淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


  查詢圖書館館藏目錄
系統識別號 U0002-0107200901360200
中文論文名稱 股票選擇權會計政策、人力資本與企業績效之關聯性-美國上市高科技公司之實證
英文論文名稱 The Associations among Stock Option Accounting Policy, Human Capital and Business Performance in United States
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 會計學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Accounting
學年度 97
學期 2
出版年 98
研究生中文姓名 闕珮伃
研究生英文姓名 Pei-Yu Chueh
學號 696600153
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2009-06-16
論文頁數 62頁
口試委員 指導教授-葉金成
委員-傅澤偉
委員-莊嘉建
中文關鍵字 內含價值法  公平價值法  股票選擇權會計政策  人力資本  企業績效 
英文關鍵字 intrinsic value method  fair value method  stock option Accounting Policy  human capital  business performance 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學商學
中文摘要 美國最早是依循1972年APB 25號意見書之規定,對於股票選擇權成本在給予日,採用內含價值法(Intrinsic Value Method)衡量,當履約價格設定與當時市價相同時,此法對選擇權成本的分配為零。1995年FASB發布SFAS 123號公報,僅建議但並未要求企業在給予日需報導成本及計算其公平價值。然而FASB在2004年12月發布SFAS 123號修正公報,強制規定給員工股票選擇權之日時,須以公平價值法(Fair Value Method)衡量及揭露酬勞成本。近年來我國財務會計準則積極與國際會計準則接軌,而我國在各種國際評鑑最常被扣分之項目為「員工分紅非以費用入帳」,此一項目亦常受外資撻伐,認為企業營運有虛盈實虧之可能,因此我國於2008年1月1日開始實施員工分紅費用化。本研究以2004至2007年美國上市公司為樣本,探討股票選擇權之會計認列方式,採用內含價值法與公平價值法對企業人力資本之影響,及人力資本對企業績效之影響,同時亦觀察股票選擇權對企業績效的影響。實證結果顯示股票選擇權會計政策變動對人力資本及企業績效皆無顯著程度影響,而人力資本為部分中介變數,另外,人力資本對企業績效在公平價值法實施前後皆有影響。
英文摘要 Based on APB Opinion No. 25, 1972, the measurement of stock option cost is the Intrinsic Value Method. When the exercise price is the same with share price at date of grant, the stock option cost equals zero. FASB issued SFAS No. 123 in 1995, it only suggested that the firm should report the stock option cost and calculate its’ fair value, still permits firms to use APB No. 25. However, FASB issued SFAS No. 123 amendment on December 2004, it forced the firm should use Fair Value Method to measure and discourse the stock option cost on grant date. Recently, the Taiwan’s GAAP is convergent with IFRS aggressively. In addition, the results of any international assessment show that the item “employee profit sharing is not accounted as expense of Taiwan” has negative effect, and this item is also criticized by foreign direct investment, they argue that the firm will have overstate net income when the firm has net loss in fact, so Taiwan started to account stock option cost as expense on 01/01/2008. The empirical tests are conducted using Compustat and ExcuComp database for firms listed on the United States Stock Exchange with fiscal year ends between 2004 and 2007. The purpose of this research is to investigate the effects of the stock option accounting policy on the human capital and business performance, and the human capital on the business performance. The empirical results indicate that the change of stock option accounting policy has no effect on human capital and business’s performance while human capital is a partial Mediator. In addition, human capital has effect on business’s performance regardless of the adoption of fair value method. That is, the stock option is accounted as expense or not has no effect human capital and business’s performance.
論文目次 目錄
第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景及動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究流程 4
第四節 論文結構 5
第貳章 文獻探討 6
第一節 股票選擇權之會計政策 6
第二節 資源基礎理論與知識基礎理論 10
第三節 人力資本 11
第參章 研究方法 16
第一節 研究架構 16
第二節 研究假說 17
第三節 實證模型 19
第四節 變數定義 23
第五節 樣本選取與資料來源 27
第肆章 實證結果與分析 29
第一節 敘述性統計與相關係數之分析 29
第二節 股票選擇權酬勞的會計政策對人力資本影響之實證 34
第三節 人力資本對企業績效影響之實證 40
第四節 股票選擇權酬勞之會計政策對企業績效影響之實證 49
第五節 人力資本為中介變數之分析 53
第伍章 結論及建議 54
第一節 結論 54
第二節 研究限制 55
第三節 研究建議 55
參考文獻 56



圖表目錄
圖1-1  研究流程圖 4
圖2-1  資源基礎模式 11
圖2-2  斯堪地亞(Skandia)的市場價值 12
圖2-3  Dzinkowski的智慧資本分類 13
圖2-4  人力資本特徵及僱用模式 14
圖3-1  研究架構圖 16

表3-1  人力資本之衡量變數及定義 24
表3-2  經理人酬勞之衡量變數及定義 24
表3-3  企業績效之衡量變數及定義 25
表3-4  控制之衡量變數及定義 27
表3-5  樣本篩選過程彙總表 28
表4-1  各變數之敘述性統計 30
表4-2  SFAS NO.123R實施前各變數之相關係數分析 32
表4-3  SFAS NO.123R實施後各變數之相關係數分析 33
表4-4  股票選擇權酬勞之會計政策對員工生產力(HC1)影響
之實證結果 35
表4-5  股票選擇權酬勞之會計政策對每人營業利益(HC2)影響
之實證結果 36
表4-6  股票選擇權酬勞之會計政策對員工附加價值(HC3)影響
之實證結果 38
表4-7  SFAS NO.123R實施前後之係數Z檢定統計量結果 39
表4-8  員工生產力(HC1)對會計績效影響之實證結果 42
表4-9  每人營業利益(HC2)對會計績效影響之實證結果 44
表4-10 員工生產力(HC1)對市場績效影響之實證結果 45
表4-11 每人營業利益(HC2)對市場績效影響之實證結果 46
表4-12 員工附加價值(HC3)對市場績效影響之實證結果 47
表4-13 每人營業利益(HC2)對市場績效影響之實證結果-當期48
表4-14 每人營業利益(HC2)對市場績效影響之實證結果-
遞延一期 48
表4-15 股票選擇權酬勞之會計政策對會計績效影響之實證結果50
表4-16 股票選擇權酬勞之會計政策對市場績效影響之實證結果51
表4-17 SFAS NO.123R實施前後之係數Z檢定統計量結果 52
表4-18 人力資本為中介變數之實證結果 53
參考文獻 一、中文部份:
王文英、張清福,2004,智慧資本影響績效模式之探討:我國半導體業之實證研究,會計評論,第39期:89-117。
古台昭,2002,台積電的成功有一部分歸功於員工紅利系統,會計研究月刊,第202期:55。
吳秀娟,2000,企業市場價值與淨值差異影響因素之研究-以我國資訊電子業為例,政治大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
吳鑑芝,2003,智慧資本與公司價值之攸關性探討,中原大學會計學系未出版碩士論文。
林昱君,2003,股票選擇權列為費用,遠見雜誌,第201期:196-197。
林正銘,2002,人力資源管理活動對組織績效的影響-同期與遞延效果之探討,中央大學人力資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
林明德,2003,無形資產之價值攸關性與決定因素之探討,政治大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
施振榮,2002年8月1日,員工分紅入股有其存在意義與價值,經濟日報,第4版。
馬嘉應、薛明玲、黃志雄,2000,員工分紅入股之會計處理與財稅影響(上),會計研究月刊,第178期:134-139。
許崇源、張仲岳、葉疏,2003,我們認為員工分紅應列為費用,會計研究月刊,第213期:100-115。
黃聖茵,2004,組織之人力資本對市場價值及財務績效影響之研究,政治大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
詹文男,2002,資訊科技產業智慧資本衡量之研究-系統理論之觀點,中央大學資訊管理學系未出版碩士論文。
趙子沛,2002,趙子沛,人力資本資訊揭露與市場績效關聯性之研究,中正大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
董碧玫,2001,智能資本之衡量-以國內電子產業為例,中央大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
陳湘錡,2004,財務資本、智慧資本與企業價值之關聯性探討-以資訊電子產業為例,台灣科技大學企業管理系未出版碩士論文。
鍾惠珍,2002,員工分紅制度探討,會計研究月刊,第202期:44-46。
鄭慧之,2006,員工分紅費用化時代來臨,會計研究月刊,第249期:28-33。
蘇淑卿,2007,員工分紅費用化新制上路,證券暨期貨月刊,第25卷第7期:39-46。
二、英文部份:
Aboody D., M. E. Barth, and R. Kasznik. 2004. SFAS No. 123 stock-based compensation expense and equity market values. The Accounting Review 79 (2): 251-275.
Aboody D., M. E. Barth, and R. Kasznik. 2006. Do firms understate stock option-based compensation expense disclosed under SFAS 123? Review of Accounting Studies 11 (4): 429-461.
Andriessen, D. 2004. Making sense of intellectual capital designing a method for the valuation of intangibles. USA, MA: Elsevier, Inc.
Baber, W. R., S. N. Janakiraman, and S. H. Kang. 1996. Investment opportunities and the structure of executive compensation. Journal of Accounting and Economics 21 (3): 297-318.
Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17 (1): 99-120.
Bell, T. B., W. R. Landsman, B. L. Miller, and S. Ysh. 2002. The valuation implications of employee stock option accounting for profitable computer software firms. The Accounting Review 77 (4): 971-996.
Bernstein J. I. and M. I. Nadiri. 1988. Interindustry R&D spillovers, rates of return, and production in high-tech industries. The American Economic Review 78 (2): 429-434.
Bizjak, J. M., J. A. Brickley, and J. L. Coles. 1993. Stock-based incentive compensation and investment behavior. Journal of Accounting and Economics 16 (1-3): 349-372.
Bodie, Z., R. S. Kaplan, and R. C. Merton. 2003. For the last time: stock options are an expense. Harvard business review 81 (3): 63-71.
Bouillon, M. L., B. M. Doran, and P. F. Orazem. 1996. Human capital investment effects on firm returns. Journal of Applied Business Research 12 (1): 30-41.
Bryan, S., L. Hwang, and S. Lilien. 2000. CEO stock-based compensation: An empirical analysis of incentive-intensity, relative mix, and economic determinants. The Journal of Business 73 (4): 661-693.
Cheng, M. Y., J. Y. Lin, T. Y. Hsiao, and T. W. Lin. 2008. Censoring model for evaluating intellectual capital value drivers. Journal of Intellectual Capital 9 (4): 639-654.
Core, J. E., and W. R. Guay. 2001. Stock option plans for non-executive employees. Journal of Financial Economics 61 (2): 253-287.
Dechow, P. M., A. P. Hutton, and R. G. Sloan. 1996. Economic Consequences of Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Journal of Accounting Research 34: 1-20.
Dierickx, I., K. Cool. 1989. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science 35 (12): 1504-1511.
Dzinkowski, R. 2000. The measurement and management of intellectual capital: an introduction. Management Accounting 78 (2): 32-35.
Eaton, J. and S. Rosen. 1983. Agency, delayed compensation, and the structure of executive remuneration. The Journal of Finance 38 (5): 1489-1505.
Edvinsson, L., and M. S. Malone. 1997. Intellectual capital: realizing your company's true value by finding its hidden brainpower: HarperBusiness.
Fama, E. F. 1980. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy 88 (2): 288-307.
Frye, M. B. 2004. Equity-based compensation for employees firm performance and determinants. The Journal of Financial Research 27 (1): 31-54.
Gaver, J. J., and K. M. Gaver. 1993. Additional evidence on the association between the investment opportunity set and corporate financing, dividend, and compensation policies. Journal of Accounting and Economics 16 (1-3): 125-160.
Grant, R. M., 1991. The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation, California Management Review 33 (3): 114-135.
Grant, R. M., 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17 (special issue): 109-122.
Hale, J. 1998. Strategic rewards: Keeping your best talent from walking out the door. Compensation and Benefits Management 14 (3): 39-50.
Hall, B. J., and J. B. Liebman. 1998. Are CEOs really paid like bureaucrats? Quarterly Journal of Economics 113 (3): 653-691.
Hall, B. J. 2000. What you need to know about stock option. Harvard Business Rview 78(3): 121-129.
Holzer, H. J., R. N. Block, M. C. Cheatham, and J. H. Knott. 1993. Are training subsidies for firms effective? The michigan experience. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 46 (4): 625-636.
Hurwitz, J., S. Lines, B. Montgomery, and J. Schmidt. 2002. The linkage between management practices, intangibles performance and stock returns. Journal of Intellectual Capital 3 (1): 51-61.
Ittner, C. D., R. A. Lambert, and D. F. Larcker. 2003. The Structure and Performance Consequences of Equity Grants to Employees of New Economy Firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics 34: 89-127.
John, T. A., and K. John. 1993. Top-management compensation and capital structure. The Journal of Finance 48 (3): 949-974.
Johnson, W. H. A. 1999. An integrative taxonomy of intellectual capital: Measuring the stock and flow of intellectual capital components in the firm. International Journal of Technology Management 18 (5): 562-575.
Knight, D. J. 1999. Performance measures for increasing intellectual capital. Strategy and Leadership 27 (2): 22-25.
Lambert, E. G., N. L. Hogan, and S. M. Barton. 2001. The impact of job satisfaction on turnover intent: a test of a structure measurement model using a national sample of workers. The Social Science Journal 38 (2): 233-250.
Leonard-Barton, D. 1992. Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal 13: 111-125.
Lepak, D. P., and S. A. Snell. 1999. The human resource architecture: toward a theory of human capital allocation and development. The Academy of Management Review 24 (1): 31-48.
Lepak, D. P., and S. A. Snell. 2002. Examining the human resource architecture: the relationships among human capital, employment, and human resource configurations. Journal of Management 28 (4): 517-543.
Liebowitz, J., and C. Y. Suen. 2000. Developing knowledge management metrics for measuring intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital 1 (1): 54-67.
Matsunaga, S. R. 1995. The Effects of Financial Reporting Costs on the Use of Employee Stock Options. The Accounting Review 70 (1): 1-26.
Mehran, H. 1995. Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics 38 (2): 163-184.
Murphy, K. J. 2003. Stock-based pay in new economy firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics 34 (1-3): 129-147.
Ohlson, J. A. 1995. Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation. Contemporary Accounting Research 11 (2): 661-687.
Peteraf, M. A. 1993. The Cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 14 (3): 179-191.
Riedl, E. J. 2004. An examination of long-lived asset impairments. The Accounting Review 79 (3): 823-852.
Scott, W. R. 2006. Financial accounting theory. Toronto, ON: Pearson Education Canada, Inc.
Skaggs, B. C., and M.Youndt. 2004. Strategic positioning, human capital, and performance in service organizations: A customer interaction approach. Strategic Management Journal 25 (1): 85-99.
Smith, C. W. Jr. and R. L. Watts. 1992. The investment opportunity set and corporate financing, dividend, and compensation policies. Journal of Financial Economics 32 (3): 263-293.
Snell, S. A., and J. W. Jr. Dean. 1992. Integrated manufacturing and human resource management: A human capital perspective. Academy of Management Journal 35 (3): 467-504.
Stewart, T. A. 1994. Your company’s most valuable asset: intellectual capital. Fortune 3 (10): 68-74.
Stewart, T. A. 1997. Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York, NY: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.
Tayles, M., R. H. Pike, and S. Sofian. 2007. Intellectual capital, management accounting practices and corporate performance-Perceptions of managers. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 20 (4): 522-548.
Van Buren, M. E. 1999. A yardstick for knowledge management. Training and Development 53 (5): 71-74.
Wang, J. C. 2006. Utilizing Skandia navigator system and ohlson model to evaluate the intellectual capital performance for Taiwan electronic corporations. The Business Review 6 (1): 186-192.
Wang, J. C. 2008. Investigating market value and intellectual capital for S&P500. Journal of Intellectual Capital 9 (4): 546-563.
Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5 (2): 171-180.
Yermack, D. 1995. Do corporations award CEO stock options effectively? Journal of Financial Economic 5 (2-3): 237-269.
Zingales, L. 2000. In search of new foundations. The Journal of Finance 55 (4): 1623-1653.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2014-07-01公開。
  • 不同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信