Tobin's q and the Structure-Performance Relationship: Comment
Tobin's q and the Structure-Performance Relationship: Comment
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1986
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
W. G. Shepherd
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
W. G. Shepherd
威廉·谢泼德和迈克尔·斯米尔洛克、托马斯·吉利根和威廉·马歇尔之间的意见交流(《评论》，1986年12月)提出了两个仍未解决的关键问题。第一点是托宾的Q比率，即公司的金融市场价值除以其资产的重置成本，是否比会计回报率更能衡量公司业绩。第二个争议点是，无论如何衡量，卓越的业绩是否可以归因于效率，而不是市场力量。本文对这两点作了进一步的澄清。在第一节中，绩效指标的选择受到金融和经济之间的根本差异的影响。在第二节中，斯米尔洛克、吉利根和马歇尔(以下简称SGM)和谢泼德所采用的结构-绩效模型是考虑市场-份额-绩效关系对集中度的依赖的更一般模型的特例。第三节使用了SGM(1984)原始研究中的相同数据，以提供SGM的发现与结构-性能模型的另一种规范的经验结果的比较。这种比较表明，将卓越的公司业绩完全归因于效率是没有充分根据的。结束语见第四节。
The exchange of comments between William Shepherd and Michael Smirlock, Thomas Gilligan, and William Marshall (this Review, December 1986) raised two key points that remain unresolved. The first point is whether Tobin's q ratio, a firm's financial market value divided by replacement cost of its assets, is a better measure of firm performance than accounting rates of return. The second point of contention is whether superior performance, however measured, can be attributed to efficiency rather than market power. This paper offers further clarification on both of these points. In Section I the performance measure choice is shown to be influenced by fundamental differences between finance and economics. In Section II, the structure-performance model employed by Smirlock, Gilligan, and Marshall (hereafter, SGM) and Shepherd is shown to be a special case of a more general model allowing for a dependence of the market-share-performance relationship on the concentration ratio. The same data from the original study by SGM (1984) are used in Section III to provide a comparison of SGM's findings with empirical results from an alternative specification of the structure-performance model. This comparison suggests that attributing superior firm performance exclusively to efficiency is not well founded. Concluding remarks are found in Section IV.