|
|
|
| The Influence of Mixed Reform of State-owned Enterprises on Enterprise Innovation Performance with Different Risk Characteristics： The Perspectives of Resource Effect and Institutional Effect |
| Song Chunxia,Xue Yue |
| (School of Management and Economics, North China University of Water Resourcesand Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450003, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract From the "innovation-driven development strategy" of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China to the goal of "building a strong country in science and technology" at the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee, corporate innovation has always attracted attention as a prerequisite for national development and national rejuvenation. The reason why China has an overall development in recent years is because innovation has played an extremely important role in it. For example, the improvement of national defense strength and education level, the rich scientific research achievement and the rapid development of aerospace industry, etc. all take innovation as their backbone. In addition, from the perspective of the mixed reform of state-owned enterprises promoted across the country, innovation capability has also become an important target. Therefore,it is proposed to actively develop mixed ownership and introduce non-state capital into state-owned enterprises in the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China . On the one hand, the ownership structure of enterprises stimulates the innovation vitality of state-owned enterprises, and on the other hand, through the supervision of state-owned enterprises by non-state-owned capital, it reduces agency costs and improves the efficiency of enterprises in all aspects. So far nearly 8 years have passed since the mixed ownership reform. What is the impact of the mixed ownership reform of state-owned enterprises on innovation performance? This deserves further study. #br#In recent years, more and more state-owned enterprises have participated in the mixed ownership reform, making their equity more diversified, improving innovation performance, and achieving high-quality development is one of the motivations for state-owned enterprises' mixed ownership reform. Changes in the external environment will lead to problems such as the excessive proportion of state-owned equity in state-owned enterprises, imperfect internal governance, disproportion between costs and production capacity, and lack of management of state-owned assets, resulting in the loss of state-owned assets and insufficient ability to deal with internal and external risks.Due to the different risk characteristics of enterprises, the decline of state-owned equity in state-owned enterprises will have different effects on innovation performance. Therefore, this paper further analyzes the innovation effect of mixed reform of state-owned enterprises under different risk backgrounds. #br#As the actual controller of state-owned enterprises, the government may give up part of its economic performance due to policy goals, and thus choose to invest in projects with lower risks, which will lead to relatively low innovation capabilities and innovation performance of state-owned enterprises. The introduction of non-state-owned capital with a relatively complete governance mechanism and a dynamic management system, on the one hand, enables the integration of different types of shareholder resources to achieve a "resource effect" that complements each other's advantages andmake them learn from each other's strengths; on the other hand, it also realizes the mutual learning of management and governance systems. The "institutional effect" of integration may be an effective way to effectively improve the independent innovation capability of state-owned enterprises. Therefore, the studyadopts the empirical data of A-share state-owned listed companies from 2013 to 2019, uses Stata16.0 statistical analysis software to establish a research model and conducts multiple regression analysis. According to the"resource effect" and "system effect", this paper analyzes the degree of mixed reform of state-owned enterprises, its impact on their innovation efficiency, as well as the introduction of internal business risk and external competition risk, and further analyzes the innovation effect of mixed reform of state-owned enterprises under different risk backgrounds. The results show that there is a U-shaped relationship between state-owned equity and innovation performance, that is, enterprises with a lower proportion of state-owned equity appropriately reduce the proportion of state-owned shares, which is conducive to exerting the institutional vitality of non-state-owned capital and promoting enterprise innovation; while state-owned enterprises with a higher proportion of state-owned equity , the increase of state-owned shares is more conducive to exerting its resource advantages and promoting innovation performance. The research that considers the internal and external risks of enterprises finds that the high operating risk of state-owned enterprises will strengthen the U-shaped relationship between state-owned equity changes and innovation performance; the low market competition risk of state-owned enterprises will strengthen the U-shaped relationship between state-owned equity changes and innovation performance. The group study confirms that for manufacturing and non-manufacturing state-owned enterprises, state-owned equity has no correlation and there is U-shaped relationship with innovation performance, respectively. The research conclusions of this paper can provide guidance and direction for promoting the mixed reform of state-owned enterprises and improving the innovation performance of state-owned enterprises.#br#
|
|
Received: 24 August 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 吴延兵. 不同所有制企业技术创新能力考察[J]. 产业经济研究,2014,13(2)：53-64.
[2] 熊爱华,张质彬,张涵. 国有企业混合所有制改革对创新绩效影响研究[J]. 科研管理,2021,42(6) :73-83.
[3] 胡加明,吴迪. 股权结构与企业绩效之谜[J]. 东岳论丛,2020,41(10) :97-113.
[4] 向东,余玉苗. 国有企业引入非国有资本对创新绩效的影响——基于制造业国有上市公司的经验证据[J/OL]. 研究与发展管理,http://doi.org/10.13581/j.cnkj.rdm.20190567.
[5] DIXON A J,SEDDI H R . An analysis of R&D activities in north east England manufacturing firms: the results of a sample survey[J]. Regional Studies, 2011, 30(3):287-294.
[6] 刘欣,李颖. 国家持股对企业创新绩效影响研究[J]. 软科学,2017,31(8):119-128.
[7] 秦华英. 混合所有制改革影响国有企业创新的机制分析[J]. 管理世界,2018,34(7) :174-175.
[8] GOEL A M,THAKOR A V. Overconfidence,CEO selection and corporate governance[J]. Journal of Finance,2008(63) :2737-2784.
[9] MINTON B, SCHRAND C. The impact of cash flow volatility on discretionary investment and the costs of debt and equity financing [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 1999 (54): 423-460.
[10] CLEARY S. International corporate investment and the relationships between financial constraint measures forthcoming[J]. Journal of Banking and Finance,2006(30)：1559-1580.
[11] 吴永林,万春阳. 协同技术创新中的技术互补、资源互补与技术创新能力研究[J]. 工业技术经济,2016,35(6) :62-65.
[12] 刘雨婷. 反腐新政背景下政企关系对企业投资的影响研究[D]. 桂林:广西师范大学,2019.
[13] 吴松强,黄盼盼,曹新雨. 企业关系资本、知识共享与企业创新能力——基于先进制造业产业技术联盟的实证研究[J]. 科学管理研究,2021,39(1)：123-131.
[14] 赵璨,宿莉莎,曹伟. 混合所有制改革：治理效应还是资源效应——基于不同产权性质下企业投资效率的研究[J]. 上海财经大学学报,2021,23(1) :75-90.
[15] 余汉,杨中仑,宋增基. 国有股权、政治关联与公司绩效——基于中国民营控股上市公司的实证研究[J]. 管理评论,2017,29(4) :196-212.
[16] 张之源. 大型国有企业人力资源开发管理研究[J]. 黑龙江社会科学,2019,30(6) :22-25.
[17] 黄艳. 发挥党管人才优势提升现代国有企业人力资源管理价值[J]. 现代经济信息,2019，40(21) :29-31.
[18] 李明敏. 非国有股东的董事会权力对混改国企资产保值增值的作用机理[D]. 西安：西安理工大学,2020.
[19] 喻坤,李治国,张晓蓉,等. 企业投资效率之谜:融资约束假说与货币政策冲击[J]. 经济研究,2014,49(5) :106-120.
[20] 刘俊辰. 竞争性国企混改中的国有股比例对企业绩效的影响研究[D]. 西安：西安理工大学,2018.
[21] ZHU W,SU S,SHOU Z. Social ties and firm performance:the mediating effect of adaptive capability and supplier opportunism[J]. Journal of Business Research,2017,78(5) :226-232.
[22] ZHANG N,LIANG Q Z,LEI H,et al. Are political ties only based on interpersonal relations? the organizational political tie and its role in firms' innovations in China[J]. Chinese Management Studies,2016,10(3) :417-434.
[23] 蔡晓凤. 公司治理视角下大股东减持对企业价值的影响研究[D]. 赣州：江西理工大学,2020.
[24] 李增福,黄家惠,连玉君. 非国有资本参股与国企技术创新[J]. 统计研究,2021,38(1) :119-131.
[25] GUPTA N.Partial privatization and firm performance[J].The Journal of Finance, 2005, 60(2)：987-1015.
[26] 吴延兵. 中国哪种所有制类型企业最具创新性[J]. 世界经济,2012,35(6) :3-29.
[27] KIM LU. Is chief officer power bad[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 2011(4):495-516.
[28] JOSEPH L C.Organizational slack and response to environmental shifts:the impact of resource allocation patterns[J].Journal of Management，1997，23(1): 1-18.
[29] STEIN L, STONE E. The effect of uncertainty on investment,hiring,and R&D: causal evidence from equity options[J]. SSRN Electronic Journal,2013(10):88-129.
[30] 唐瑶. 高管激励、内部控制质量对企业风险承担的影响研究[D]. 重庆:重庆理工大学,2020.
[31] GULEN H，ION M. Policy uncertaintyand corporate investment[J]. Review of Financial Studies，2016，29(3)：523-564.
[32] ZHAOXIA XU. Economic Policy uncertainty，cost of capital，and corporate innovation[J]. Journal of Banking and Finance，2020，11-12.
[33] 杨昊昌,温军,陈学招. 经济政策不确定性与家族企业创新——融资约束及政府补助视角[J]. 科技进步与对策,2021,38(11) :1-9.
[34] 林钟高,张春艳. 环境不确定性、客户集中度与企业创新能力——基于创业板公司上市前后主要客户变动的视角[J]. 会计之友,2017,35(16) :47-53.
[35] 张春鹏,徐璋勇. 市场竞争:“拦路虎”还是“助推剂”——技术异质性企业“脱实向虚”的证据[J]. 财经科学,2019,62(8) :1-13.
[36] 徐柳波. 国有企业混合所有制改革对企业创新的影响[D]. 北京:首都经济贸易大学,2018.
[37] 朱磊,陈曦,王春燕. 国有企业混合所有制改革对企业创新的影响[J]. 经济管理,2019,41(11) :72-91.
[38] 王晓红,王梦瑶. 企业绩效、财务状况与杠杆风险——来自中国上市公司的实证研究[J]. 商业经济,2019,38(4) :144-146.
[39] 刘胜强. 股权结构对企业R&D投资行为的影响及经济后果研究[D].重庆:重庆大学,2011.
|
|
|
|
