Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

State ownership and listed firm performance: a universally negative governance relationship?

  • Published:
Journal of Management & Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Our analysis of more than 1,000 Chinese listed firms, 2003–2005, reveals a positive association between state ownership (SO) and firm performance. Arguably, if SO “causes” performance, it must be through the channel of agency cost. Therefore, our paper checks the robustness of this positive SO/performance finding by analyzing the role of agency cost as a mediator. It emerges that SO in the Chinese context may represent a strategic asset rather than an agency burden. However, it is not clear whether this is an outcome driven by efficiency or power.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, F., Qian, J., & Qian, M. (2005). Law, finance, and economic growth in China. Journal of Financial Economics, 77, 57–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ang, J. S., Cole, R. A., & Lin, J. W. (2000). Agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Finance, 55, 81–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barberis, N., Boycko, M., Shleifer, A., & Tsukanova, N. (1996). How does privatization work? Evidence from the Russian Shops. Journal of Political Economy, 104, 764–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bascle, G. (2008). Controlling for endogeneity with instrumental variables in strategic management research. Strategic organization, 6, 285–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birdsall, N., & Nellis, J. (2005). Reality check: The distributional impact of privatization in developing countries. Washington DC: Center for Global Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bontis, N., Booker, L., & Serenko, A. (2007). The mediating effect of organizational reputation on customer loyalty and service recommendation in the banking industry. Management Decision, 45, 1426–1445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boycko, M., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1996). A theory of privatization. Economic Journal, 106, 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buck, T. W., Liu, X., & Skovoroda, R. (2008). Top executive pay and firm performance in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 833–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S. J. (2003). Ownership structure, expropriation, and performance of group-affiliated companies in Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 238–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J.-R. (2008). Attaining a greater understanding of how job attitudes of new MIS professionals impact their turnover intentions at the socialization stage. The Business Review, 11, 207–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Firth, M., & Rui, O. (2006). Have China’s enterprise reforms led to improve efficiency and profitability? Emerging Markets Review, 7, 82–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, X.-P., & Li, S. (2005). Cross-national differences in cooperative decision-making in mixed-motive business contexts: The mediating effect of vertical and horizontal individualism. Journal of international business studies, 36, 622–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., Sun, Z., & Wang, Y. (2002). Evidence from China on whether harmonized accounting standards harmonize accounting practices. Accounting Horizons, 16, 183–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, X., & Yur-Austin, J. (2007). Re-measuring agency costs: The effectiveness of blockholders. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 47, 588–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chow, G. C. (1997). Challenges of China’s economic system for economic theory. American Economic Review, 87, 321–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, T. (2007). International corporate governance: A comparative approach. Oxon, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte. (2006). China’s new accounting standards. www.deloitte.com accessed 7.2.09.

  • Dharwadkar, R., George, G., & Brandes, P. (2000). Privatization in emerging economies: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management Review, 25, 650–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djankov, S., & Murrell, P. (2002). Enterprise restructuring in transition: A quantitative survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 739–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernald, J., & Rogers, J. H. (2002). Puzzles in the Chinese stock market. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 416–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, P. A. (1993). Determinants of corporate restructuring: The relative importance of corporate governance, takeover threat, and free cash flow. Strategic Management Journal, 14, Special issue: Corporate restructuring, 51–68.

  • Gordon, R. H., & Li, W. (2003). Government as a discriminating monopolist in the financial market: The case of China. Journal of Public Economics, 87, 283–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, S., & Liu, S. G. (2005). Exit the dragon? Privatization and state control in China. Chatham House, Blackwell: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, T., Hong, Y., McMillan, J., & Naughton, B. (1994). Autonomy and incentives in Chinese state enterprises. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109, 183–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L. L., Chung, M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76, 323–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (1993). Presidential address: The modern industrial revolution, exit and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48, 831–880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia, J., Sun, Q., & Tong, W. (2005). Privatization through an overseas listing: Evidence from China”s H-share firms. Financial Management, 34, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jingu, T. (2007). Corporate governance for listed companies in China—recent moves to improve the quality of listed companies. Nomura Capital Market Review, 10, 36–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kato, T., & Long, C. (2006). Executive turnover and firm performance in. China, 96, 363–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, C.-M., Fan, D. K. K., Young, M. N., & Wu, S. (2007). Corporate Governance Effectiveness During Institutional Transition. International Business Review, 16, 425–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, L. J., Qian, Y., & Roland, G. (2000). Reform without losers: An interpretation of China’s dual-track approach to transition. Journal of Political Economy, 108, 120–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehn, K., & Poulsen, A. (1989). Free cash flow and stockholder gains in going private transactions. Journal of Finance, 44, 771–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, D. (1998). Changing incentives of the Chinese bureaucracy. American Economic Review, 88, 393–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, W. (1997). The impact of economic reform on the performance of Chinese state enterprises, 1980–1989. Journal of Political Economy, 105, 1080–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, T. W. (2004). Corporate governance in China: Recent developments, key problems and solutions. Journal of Accounting and Corporate Governance, 1, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, A. Y., & Swanson, P. E. (2008). The effect of China’s reform policies on stock market information transmission. Quarterly Journal of Finance & Accounting, 47, 49–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, G. S., & Sun, P. (2005). China’s public firms: How much privatization? In S. Green & S. G. Liu (Eds.), Exit the dragon? Privatization and state control in China. London: Chatham House, Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, D. (2000). Industry policy and resource allocation: Implications on China’s participation in globalization. Chinese Economic Review, 11, 342–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, D., Thangavelu, S., & Hu, Q. (2005). Biased lending and non-performing loans in China’s banking sector. Journal of Development Studies, 41, 1071–1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, S. V., & Sicherman, N. W. (1991). The agency cost of free cash flow: Acquisition activity and equity issues. Journal of Business, 64, 213–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, P., & Weir, C. (2009). Agency costs, corporate governance mechanisms and ownership structure in large UK publicly quoted companies: A panel data analysis. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, forthcoming.

  • Megginson, W. L., & Netter, J. M. (2001). From state to market: A survey of empirical studies on privatization. Journal of Economic Literature, 39, 321–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Min, J. H., & Prather, L. J. (2001). Tobin’s q, agency conflicts, and different wealth effects of international joint ventures. Global Finance Journal, 12, 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nee, V., Opper, S., & Wong, S. (2007). Developmental state and corporate government in China. Management and Organization Review, 3, 19–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., & Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied Linear Regression Models (3rd ed.). Chicago: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nolan, P. (2001). China and the global business revolution. New York: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Norton, L. P. (2008). Who’s minding the minders of Chinese accounting? Barron’s, 88, 36–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, S. H., Li, S., & Tse, D. K. (2006). Market liberalization and firm performance during China’s economic transition. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 127–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, S. H., & Luo, Y. (2001). Guanxi and organizational dynamics: Organizational networking in Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 455–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. P., & Luo, Y. (2000). Managerial ties and firm performance in a transition economy: The nature of a micro-macro link. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 486–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, S., Tondkar, R. H., van der Laan Smith, J., & Harless, D. W. (2008). Does convergence of accounting standards lead to a convergence of accounting practices? A study from China. International Journal of Accounting, 43, 448–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, B. E. (2007). The threat of privatization: The impetus behind government performance. International Journal of Public Administration, 30, 1141–1155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qi, D., Wu, W., & Zhang, H. (2000). Shareholding structure and corporate performance of partially privatized firms: Evidence from listed Chinese companies. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 8, 587–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rediker, K. J., & Seth, A. (1995). Boards of directors and substitution effects of alternative governance mechanisms. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuer, J. J., & Miller, K. D. (1997). Agency costs and the performance implications of international joint venture internalization. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 425–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sami, H., & Zhou, H. (2008). Do auditing standards improve the accounting disclosure and information environment of public companies? Evidence from the emerging markets China. International Journal of Accounting, 43, 139–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheng, S., Parker, A. M., & Nakamoto, K. (2005). Understanding the mechanism and determinants of compromise effects. Psychology & Marketing, 22, 591–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirley, M., & Walsh, P. (2000). Public versus private ownership: The current state of the debate, Working Paper No. 2420, World Bank.

  • Shleifer, A. (1998). State versus private ownership. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12, 133–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52, 737–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998). The grabbing hand: Government pathologies and their cures. Boston: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, M., & Davidson, W. N., I. I. I. (2003). Agency costs, ownership structure and corporate governance mechanisms. Journal of Banking, Finance, 27, 793–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, Q., & Tong, W. (2003). China share issue privatization: The extent of its success. Journal of Financial Economics, 70, 183–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, Q., Tong, W., & Tong, J. (2002). How does government ownership affect firm performance? Evidence from China’s privatization experience. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 29, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2007). Cultural revolution: Chinese accounting, 382(8511), p 63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian, L., & Estrin, S. (2005). Retained state shareholding in Chinese PLCs: Does government ownership reduce corporate value?, working paper 750. Ann Arbor: William Davidson Institute.

  • Wan, J., & Yuce, A. (2007). Listing regulations in China and their effect on the performance of IPOs and SOEs. Research in International Business and Finance, 21, 366–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Xu, L. C., & Zhu, T. (2004). State-owned enterprises going public: The case of China. Economics of Transition, 12, 467–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, Z., Xie, F., & Zhang, S. (2005). Ownership structure and firm value in China’s privatized firms: 1991–2001. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 40, 87–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, S. (2000). Competition, capabilities, and the make, buy, or ally decisions of Chinese state-owned firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 324–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, J. (2003). Introductory econometrics. Ohio: South Western, Mason.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R., & Peng, M. W. (2005). Strategy research in emerging economies: Challenging the conventional wisdom. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, P. C., & Nguyen, V. T. (2000). State-owned enterprises (SOEs) in Vietnam–Perceptions of strategic direction for a society in transition. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13, 169–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiong, Y., Su, W., & Lin, T. W. (2008). Activity-based costing popularity in China. Cost Management, 22, 40–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, X., & Wang, Y. (1999). Ownership structure and corporate governance in Chinese stock companies. China Economic Review, 10, 75–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. N., Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. D., & Jiang, Y. (2008). Corporate governance in emerging economies: A review of the principal-principal perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 196–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, B. Y., & Egri, C. P. (2005). Human resource management practices and affective organizational commitment: A comparison of Chinese employees in a state-owned enterprise and a joint venture. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 43, 332–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zajac, E. J., & Westphal, J. D. (1994). The costs and benefits of managerial incentives and monitoring in large us corporations—when is more not better. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 121–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, W. (2006). China’s SOE reform: A corporate governance perspective”. Corporate Ownership and Control, 3, 132–150.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Loughborough University Business School, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK

    Trien Vinh Le & Trevor Buck

Authors
  1. Trien Vinh Le
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Trevor Buck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Trien Vinh Le.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 4.

Table 4 Industries by level of state ownership
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Le, T.V., Buck, T. State ownership and listed firm performance: a universally negative governance relationship?. J Manag Gov 15, 227–248 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-009-9098-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-009-9098-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation