Cilt 3, Sayı 2, Sayfalar 153 - 174 2014-06-28

Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi

Yücel AYRIÇAY [1] , Göktürk KALKAN [2]

249 508

The roots of modern agency theory which has been thought to play an important role in causing financial crises can be traced back to the book of Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” published in 1776. Adam Smith stated that the directors of such companies, however, being the managers rather of other people's money rather than of their own, it cannot well be expected, that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which the partners in a private [firm] frequently watch over their own. This situation raises the agency theory issue. Agency theory occurs within an agency relationship where a party delegates a party to perform for his own sake. Seperation of ownership and control causes these kind of relationships. This seperation leads to conflicts of interest especially between managers and owners and between creditors and owners. In this study, agency theory emanating from the seperation of ownership and control, conflicts of interest in agency relationships and the costs of these conflicts of interest have been studied in the literature review.
Son zamanlarda finansal krizlerin oluşmasında önemli bir rol oynadığı düşünülen modern temsilcilik teorisinin kökleri, Adam Smith’in 1776’da yayınlanan “Ulusların Zenginliği” adlı kitabına kadar götürülebilir. Adam Smith (1776) bu çalışmasında, kendilerinin değil de başkalarının paralarının yöneticileri olan şirket yöneticilerden, ortakların kendi mallarına özen gösterdikleri gibi aynı özeni göstermelerinin beklenemeyeceğini ifade etmiştir. Bu durum, ortaya temsilcilik teorisini çıkarmaktadır. Temsilcilik teorisi; bir tarafın, işi gerçekleştirmeleri için başka bir tarafı görevlendirdikleri temsilcilik ilişkisi içinde meydana gelir. Bu ilişkiler, sahiplik ve kontrolün birbirinden ayrılmasıyla meydana gelir. Sahiplik ve kontrolün birbirinden ayrılması, özellikle, sahiplerle yöneticiler ve sahiplerle borç verenler arasında çıkar çatışmalarına sebep olur. Bu çalışmada, dağılmış ve yoğunlaşmış sahiplik yapısı boyutlarında, sahiplik ve kontrolün birbirinden ayrılmasıyla ortaya çıkan temsilcilik teorisi, temsilcilik ilişkilerinden meydana gelen çıkar çatışmaları ve bu çıkar çatışmalarının maliyetleri, literatür incelemesi olarak çalışılmıştır.
  • ALMEIDA, H. ve WOLFENZON, D. (2004), A Theory of Pyramidal Ownership and Family Business Groups, http://www.business.illinois.edu/finance/papers/2004/almeida.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi:16.05.2013).
  • AMIHUD, Y. ve LEV, B. (1981,. Risk Reduction as a Managerial Motive for Conglomerate Mergers, The Bell Journal of Economics, 12(2): 605-617. ANG, J., COLE, R. ve LIN, J. (2000), Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, The Journal of Finance, 55(1): 81-106.
  • AROSA, B., ITTURALDE, T. ve MASEDA, A. (2010), Ownership Structure and Firm Performance In Non-Listed Firms: Evidence From Spain, http://www.catedrafamiliar.ehu.es/p297content/es/contenidos/informacion/cef_publicaciones/es_publicac/adju ntos/Ownership_structure_and_firm_performance_in_non_listed_firms_e vidence_from_Spain.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 15.11.2012).
  • ATTIG, N., FISCHER, K. P. ve GADHOUM, Y. (2004), On the Determinants of Pyramidal Ownership: Evidence on Dilution of Minority Interests, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=434201 , (Erişim Tarihi: 15.06.2013).
  • BAKER, H., K. ve POWELL, G. E. (2005), Understanding Financial Management: A Practical Guide, Blackwell Publishing, UK.
  • BANY ARIFFIN, A. N. B. (2009), Pyramidal Ownership Structure and Agency Problem:Theory and Evidence, Research Bulletin Integration&Dissemination, 9-18.
  • BARRY, T. A., LEPETIT, L., ve TARAZI, A. (2009), Ownership Structure and Risk in Publicly Held and Privately Owned Banks, http://southwesternfinance.org/conf-2010/E2-3.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 02013).
  • BEATTY, R., ve ZAJAC, E. (1994), Managerial Incentives, Monitoring, and Risk Bearing: A Study of Executive Compensation, Ownership, and Board Structure in Initial Public Offerings, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2): 313-335.
  • BEBCHUK, L. A., KRAAKMAN, R., ve TRIANTIS, G. (2000), Stock Pyramids, CrossOwnership and Dual-Class Equity: The Mechanisms and Agency Costs of Separating Control from Cash-Flow Rights, Volume Editor: Randall MORCK, Concentrated Corporate Ownership, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, ss. 295-318.
  • BERLE, A. ve MEANS, G. C. (1932), The Modern Corporation and Private Property, MacMillan, New York.
  • BIANCHI, M., BIANCO, M. ve ENRIQUES, L. (1999), Pyramidal Groups and the Separation between Ownership and Control in Italy, Working Paper, Commisione Nazionale per le Societa e la Borsa (CONSOB) http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=168208, (Erişim Tarihi: 02013).
  • BRIGHAM, E. ve HOUSTON, J. (2003), Fundamentals of Financial Management, Thomson Learning Inc., USA.
  • BURKART, M. ve PANUNZI, F. (2001), Agency Conflicts, Ownership Concentration and Legal Shareholder Protection, Financial Markets Group Discussion Paper, London School of Economics.
  • BUTLER, E. (2011), The Condensed Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith Research Trust, England.
  • BYRD, J., PARRINO, R. ve PRITSCH, G. (1998), Stockholder-Manager Conflicts and Firm Value, Financial Analysts Journal, 54(3): 14-30.
  • CAPRIO, G., LAEVEN, L. ve LEVINE, R. (2007), Governance and Bank Valuation, Journal of Financial Intermediation, 16: 584-617.
  • CHEFFINS, B. R. ve BANK, S. A. (2009), Is Berle and Means Really a Myth?, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1352605 , (Erişim Tarihi: 16.03.2013).
  • CLAESSENS, S., DJANKOV, S., FAN, J. P. H. ve LANG, L. (2002), Disentangling the Incentive and Entrenchment Effects of Large Shareholdings, The Journal of Finance, 57(6): 2741-2771.
  • CLAESSENS, S., DJANKOV, S. ve LANG, L. (2000), The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations, Journal of Financial Economics, 58: 81-112.
  • CONNELLY, B., HOSKINSON, R. E., TIHANYI, L. ve CERTO, S. T. (2010), Ownership as a Form of Corporate Governance, Journal of Management Studies, 47(8): 1561-1589.
  • CRONQVIST, H. ve NILSSON, M. (2003), Agency Costs of Minority Shareholders, The Journal of Financial Quantitative Analysis, 38(4): 695-719.
  • ÇITAK, L. (2007), The Impact of Ownership Structure on Company Performance; A Panel Data Analysis on İstanbul Stock Exchange Listed (ISE-100) Companies, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 9: 231-245.
  • DEMSETZ, H. (1983), The Structure of Ownership and the Theory of the Firm, Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2): 375-390.
  • DEMSETZ, H. ve LEHN, K. (1985), The Structure of Corporate Ownership: Causes and Consequences, Journal of Political Economy, 93(6): 115511
  • DEPKEN, C. A., NGUYEN, G. X. ve SARKAR, S. K. (2006). Agency Costs, Executive Compensation, Bonding and Monitoring: A Stochastic Frontier Approach, Discussion Paper, Finance Management Association European Conference, Stockholm. http://belkcollegeofbusiness.uncc.edu/cdepken/P/agencycosts.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 22.10.2012).
  • EARLE, J. S., KUCSERA, C. ve TELEGDY, A. (2005), Ownership Concentration and Corporate Performance on the Budapest Stock Exchange: Do too many Cooks Spoil the Goulash?, Corporate Governance: An International Review , 2(3): 254-264.
  • EASTERBROOK, F. (1984), Two Agency-Cost Explanations of Dividends, The American Economic Review, 74(4): 650-659.
  • EDWARDS, J. S. S. ve WEICHENRIEDER, A. J. (2009), Control Rights, Pyramids, and the Measurement of Ownership Concentration, http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/faculty/edwards/JEBO_13MayJE.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 16.05.2013).
  • EISENHARDT, K. M. (1989), Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review, The Academy of Management Review, 14(1): 57-74.
  • ELLUL, A. (2009), Control Motivations and Capital Structure Decisions, Working Paper, Kelley School of Business, Indiana University, http://www.asb.unsw.edu.au/schools/bankingandfinance/Documents/ A.%20Ellul%20%20Control%20Motivations%20and%20Capital%20Structure%20Decis ions.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 13.12. 2012).
  • FACCIO, M., ve LANG, L. (2002), The Ultimate Ownership of Western European Corporations, Journal of Financial Economics, 65: 365-395.
  • FACCIO, M., LANG, L. ve YOUNG, L. (2007), Debt and Expropriation, Purdue CIBER Working Papers, Krannert Graduate School of Management. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ciberwp/50 , (Erişim Tarihi: 13.12. 2012). FACCIO, M., LANG, L. ve YOUNG, L. (2010), Pyramiding vs Leverage in Corporate Groups: International Evidence, Journal of International Business Studies, 41: 88-104.
  • FAMA, E. (1980), Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm, Journal of Political Economy, 88(2): 288-307.
  • FAMA, E. ve JENSEN, M. (1983a), Agency Problems and Residual Claims, Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2): 327-349.
  • FAMA, E. ve JENSEN, M. (1983b), Separation of Ownership and Control, Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2): 301-325.
  • GÖNENÇ, H. (2006), Ownership Concentration and Corporate Performance: A Simultaneous Equation Framework for Turkish Companies, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=498263 , (Erişim Tarihi: 05.05.2013).
  • GÜRSOY, G. ve AYDOĞAN, K. (1998), Equity Ownership Structure , Risk Taking and Performance : An Empirical Investigation in Turkish Companies, http://www.bilkent.edu.tr/~aydogan/OwnershipStructure.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 10.03.2013).
  • HARRIS, M. ve RAVIV, A. (1979), Optimal Incentive Contracts with Imperfect Information, Journal of Economic Theory, 20: 231-259.
  • HESSEN, R. (1983), The Modern Corporation and Private Property: A Reappraisal, Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2): 273-289.
  • HÖLMSTROM, B. (1979), Moral Hazard and Observability, The Bell Journal of Economics, 10(1): 74http://financialdictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Residual+Claim
  • HU, Y. ve IZUMIDA, S. (2008), The Relationship Between Ownership and Performance: A Review of Theory and Evidence, International Business Research, 1(4): 72-81.
  • IANNOTTA, G., NOCERA, G. ve SIRONI, A. (2007), Ownership Structure, Risk and Performance in the European Banking Industry, Journal of Banking&Finance, 31: 2127-2149.
  • JENSEN, M. (1986), Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers, The American Economic Review, 76(2): 323-329.
  • JENSEN, M. ve MECKLING, W. (1976), Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, Journal Financial Economics, 3(4): 305-360.
  • JENSEN, M. ve SMITH, C. (1985), Stockholder, Manager, and Creditor Interests: Applications of Agency Theory, Volume Editors: E. ALTMAN, M. SUBRAHMANYAM, Recent Advances in Corporate Finance, Dow-Jones Irwin.
  • JIANG, L.,KIM, J. B., ve PANG, L. (2011), Control-Ownership Wedge and Investment Sensitivity to Stock Price, Journal of Banking and Finance, 35(11): 2856-2867.
  • JOHNSON, S., LA PORTA, R., LOPEZ-DE-SILANES, F. ve SHLEIFER, A. (2000), Tunnelling, Working Paper, http://www.nber.org/papers/w7523 , (Erişim Tarihi: 11.12.2012).
  • KALAY, A. ve LEMMON, M. (2008), Payout Policy, Volume Editor: E. ECKBO, Handbook of Empirical Corporate Finance, Vol:2, Elsevier, USA.
  • LA PORTA, R., LOPEZ-DE-SILANES, F. ve SHLEIFER, A. (1998), Law and Finance, Journal of Political Economy, 106(6): 113-1155.
  • LA PORTA, R., LOPEZ-DE-SILANES, F. ve SHLEIFER, A. (1999), Corporate Ownership Around the World, The Journal of Finance, 31: 471-517.
  • LA PORTA, R., LOPEZ-DE-SILANES, F., SHLEIFER, A. ve VISHNY, R. (2002), Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation, The Journal of Finance, 57(3): 1147-1170.
  • LAEVEN, L. ve LEVINE, R. (2008a), Complex Ownership Structures and Corporate Valuations, The Review of Financial Studies, 21(2): 579-604. LAEVEN, L. ve LEVINE, R. (2008b). Bank Governance, Regulation and Risk Taking, Journal of Financial Economics, 93(2): 259-275.
  • LEECH, D. ve LEAHY, J. (1991), Ownership Structure, Control Type Classifications and the Performance of Large British Companies, The Economic Journal, 101(409): 1418-1437.
  • LIU, Q. ve TIAN, G. (2012), Controlling Shareholders Expropriation and Firms Leverage Decision: Evidence From Chinese Non-Tradable Share Reform, Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(4): 782-803.
  • MAHER, M. ve ANDERSSON, T. (1999), Corporate Governance: Effects on Firm Performance and Economic Growth, OECD.
  • MASULIS, R., PHAN, P. ve ZEIN, J. (2011), Family Business Groups Around the World: Financing Advantages, Control Motivations, and Organizational Choices, The Review of Financial Studies, 24(11): 3556-3600.
  • McMAHON, R. (2006), Bonding and Monitoring in Equity Agency Relationships:Non-family Versus Family SMEs from Australia’s Business Longitudinal Survey, Flinders University Research Paper, http://www.flinders.edu.au/sabs/businessfiles/research/papers/2006/06-1.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 22.10.2012).
  • MEANS, G. C. (1931), The Separation of Ownership and Control in American Industry, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 46(1): 68-100.
  • MORCK, R., SHLEIFER, A. ve VISHNY, R. (1988), Management Ownership and Market Valuation, Journal of Financial Economics, 20: 293-315.
  • MORCK, R., STANGELAND, D. ve YEUNG, B. (2000), Inherited Wealth, Corporate Control and Economic Growth: The Canadian Disease, NBER Working Paper No. 6814, http://bschool.nus.edu/departments/busspolicy/BY%20papers/inherit ed%20wealth,%20corporate%20control%20and%20economic%20gro wth.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 11.12.2012).
  • MYERS, S. (1977), Determinants of Corporate Borrowing, Journal of Financial Economics, 5: 147-175.
  • NASH, R., NETTER, J. ve POULSEN, A. (2003), Determinants of Contractual Relations Between Shareholders and Bondholders: Investment Opportunities and Restrictive Covenants , Journal of Corporate Finance, 9: 201-232.
  • RASIAH, D. (2012), The Separation of Ownership and Control in Malaysian Domestic Companies, http://www.ipedr.com/vol38/024-ICEBI2012A100pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 22.05.2013).
  • ROSS, S., WESTERFIELD, R. ve JAFFE, J. (2003), Corporate Finance, The McGraw-Hill, Sixth Edition, USA.
  • SHLEIFER, A. ve VISHNY, R. (1986), Large Shareholders and Corporate Control, Journal of Political Economy, 94(3): 461-488.
  • SHLEIFER, A. ve VISHNY, R. (1989), Management Entrenchment: The Case of Manager-Specific Investments, Journal of Financial Economics, 25: 1231
  • SHLEIFER, A. ve VISHNY, R. (1997), A Survey of Corporate Governance, The Journal of Finance, 52(2): 737-783.
  • SMITH, A. (1776), The Wealth of Nations, An Electronic Classics Series Publication, Editor: J. MANIS, The Pennsylvania State University, 2005. http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/wealthnations.pdf , (Erişim Tarihi: 22.10.2012).
  • SMITH, C. ve WARNER, J. (1979), On Financial Contracting: An Analysis of Bond Covenants, Journal of Financial Economics, 7: 117-161.
  • STULZ, R. M. (1990), Managerial Discretion and Optimal Financing Policies, Journal of Financial Economics, 26: 3-27.
  • TURABOĞLU, T. T. (2004), Vekalet-Temsil-Problem ve Maliyetleri, Ekonomik Yaklaşım Dergisi, 15(51): 109-124.
  • UYSAL, E. (2002), Yatırım Projeleri Analizinde Black-Scholes Opsiyon Fiyatlama Modelinin Kullanımı, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 56(1): 135-148.
  • VERNIMMEN, P., QUIRY, P., LE FUR, Y., DALLOCCHIO, M. ve SALVI, A. (2005), Corporate Finance: Theory and Practice, John Wiley&Sons Ltd, Sixth Edition, England.
  • ZAJAC, E. ve WESTPHAL, J. (1994), The Costs and Benefits of Managerial Incentives and Monitoring in Large U.S. Corporations: When is More Not Better?, Strategic Management Journal, 15: 121-142.
  • ZWIEBEL, J. (1996), Dynamic Capital Structure Under Managerial Entrenchment, The American Economic Review, 86(5): 1197-1215.
Birincil Dil tr
Konular
Dergi Bölümü Makaleler
Yazarlar

Yazar: Yücel AYRIÇAY
E-posta:

Yazar: Göktürk KALKAN
E-posta:

Bibtex @ { ksuiibf125937, journal = {Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi}, issn = {2146-5908}, address = {Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi}, year = {2014}, volume = {3}, pages = {153 - 174}, doi = {}, title = {Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi}, language = {tr}, key = {cite}, author = {AYRIÇAY, Yücel and KALKAN, Göktürk} }
APA AYRIÇAY, Y , KALKAN, G . (2014). Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 3 (2), 153-174. Retrieved from http://iibfdergisi.ksu.edu.tr/issue/10267/125937
MLA AYRIÇAY, Y , KALKAN, G . "Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi". Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 3 (2014): 153-174 <http://iibfdergisi.ksu.edu.tr/issue/10267/125937>
Chicago AYRIÇAY, Y , KALKAN, G . "Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi". Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 3 (2014): 153-174
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi AU - Yücel AYRIÇAY , Göktürk KALKAN Y1 - 2014 PY - 2014 N1 - DO - T2 - Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 153 EP - 174 VL - 3 IS - 2 SN - 2146-5908-2536-4464 M3 - UR - Y2 - 2017 ER -
EndNote %0 Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi %A Yücel AYRIÇAY , Göktürk KALKAN %T Sahiplik Yapısı ve Temsilcilik Teorisi %D 2014 %J Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi %P 2146-5908-2536-4464 %V 3 %N 2 %R %U