【作者】 董志强；

【导师】 蒲勇健；

【作者基本信息】 重庆大学 ， 工商管理， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 初创的民营企业，一般都采取所有权-控制权合二为一的古典治理结构。但是，由于继承问题、融资问题等不可避免，民营企业的公司治理最终会面临从古典治理向现代治理的转变，即分离公司的所有权和控制权。本文研究的就是，当代中国民营企业的公司治理转型问题。 对于当代中国民营企业公司治理转型问题，国内大致存在两种观点。规范性观点认为，古典治理是一种落后的治理方式，当代民营企业必须向以两权分离为特征的现代治理转变，才能更好地适应市场的竞争局势；解释性观点认为，当代中国绝大多数民营企业自愿“锁定”在古典治理，这并非随机选择的结果，而是有着深厚的经济理性逻辑。血缘文化传统、社会缺乏信任、法治环境欠佳等，都可能是民营企业锁定在古典治理的重要原因。 本文认为：规范性观点在逻辑上不具有说服力；但若追随解释性的观点，那么人们将得到消极的结论——既然文化、信任、法制等因素不是单个企业可改变的，那么企业在转变其公司治理结构方面可能是无所作为的。但现实却表明，仍旧有不少的民营企业成功地实现了向现代企业的转变。从而，反思解释性观点是有必要的。实际上，本文正在做这样的尝试：一方面寻求某种理论框架可以解释既存的现象，另一方面这个理论框架又可以应用于考察管理实践，昭示企业该如何努力。 在本文看来，所有权-控制权的分离会带来一系列收益，但是也会因此出现代理问题而带来更高的治理成本。一个企业是否应当分离所有权与控制权，应取决于成本-收益的平衡。一般来说，分离两权的收益可看作是既定的(虽然随时间演进可能也会有变化)，则分离两权的成本就成了是否分离两权的关键考虑因素。援引国际上关于公司治理的最新成果，本文认为分权治理的成本高低主要取决于外部环境(尤其是法治环境)和内部监控(所有者实施监督的能力和水平)。尽管企业对环境的改变无能为力，但它们还是可以通过强化内部监控来对公司治理转型做出积极响应。为了获取管理应用意义，本文对一些成功公司进行了基准化(Benchmarking)研究，并结合前述分析逻辑探讨了降低边际监控成本的措施，从而为民营企业公司治理转型提供了一个极具现实意义的分析思路。本文也认为，组织架构理论为改善企业内部治理、降低边际监控成本提供了良好的分析框架。 受近年来商学教育注重理论的趋势之影响，本文强调了理论分析框架，但作为工商管理论文本文没有忘记提供一个应用案例，虽然这个真实案例本身的工作并未完全结束。更多还原

【Abstract】 It is well known that ownership and management are tied together in private firms controlled by their founders. For some unavoidable problems such as succession or financing, however, these firms cannot avoid to face the transition from classic corporate governance to modern corporate governance. That means these firms cannot but separate their management from ownership. This paper will discuss the corporate governance transition of private company in China.There are two opinions on private company’s corporate governance transition in current China. One is called normative view, and it claims that classic governance is so inferior to modern governance that firms should transfer it to modern governance; another is called explanative view, and this view considers that most private firms are still locked in classic governance, and this phenomenon is not a random result and has its profound economic ration logic. Kin-based culture traditions, Lack of social trust, incomplete legal system and so on maybe the important factors which result to classic governance.Normative view is lack of logistic persuasion. Following explanative view, however, will draw a passive conclusion - firms will attempt and accomplish nothing on corporate governance transition, since culture tradition, social trust and legal system can’t be changed by a single firm. But some private firms did change its governance structure successfully. Therefore, it is necessary to rethink explanative view. This paper is doing this work now.This paper considers that separating management from ownership would bring more benefits to firm and more governance costs synchronously for agency problem emerging. It is determined by balance of costs and benefits whether a firm should separate its management from ownership. In general case, the benefits of ownership-management separation can be seen as fixed (although it also has probability to change over time), so the costs of separation is the key factor should be considered for separating management. According to the latest achievements from corporate governance studying, this paper claims that the level of separation costs is determined by external environments (including legal system) and internal monitoring & controlling from the business proprietor. Although firms cannot change external environments, they also can take some positive action for separating management from ownership. This paper also makes some benchmarking work by studying some companies which succeeded in governance transition, and discusses some steps to reduce the marginal costs of monitoring and controlling, thereby provide a realistic approach to private firms’ governance transition. This paper insists that theory oforganizational architecture provide a suitable analytic framework to improve internal governance quality for separating management from ownership.Owing to modern business education tend to pay much attention to theoretic, this paper emphasizes theoretic framework especially. As a paper dresses in business practice, however, the paper didn’t forget to provide a real case, although some works in the case are not finished.更多还原