台灣營建業公司治理落實程度之評量與分析

Compliance of Taiwan Construction Companies with Corporate Governance Best Practice

洪嘉鍾(Chia-Chung Hung)

指導教授 ： 周慧瑜

朝陽科技大學/理工學院/營建工程系/碩士(2010年)

摘要

隨著公司治理逐漸成為世界各國的共同趨勢，我國政府對上市櫃公司實施公司治理機制的倡導與推動，至今也有十年的時間。營建業基於其高代理風險的產業特性，理論上應有較強烈的動機落實公司治理機制；然而初步觀察國內上市櫃公司治理制度之推動，卻未能發現營建業在獲取認證上有較積極或表現較佳的趨勢。此種現象是否有其他產業特性因素、廠商個別因素、或公司治理之制度面因素，造成了上述理論與實際不符的現象，是本研究擬發掘探究的課題。
本研究首先為確認營建業在公司治理上之表現，是否與其他產業存在顯著差異，擬採用國內目前較具指標性，由中華公司治理協會發展出之「公司治理制度評量系統」，作為公司治理制度落實程度的評量標準。在既有評量成績與結果不可得的情況下，本研究自行對研究對象進行可揭露資訊之收集與評分。至於研究對象的選定，本研究選取了41家公司作為代表「營建業」之調查群組；並依據天下雜誌所公布之2009年製造業、服務業及金融業前一千大排行，選取41家「龍頭企業」作為營建業之對照群組。
對上述兩群組進行公司治理落實程度之調查與評分後，本研究主要運用統計檢定方法來探討兩方面課題，其一為檢定營建業與龍頭企業在公司治理落實程度上是否存在差異；其二為檢定包括公司規模、獲利能力、及公司治理推動動機等各類因素，與公司治理落實程度之相關性。檢定結果得知：
1.營建業與龍頭企業在整體公司治理落實程度上存在顯著差異，且龍頭企業之整體表現較營建業為佳。
2.龍頭企業在「董事會職能的強化」與「利害關係人權益的尊重」兩分項上，落實程度與營建業存在顯著差異，且龍頭企業表現較佳。
3.若不區分營建業或龍頭企業，全體樣本企業之公司規模落實程度，與代表公司規模之「營收總額」、「資本額」、「員工人數」等三項因素均具有顯著相關，但與獲利能力、公司治理推動動機等方面之各項因素則未見顯著相關性。依據上述結果，本研究初步推論，企業規模越大，如公司資金規模愈大或人力越充足時，公司越有能力承擔公司治理所需的成本，也因此公司治理落實程度越高。
4.單獨就營建業來看，公司治理落實程度與「員工人數」、「董事及監事持股比率」存在顯著性；而龍頭企業之公司治理落實程度則與所有假設因素皆未見顯著相關性。

關鍵字

公司治理 ； 代理問題

並列摘要

As corporate governance has gradually become the common trend in every country in the world, it has also been 10 years since our country’s government began to implement the initiative and promotion of corporate governance mechanism in listed/OTC companies. In the construction industry, owing to its industrial property of high agency risk, theoretically, it should have stronger motivation to carry out corporate governance mechanism. Nevertheless, in the primary observations about the promotion of corporate governance system in the listed/OTC companies within our country, the construction industry does not seem to have the tendency to be more active or have better performance in acquiring certification. Regarding such a phenomenon, the study intended to discover and explore the issue: Whether there are other industrial property factors, company’s individual factors, or system factors of corporate governance that cause the aforementioned phenomenon of inconsistency between theories and reality.
In this study, first of all, in order to confirm whether the construction industry’s performance in corporate governance is significantly different from other industries, the “Corporate Governance and Rating System” developed by Corporate Governance Association, which is more indicatory in our country at present, was adopted to serve as the rating standard for implementation degree of corporate governance system. Under the situation in which the existing assessment scores and results are not available, the collections and ratings were undertaken in this study, aimed at the research subjects’ information which can be disclosed. As for the selection of the research subjects, 41 companies (in the construction industry) were selected in this study, to serve as the survey group representing “the construction industry”. Also, according to the 2009 Top 1000 Companies in the manufacture industry, the service industry and the financial industry announced by Common Wealth Magazine, the 41 “leading enterprises” were selected from these industries, to serve as the control group vs. the construction industry.
After the surveys and appraisals of implementation degree of corporate governance were performed aimed at the foregoing two groups, statistics and test methods were mainly utilized in this study to explore the issues in two aspects. One was to test whether the difference in implementation degree of corporate governance existed between the construction industry and the leading enterprises. The other was to test the correlation between the implementation degree of corporate governance and the various kinds of factors including company scale, profitability, the motivation for promoting corporate governance, and so on. The test results indicated:
1.In terms of implementation degree of entire corporate governance, a significant difference existed between the construction industry and the leading enterprises. Also, the leading enterprises had better entire performance than the construction industry did.
2.In the two sub-items “Function reinforcement of the Board of Directors” and “Respect for stakeholders’ right”, a significant difference in the implementation degree existed between the leading enterprises and the construction industry. Also, the leading enterprises had better performance.
3.If no division of construction industry or leading enterprise was made, the implementation degree of company scale in all the sample enterprises had significant correlation with the three factors “total revenue”, “capital amount” and “number of employees” that represent company scale, but it had no significant correlation with various kinds of factors in the aspects such as profitability and the motivation for promoting corporate governance. According to the results mentioned above, this study had the primary conclusion: With greater enterprise scale, ex. greater scale of company capital or more abundant manpower, a company will be more capable for taking on the cost necessary for corporate governance, and thus it will have higher implementation degree of corporate governance.
4.If seen from the construction industry alone, significance existed between the implementation degree of corporate governance and the factors “number of employees” and “directors’ and supervisors’ share proportion”, while the leading enterprises’ implementation degree of corporate governance had no significant correlation with all the assumption factors.

並列關鍵字

agency problem ； corporate governance

參考文獻

3.王明德、張登傑，「營建業組織中代理問題之分析」，中華民國建築學會「建築學報」，第30期，第27-42頁，1999.09。

6.洪維廷、林森田「營建業共同代理問題」，中華民國建築學會「建築學報」，第45期，第81-89頁，2004.02。

11.彭雲宏、廖佳雯、陳淑如，「營建業上市公司代理問題之初步探討」，中華民國建築學會「建築學報」，第28期，第01-14頁，1999.03。

1.Lang, M. and R. Lundholm,“Cross Sectional Determinants of Analysis Ratingsof Corporate Disclosures,”Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.31,No2,pp. 246–271,1993.

2.Wijantini,“Voluntary Disclosure in the Annual Reports of Financially Distressed Companies in Indonesia,”Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, Vol.8, No3, pp.343-365,2006.