Spillover Effects of the Registration System Reform on Corporate Labor Productivity from an Information Feedback Perspective
ZHAO Baoying, JIANG Xuanyu, YI Zhihong, ZHANG Che
School of Business, Renmin University of China; School of Accountancy, Central University of Finance & Economics; School of Business, Renmin University of China; PBC School of Finance, Tsinghua University
Summary:
The report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed that high-quality development is the essential requirement of Chinese modernization and the priority of building a modern socialist country in all respects. On the one hand, endogenous growth theory suggests that total factor productivity is a sustainable source of healthy economic growth. Marxist theory of surplus value points out that living labor is the only source of value creation while workers' surplus labor is the only source of surplus value. Labor productivity has become the core measure of productivity development, and its improvement is usually considered to be the essence of economic growth. As China's population ages, the share of working-age population has decreased, lowering its demographic dividend. Thus, focusing on strengthening the development and utilization of human resources, stabilizing the labor force participation rate, and improving the efficiency in the utilization of human resources are important initiatives to shift the driving force of economic development from the demographic dividend to the talent dividend and support high-quality economic development in the future. Additionally, the new development philosophy also prioritizes sharing as a fundamental goal of high-quality development. The concept of creating shared value reflected by enhancing corporate investment in human capital and improving corporate labor productivity also contributes to high-quality development.The capital market is critical to the high-quality development of the real economy. As the key to comprehensively deepening capital market reform, the registration system is one of the major reforms to improve the systems and mechanisms for the market allocation of production factors. Existing literature has examined the impact of the registration system reform on IPO pricing efficiency, stock liquidity, and IPO quality. Several studies also focus on the spillover effects of the registration system reform on information environment of peer companies, investment of peer companies, and the market valuation of potential reverse merger targets. Given the importance of corporate labor productivity to achieve a stable and healthy economic development in China, it is worthwhile investigating whether and how the registration system reform could influence labor productivity of peer companies.Using the data of China's A-share listed firms from 2016 to 2021, this paper finds that registered IPOs have a positive impact on the labor productivity of peer companies. Meanwhile, the spillover effects are due to the feedback effects from registered IPOs' human capital and innovative information, which alleviate peers' agency problems and incentivize peers to increase research and development (R&D) expenditure. Further analyses indicate that the spillover effects are more significant in peers facing fiercer product-market competition, with lower levels of manager and employee stock ownership, especially for innovative industries.This paper makes three theoretical contributions. First, this study contributes to the literature on the economic impact of the registration system reform. Instead of exploring the effect of the registration system reform on the registered IPOs themselves, a growing body of literature has examined the spillover effects of the registration system reform on their peer companies. However, such studies mainly provide evidence from the perspective of the information environment and corporate innovation. This paper extends to corporate labor productivity and thus supplements existing research on the spillover effects of the registration system reform. Second, this paper enriches the analytical framework for the spillover effects of information disclosure in the registration system reform. Specifically, this paper identifies information on human capital and innovation from the prospectus using textual and accounting measures. This helps us to examine the feedback effects of human capital information and innovative information on the labor productivity of registered IPOs' peer companies respectively. Therefore, by taking the perspectives of human capital information and quantitative data, the paper expands the analysis framework of the spillover effects of information disclosure in registration system reform. Thirdly, the study contributes to the literature on the influence factors of corporate labor productivity. The existing literature documents that external factors including Internet loan development, local public debt growth, business environment, and tax policy, as well as internal factors such as compensation incentive, capital structure, social security input, and managerial efficiency, are significantly related to corporate labor productivity. Nevertheless, few studies explore the relationship between capital market development and corporate labor productivity. Based on the equity capital market, this paper reports that the registration system reform and its effect of information feedback are conducive to improving the labor productivity of registered IPOs' peers, which helps the market to understand the differentiated roles of different aspects of capital market development in corporate labor productivity.This paper also provides the following policy implications. First, against the backdrop of implementing across-the-board registration-based IPO system, it is necessary to continue making rules on the content and format of information disclosure of the prospectus and improving the quality of issuers' information disclosure, especially the authenticity, accuracy, and completeness of information disclosure of human capital and innovation. The enhanced information feedback could help the capital market to serve high-quality economic development. Second, governments should continue to encourage and promote firms to increase investment in human capital, improve corporate governance, and increase R&D investment to achieve sustained optimization of corporate labor productivity.
赵葆颖, 江轩宇, 伊志宏, 张澈. 注册制改革对企业劳动生产率的溢出效应研究——基于信息反馈效应的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 525(3): 132-149.
ZHAO Baoying, JIANG Xuanyu, YI Zhihong, ZHANG Che. Spillover Effects of the Registration System Reform on Corporate Labor Productivity from an Information Feedback Perspective. Journal of Financial Research, 2024, 525(3): 132-149.
[1]蔡庆丰、王瀚佑和李东旭,2021,《互联网贷款、劳动生产率与企业转型——基于劳动力流动性的视角》,《中国工业经济》第12期,第146～165页。 [2]程虹,2018,《管理提升了企业劳动生产率吗？——来自中国企业——劳动力匹配调查的经验证据》,《管理世界》第2期,第80～92+187页。 [3]程欣和邓大松,2020,《社保投入有利于企业提高劳动生产率吗？——基于“中国企业—劳动力匹配调查”数据的实证研究》,《管理世界》第3期,第90～101页。 [4]江艇,2022,《因果推断经验研究中的中介效应与调节效应》,《中国工业经济》第5期,第100～120页。 [5]江轩宇和朱冰,2022,《资本市场对外开放与劳动收入份额——基于沪深港通交易制度的经验证据》,《经济学(季刊)》第4期,第1101～1124页。 [6]赖黎、蓝春丹和秦明春,2022,《市场化改革提升了定价效率吗？——来自注册制的证据》,《管理世界》第4期,第172～184+199+185～190页。 [7]李广众、叶敏健和郑颖,2018,《资本结构与员工劳动生产率》,《管理科学学报》第2期,第1～15页。 [8]李建伟,2020,《我国劳动力供求格局、技术进步与经济潜在增长率》,《管理世界》第4期,第96～113页。 [9]李松楠、刘玉珍和胡聪慧,2023,《价格笼子、流动性与价格发现效率——基于创业板注册制改革的证据》,《管理世界》第3期,第49～62页。 [10]刘瑞琳和李丹,2022,《注册制改革会产生溢出效应吗？——基于企业投资行为的视角》,《金融研究》第10期,第170～188页。 [11]鲁桐和党印,2014,《公司治理与技术创新:分行业比较》,《经济研究》第6期,第115～128页。 [12]牛志伟、许晨曦和武瑛,2023,《营商环境优化、人力资本效应与企业劳动生产率》,《管理世界》第2期,第83～100页。 [13]彭镇、连玉君和戴亦一,2020,《企业创新激励:来自同群效应的解释》,《科研管理》第4期,第45～53页。 [14]申丹琳和江轩宇,2022,《社会信任与企业劳动投资效率》,《金融研究》第9期,第152～168页。 [15]时昊天、石佳然和肖潇,2021,《注册制改革、壳公司估值与盈余管理》,《会计研究》第8期,第54～67页。 [16]唐未兵、傅元海和王展祥,2014,《技术创新、技术引进与经济增长方式转变》,《经济研究》第7期,第31～43页。 [17]王会娟和张然,2012,《私募股权投资与被投资企业高管薪酬契约——基于公司治理视角的研究》,《管理世界》第9期,第156～167页。 [18]王家庭、李艳旭、马洪福和曹清峰,2019,《中国制造业劳动生产率增长动能转换:资本驱动还是技术驱动》,《中国工业经济》第5期,第99～117页。 [19]王艺明和赵焱,2022,《地方公共债务、企业投资结构与劳动生产率》,《财贸经济》第12期,第32～48页。 [20]温忠麟、张雷、侯杰泰和刘红云,2004,《中介效应检验程序及其应用》,《心理学报》第5期,第614～620页。 [21]巫岑、饶品贵和岳衡,2022,《注册制的溢出效应:基于股价同步性的研究》,《管理世界》第12期,第177～202页。 [22]杨俊青和陈虹,2017,《非国有企业薪酬激励能够实现劳动者、企业与社会的合作共赢吗——基于劳动生产率、盈利与吸纳劳动力视角的研究》,《南开管理评论》第4期,第165～178页。 [23]叶永卫、陶云清、王琪红和刘兆达,2023,《税收激励、人力资本投资与企业劳动生产率——来自2018年职工教育经费税前扣除政策的证据》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第5期,第136～157页。 [24]余玉苗和史有容,2022,《研发操纵如何影响研发人员薪酬溢价的经济后果？》,《财务研究》第6期,第53～65页。 [25]周泽将、汪顺和张悦,2022,《知识产权保护与企业创新信息困境》,《中国工业经济》第6期,第136～154页。 [26]祝文达、胡洁和董银红,2023,《注册制新股发行定价改革与IPO质量——基于技术创新的视角》,《管理评论》第2期,第70～78页。 [27]Badertscher, B., N. Shroff and H. D. White, 2013, “Externalities of Public Firm Presence: Evidence from Private Firms' Investment Decisions”, Journal of Financial Economics, 109(3), pp.682～706. [28]Black, S. E. and L. M. Lynch, 1996, “Human-Capital Investments and Productivity”, The American Economic Review, 86(2), pp.263～267. [29]Cengiz, D., A. Dube, A. Lindner and B. Zipperer, 2019, “The Effect of Minimum Wages on Low-Wage Jobs”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3), pp.1405～1454. [30]Datta, S., M. Iskandar-Datta and V. Singh, 2013, “Product Market Power, Industry Structure, and Corporate Earnings Management”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 37(8), pp.3273～3285. [31]Gabaix, X. and A. Landier, 2008, “Why Has CEO Pay Increased So Much？”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(1), pp.49～100. [32]Guo, R. and R. Zhong, 2023, “Do Managers Learn from Analysts about Investing？ Evidence from Internal Capital Allocation”, The Accounting Review, 98(2), pp.215～246. [33]Holmstrom, B., 1989, “Agency Costs and Innovation”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 12(3), pp.305～327. [34]Jung, B., W. J. Lee and D. P. Weber, 2014, “Financial Reporting Quality and Labor Investment Efficiency”, Contemporary Accounting Research, 31(4), pp.1047～1076. [35]Li, Y. and W. Zhang, 2021, “Another Game in Town: Spillover Effects of IPOs in China”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 67, pp.101910. [36]Rajan, R. G. and L. Zingales, 1998, “Power in a Theory of the Firm”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(2), pp.387～432. [37]Romer, P. M., 1990, “Endogenous Technological-Change”, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), pp.S71～S102. [38]Shi, W., D. Wajda and R. V. Aguilera, 2022, “Interorganizational Spillover: A Review and a Proposal for Future Research”, Journal of Management, 48(1), pp.185～210.
