关系嵌入对股东代理成本的影响
The Impact of Relational Embeddedness on Shareholder Agency Costs
DOI: 10.12677/aam.2026.156271, PDF,   
作者: 龚佳辉:吉首大学数学与统计学院,湖南 吉首
关键词: 关系嵌入股东代理成本公司治理Relational Embeddedness Shareholder Agency Cost Corporate Governance
摘要: 文章以2007~2012年度A股民营上市公司为样本,探讨实际控制人与总经理之间的关系是否会影响股东的代理成本,统计了民营上市公司实际控制人与总经理的关系嵌入形式,并实证分析了关系嵌入强度对股东代理成本的影响。并统计发现实际控制人喜欢亲自掌握公司的控制权或者安排亲人、熟人来经营管理企业。熟人,亲人管理公司经营的话跟自己实际控制的差不多,也可以进行控制。实证结果表明随着实际控制人与总经理的关系嵌入强度递增,股东代理成本就会递增。实证研究还表明,民营上市企业公司治理机制没有发挥作用,导致不能制约关系治理机制下大股东对中小股东的掠夺。在关系治理盛行的文化环境下,加强法治信用和公民道德素质建设,强化制度的约束,才能彻底改变人治对法制的随意践踏,促进公司的发展,完善公司的治理。
Abstract: This article takes private listed companies in China’s A-share market from 2007 to 2012 as its research sample, and examines whether the relationship between the actual controller and the general manager affects shareholder agency costs. It first documents the specific forms of relational embeddedness between actual controllers and general managers in these private listed companies, then empirically analyzes how the strength of this relational embeddedness influences shareholder agency costs. The statistical findings reveal that actual controllers prefer to personally exercise control over their companies, or alternatively, appoint relatives or acquaintances to manage and operate the business. When relatives or acquaintances manage the company, the degree of control is essentially equivalent to direct personal control, thereby enabling the actual controller to maintain effective control. The empirical results demonstrate that as the strength of relational embeddedness between the actual controller and the general manager increases, shareholder agency costs rise correspondingly. Furthermore, the empirical study indicates that corporate governance mechanisms in private listed companies have failed to function effectively, rendering them incapable of restraining the expropriation of minority shareholders by large shareholders under the relationship-based governance mechanism. In a cultural environment where relationship governance prevails, only by strengthening the construction of the legal and credit systems, enhancing citizens’ moral quality, and reinforcing institutional constraints can we fundamentally change the arbitrary trampling of the rule of law by rule-of-man practices, promote corporate development, and improve corporate governance.
文章引用:龚佳辉. 关系嵌入对股东代理成本的影响[J]. 应用数学进展, 2026, 15(6): 114-123. https://doi.org/10.12677/aam.2026.156271

参考文献

[1] Berle, A. and Means, G.C. (1932) The Modern Corporation and Public Property. Harcourt Brace & World.
[2] Porta, R.L., Lopez-de-Silane, F., Shleifer, A., et al. (1997) Legal Determinants of External Finance. The Journal of Finance, 52, 1131-1150.
[3] Porta, R.L., Lopez-deSilanes, F., Shleifer, A., et al. (1999) Investor Protection: Origins, Consequences, and Reform.
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w7428/w7428.pdf
[4] Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J.P.H. and Lang, L.H.P. (2002) Disentangling the Incentive and Entrenchment Effects of Large Shareholdings. The Journal of Finance, 57, 2741-2771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] 黄光国. 儒家伦理与企业组织形态[J]. 经济社会体制比较, 1986(2): 61-66+5.
[6] 张建新, 张妙清, 梁觉. 殊化信任与泛化信任在人际信任行为路径模型中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2000(3): 311-316.
[7] 费孝通, 刘豪兴. 乡土中国[M]. 北京: 生活∙读书∙新知三联书店, 2010.
[8] La Pola (2010) Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 35-67.
[9] Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H. (2011) Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] Zingales, L. (2009) Insider Ownership and the Decision to Go Public. The Review of Economic Studies, 62, 425-448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Farh, J., Tsui, A.S., Xin, K. and Cheng, B. (2008) The Influence of Relational Demography and Guanxi: The Chinese Case. Organization Science, 9, 471-488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] Tsui, A.S. and Farh, J.L. (2010) Where Guanxi Matters: Relational Demography and Guanxi in the Chinese Context. Work and Occupations, 24, 56-79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] 陈晓, 王琨. 关联交易、公司治理与国有股改革——来自我国资本市场的实证证据[J]. 经济研究, 2005(4): 77-86+128.
[14] 林朝南, 刘星, 郝颖. 行业特征与控制权私利:来自中国上市公司的经验证据[J]. 经济科学, 2006(3): 61-72.
[15] Granovetter, M.S. (1985) Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
[16] Granovetter, M. (2009) Economic Institutions as Social Constructions: A Framework for Analysis. Acta Sociologica, 35, 3-11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[17] Granovetter, M.S., Swedberg, R., et al. (2008) The Sociology of Economic Life. Westview Press.
[18] Barclay, M.J. and Holderness, C.G. (2012) Private Benefits from Control of Public Corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 25, 371-395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[19] 刘建伟. 控股股东、管理层来源与代理成本[J]. 广东商学院学报, 2005(6): 64-70.
[20] 李增泉, 孙铮, 王志伟. “掏空”与所有权安排——来自我国上市公司大股东资金占用的经验证据[J]. 会计研究, 2004(12): 3-13+97.
[21] 王鹏, 周黎安. 中国上市公司外部审计的选择及其治理效应[J]. 中国会计评论, 2006(2): 321-344.
[22] 石水平. 控制权转移、超控制权与大股东利益侵占——来自上市公司高管变更的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2010(4): 160-176.
[23] 周方召, 符建华, 尹龙. 股权制衡、法律保护与控股股东侵占——来自中国A股民营上市公司关联交易的实证分析[J]. 投资研究, 2011, 30(8): 101-110.
[24] 肖作平, 苏忠秦. 现金股利是“掏空”的工具还是掩饰“掏空”的面具?——来自中国上市公司的经验证据[J]. 管理工程学报, 2012, 26(2): 77-84.
[25] Uzzi, B. (2008) Embeddedness in the Making of Financial Capital: How Social Relations and Networks Benefit Firms Seeking Financing. American Sociological Review, 64, 481-505.
[26] 魏江, 郑小勇. 关系嵌入强度对企业技术创新绩效的影响机制研究——基于组织学习能力的中介性调节效应分析[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2010, 40(6): 168-180.
[27] 蔡卫星, 高明华. 终极股东的所有权、控制权与利益侵占: 来自关联交易的证据[J]. 南方经济, 2010(2): 28-41.
[28] 罗进辉, 万迪昉. 控股股东的控制权私人收益: 理论模型与经验证据[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2011, 31(2): 229-238.
[29] 余玉苗, 王宇生. 法律制度变迁、审计师选择与企业价值——基于实际控制人掏空行为视角的实证研究[J]. 经济评论, 2012(3): 135-144.
[30] 陈红, 杨凌霄. 我国国有控股上市公司治理: 现实困境及制度求解——基于双重委托代理理论的分析框架[J]. 当代经济研究, 2012(3): 64-69+93.