinear relationship that can be identified (Ruan, Tian & Ma 2011).
This hypothesis is congruent with the fact that while managerial ownership is one of the ways that Chinese companies adopt Western corporate governance, the proportion of managerial ownership is quite small among state-owned companies, with a mean value during 2002-2007 of just 0.0929 per cent; in contrast, the mean value of managerial ownership for civilian-run companies was 9.31 per cent. Compared to state-owned enterprises, civilian-run firms have much more autonomy and profit retention, and managers are more often appointed on merit and ability, rather than political patronage. Most civilian-run firms adopt a managerial-ownership governance approach, and their managers have more power to choose financial policies compared to those in many developed countries. This situation gives managers of civilian-run firms more discretion over funding, pricing and labor practices (Ruan et al. 2011). The specific hypotheses will that guide the proposed study are set forth below:
Hypothesis 1: The performance of Chinese firms having...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now