用户名: 密码: 验证码:
风险投资双重委托代理研究
详细信息    本馆镜像全文|  推荐本文 |  |   获取CNKI官网全文
摘要
风险投资作为一种创新型的投融资制度,为促进高科技中小企业的发展起到了积极的作用。风险投资由融资、投资和退出三个过程组成,涉及投资者、风险投资家与创业家三个主体。在投资者和风险投资家之间形成了第一重委托代理,在风险投资家和创业家之间形成了第二重委托代理,在双重委托代理机制下,风险投资的高风险性、技术的专业性等原因导致了委托人与代理人之间严重的信息不对称,使得代理问题十分突出。因此,本文就以降低风险投资的代理风险为主线,中心内容是研究如何解决双重委托代理的代理问题,减少代理成本,解决代理冲突等。
     研究思路为先分后总,先分别研究了如何解决第一重委托代理和第二重委托代理中的代理问题——逆向选择和道德风险,之后将第一重和第二重委托代理整合到一起,探讨了风险投资的“灵魂”——风险投资家的作用,并回答了风险投资为什么存在双重委托代理这一最基本同时又是最根本的问题。全文的主要内容包括:
     1.风险投资的高风险性使得风险资本的投资者多为机构投资者,不同于一般个人投资者,他们更主动、更有能力获取信息来选择合格的风险投资家作为其代理人。为防止选择风险投资家时出现逆向选择,除了根据学历、以往业绩等外部信号进行甄别外,投资者可以为风险投资家提供一组含有报酬系数和基金利润率的契约,根据风险投资家的选择甄别其类型。
     2.作为整个风险投资的灵魂,对风险投资家机会主义行为的防范至关重要。我们认为,在第一重委托代理中,解决风险投资家道德风险问题应从报酬激励、声誉约束、制度监控三个层面入手。在报酬激励方面,允许投资者分阶段注入资本,要求风险投资家在基金中投入一定的自有资本;在声誉约束方面,努力培育声誉主导的风险投资市场;在制度层面上,从美国风险投资机构组织形式的演变中发现,有限合伙制是一种更优的风险投资制度安排,因此,须不断完善我国风险投资的内在机制和外部环境,进一步发挥有限合伙制的优越性。
     3.在风险投资家挑选创业家的博弈中,创业家首先行动,通过投资建议书传递其个人能力和项目质量的信号,之后风险投资家行动,提供一组含有剩余索取权和投资额的契约,根据创业家的选择来判别其类型。
     4.在第二重委托代理中,对创业家道德风险的防范可以从监控、激励、两者的合作三个层面展开。由于外部监控成本较高,可以采取分阶段投资和联合投资等机制进行内部监控,阿里巴巴的案例证实了内部监控的实效。要使得作为代理人的创业家承担风险,为此必须给予适当的激励,除物质上的内在激励外,风险投资家有价值的管理咨询建议和政府的政策支持等外在激励机制也能降低创业家的道德风险,增大创业企业的成功概率。对于风险投资家和创业家来说,合作博弈才是集体理性下的“纳什均衡”,要促成两者长期的合作,需要加强信息沟通,建立良好的私人关系,使参与人都能获得“完全信息”;在契约中规定创业企业在每个阶段需实现的目标,以施加时间压力;在合作的早期建立双边约束机制并惩罚背叛行为,以传递合作意向的信号。
     5.通过研究国内第一家风险投资公司——中创公司失败的原因发现,不能有效降低双重委托代理的代理风险是中创失败的根本原因。之所以不能有效降低代理风险,很大程度上因为政府是中创公司的投资者,以至于公司的治理结构无法有效解决逆向选择和道德风险。因此,政府不应该成为风险投资的运作主体,而应鼓励民间资本和海外资本进入风险投资,政府可以担当风险投资“守夜人”的角色,可以提供教育培训、信息或技术服务、投资补贴等,帮助清除规章制度或管理上的障碍,政府的外在激励机制也能降低道德风险,增大创业企业的成功概率。
     6.风险投资家是风险投资中最重要、最活跃的核心,在双重委托代理中扮演了不同的角色。作为投资者的代理人,要确保风险基金保值增值;作为创业家的委托人,一方面有监督、激励的权利,防止创业家的机会主义行为,另一方面有合作,提供管理、咨询建议的义务。
     7.风险投资作为高新技术产业发展的“催化剂”和经济增长的“发动机”,对一国经济发展起了举足轻重的作用,近年来我国政府加大了对风险投资融资和投资的支持力度,如:2006年8月通过的《中华人民共和国合伙企业法(修订案)》确立了合伙企业中“有限合伙”的法律地位,2007年3月国家税务总局发布的财税[2007]31号文件,对风险资本投资创业企业给予税收上的优惠政策。但在退出机制上,我国还缺少完善的多层次资本市场。红筹上市作为IPO的重要形式是国内风险投资的一条权宜且高效的退出渠道,却受到诸多政策因素的影响,为此,必须适时推出适合中小企业上市的真正意义上的创业板。
As an innovative financing and investing system, venture capital plays an active role in the development of high-tech small & medium business. Venture capital consists of three processes that are financing, investing and withdrawing, involves in three participants that are investors, venture capitalists and entrepreneurs. The first layer of principal-agent comes into being between investors and venture capitalists and the second between venture capitalists and entrepreneurs. Under the two-ply mechanism of principal-agent, high risk and technical propriety result in the serious asymmetry of information between principal and agent, which makes the agent problem severely. Therefore, how to reduce the risk of agent becomes the main clue of this article and the key content is how to settle the agent problem, reduce agent cost and solve the agent conflict, etc.
     The research method is first separation, and then integration. Firstly, we research how to settle the problem of agent in the first layer principal-agent and the second principal-agent separately which is mainly about the adverse selection and moral hazard. Then we integrate the two layers of principal-agent, and probe into the effect of venture capitalist, which is the "soul" of venture capital, answering the basic and essential question of why two layers of principal-agent exist in venture capital. The main content of this article includes:
     1. High risk of venture capital makes investors institutionalization. Unlike general individual investors, institutional investors have more initiative and power of gaining information to select the qualified venture capitalists as their agents. In order to avoid the adverse selection in choosing venture capitalist, besides the exterior signal such as education and former achievement, investors can supply the venture capitalists with a group of contracts containing the reward coefficient and fund on return, screening the type of venture capitalists by their choice.
     2. As the soul of the whole venture capital, it is essential to safeguard against venture capitalists' opportunism. In the first layer of principal-agent, we should settle the moral hazard of venture capitalist from three aspects, which are reward incentive, reputation restriction and system administration. In the aspect of reward incentive, we should allow investors to invest by staging of capital infusion and require venture capitalist to contribute his own capital. In the aspect of reputation restriction, we should foster the venture capital market leading by reputation. In the aspect of system, through the analysis of the evolvement of American venture capital organization form, we find that, limited partnership is a more preferable venture capital system arrangement. Therefore, we should perfect the inherent mechanism and exterior environment of our country's venture capital, and develop the advantage of limited partnership.
     3. In the game theory of venture capitalist choosing entrepreneur, entrepreneur actions first, transferring the signal of his own individual ability and project quality. Then venture capitalist takes action, supplying entrepreneur with a group of contracts containing residual claim right and investment value, screening the type of venture capitalists by his choice.
     4. In the second layer of principal-agent, we should settle the moral hazard of entrepreneur from three sides, which is administration, incentive and the cooperation of two participants. For the high cost of exterior administration, interior administration, such as staging and syndication of investment should be utilized. The case of Alibaba validates the effect of interior administration. In order to make the entrepreneur, who acts as the agent, assume the risk, they need to be given proper incentives. Besides the interior incentive of material, exterior incentive mechanism, such as valuable management and consultation advice and government policy auspice, could also reduce the moral hazard of entrepreneur, and increase the probability of success to the enterprise. For venture capitalist and entrepreneur, cooperation strategy is the "Nash Equilibrium" of collective rationality. For the long-time cooperation between venture capitalist and entrepreneur, it is necessary to strengthen information communication, constitute the favorable private association, so that every participant could gain "complete information". In order to exert the time pressure, we should stipulate the goal of enterprise in each stage. For transferring the signal of cooperation intent, we need to set up double-side restriction mechanism in the early stage and punish the defection behavior.
     5. By researching the failure reason of China New Technology Venture Investment Co. Ltd., the first venture capital firm. We find that it could not effectively reduce the agent risk of double layers of principal-agent, which is the fundamental reason of failure. The reason that it could not reduce the risk of agent lies on the fact that government is the investor, and corporate governance structure can not effectively settle the adverse selection and moral hazard. Therefore, government could not be the principal part of venture capital. We should encourage civilian capital and overseas capital to enter venture capital, and government could play the role of "night watchman". It can supply education training, information and technology service, investment subsidy, etc., also it could help eliminate the barrier of bylaw and administration. The exterior incentive of government can also reduce the moral hazard of entrepreneur, and increase the probability of success to the enterprise.
     6. Venture capitalist is the most important and active core in venture capital, playing various roles in two layers of principal-agent. As the agent of investor, he should ensure venture fund to maintain and increase value. As the principal of entrepreneur, on one hand, he has the right of administration and incentive, safeguarding against the opportunism of entrepreneur, on the other hand, he has the obligation to supply management and afford consultation advice.
     7. As the "activator" of the high-tech industry and the "engine" of the economy development, the venture capital has great significance on a nation's economy. Our government increases the auspice extent to venture capital financing and investing in recent years. Such as the "Partnership Law of the People's Republic of China (revision)", which passed in August 2006, establishes the law status of "limited partnership" in venture capital. On March 2007, the State Administration for Taxation issued the file No. 37 (2007) of fiscal and taxation to give venture capital preferable policy on revenue. But, with regard to withdrawal mechanism, our country lacks the perfect pyramid capital market. As the important form of IPO, Red Chip IPO is an expedient and high efficient withdrawal channel, but it is affected by many policy factors. Therefore, it is necessary to develop the real Growth Enterprise Market (GMS), which will be suitable for small & medium business.
引文
1 参见http://www.nvca.orp/中对风险投资的定义。
    2 “天使投资市场”又称“非正式的私人风险投资市场”(Informal Business Angel),它与风险资本都属于资本市场中的“私人股权融资市场”(Private Equity Market)。但天使投资是一个没有中介的市场,它是富裕的家庭和个人直接向企业进行股份投资的市场,投资项目的选择、投资过程的管理、投资后的监控和投资的收获等均由投资者完成。本文所研究的风险投资不包括天使投资。
    3 不少文献称之为“创业投资家”、“创业投资者”,为与“创业家”、“创业企业”严格区别开来,避免不必要的混淆,本文将风险资本的管理者称为“风险投资家”,将风险投资家所在的组织或机构称为风险投资公司、风险投资机构或风险投资基金。
    4 不少文献将其称为“创业企业家”,本文为规范起见,统称为“创业家”,将创业家管理的企业称为“创业企业”。
    5 参见詹森和梅克林:《企业理论:经理行为、代理成本和所有权结构》,上海三联、上海人民出版社,1995年。
    6 参见张维迎:《企业的企业家——契约理论》[M],上海:上海三联书店,1996。
    7 参见Hart O..Firm,contracts, and financial structure. Oxford press, 1995.
    8 不少创业家为高校的科研人员,以技术参股创业企业。若因技术本身不成熟而导致创业企业失败,创业家不会有任何损失,反而通过对创业企业的经营管理验证了技术上的缺陷,得到了研究启发;若技术本身是成熟的,因为管理经验欠缺或市场本身的需求不足等导致创业企业失败,创业家也可以从技术的成功中获得满足,或者冈技术成功而获得别的额外奖励。
    9 用新制度经济学的交易成本理论来解释风险投资采用双重委托代理机制的原因,详见张东生、刘健钧:《创业投资基金运作机制的制度经济学分析》,经济研究,2000年第4期。
    10 例如,20世纪80年代生物技术革命,制药业大规模引进了公司制风险投资组织形式。
    1 有关风险投资家稀缺性的描述详见Admati and Pfleiderer.1994.Robust financial contracting and the role of venture capitalists.Journal of Finance,49:371-402.
    2 转引自张元萍:《创业融资与风险投资》,中国金融出版社,2006:第9-10页。
    3 以往的研究往往认为,ε~N(0,σ~2),这种做法明显忽视了风险投资中的高风险问题。高风险要求有高收益米补偿,因此,风险投资成功的收益很大,故不确定下的收益补偿均值应该显著地大于0。
    4 后文会提到,投资者的风险态度是风险中性或风险厌恶的,但无论是厌恶还是中性,对本部分的分析没有影响,故在此假定投资者是风险中性的。
    5 参见第二章第三节“国外研究综述”中Gompers & Lerner关于“业绩敏感的报酬制度”的文献。
    6 风险投资家的道德风险行为具体表现为:工作不努力、采取有利于自身但有损于投资者利益的行为等,为简化起见,统称这些道德风险行为为“工作不努力”。
    7 本部分内容部分参考了郑君君,刘恒:《基于委托——代理关系的风险投资者对风险投资家激励模型的研究》,数量经济技术经济研究,2005,(5),151-156。
    8 参见前文文献回顾第二章第三节“风险资本投资——第二重委托代理”。
    9 对风险投资家投到基金中的风险资本规定了上限,防止风险投资家因过多关注该基金而忽视了对其他基金的管理。
    10 风险投资家的报酬结构中如果仅含有与即期收益有关的报酬,就容易导致风险投资家的行为着眼于短期效益。在现代激励理论中,股权和股票期权是一种克服企业经营者短期行为的有效工具,因为它是一种远期风险收入,其价值取决于企业今后的盈利状况,有利于激励经营者着眼于企业的长远发展。故此,在风险投资家的报酬机构中也引入股权收益。
    11 有关风险投资组织形式的详细分析见本章第六节,有限合伙制的风险基金中都规定了基金的固定存续期,同样,公司制风险基金中也可以限定固定存续期,到期基金将被赎回,由此,风险投资公司不得不依靠业绩、声誉再次融资,声誉激励机制将发生作用。
    12 此处值得一提的是,根据中国风险投资研究院公布的《2007中国风险投资年度调研报告》,2006年,在中国宏观经济迅猛增长及政策层面的强力推动下,中国风险投资业延续了自2004年以来全面复苏的态势,并随着中国证券市场的强劲复苏及多层次资本市场体系的完善,步入高速发展的阶段。在2006年新筹集的风险资本中,超过一半的风险资本来源于海外,所占比例高达65.1%,风险资本的管理规模中,海外资本所占比例从2003年的5%激增至2005年的33.9%,2006年更是达到43.7%。
    1 Gompers Paul. Optimal investment, monitoring and the staging of venture capital. Journal of Finance. 1995. 50(5): 1461-1489.
    2 本节的部分研究成果已发表在《工业技术经济》2007年第3期。
    3 此处的投资额是指风险投资家对该创业企业的首轮投资,是相对投资额。所谓相对投资额是指创业家拥有δ剩余索取权时所获得的投资额,占风险投资家拥有全部剩余索取权时的投资额的比例。首轮投资时,创业家的剩余索取权确实与投资额成反比。
    4 Daniel M. Cable and Scott Shane, A prisoner's dilemma approach to entrepreneur-venture capitalist relationships. The Academy of Management Review. 1997, 22 (1): 142-176.
    5 尽管代理成本和代理问题都是由委托代理产生的,有些类同,但本文严格区分这两个概念。代理问题概指逆向选择、道德风险、内部人控制、饰窗效应等,其中逆向选择和道德风险最为普遍;代理成本包括因代理问题而产生或为解决代理问题而付出的成本。
    6 转摘自《风险投资运行机制与模式》,张元萍编,中国金融出版社2003年。
    7 中国人民大学风险投资发展研究中心主任刘曼红在2006年北京(海淀)创业投资论坛开幕式上的讲话中提到:“风险资本投资于创新……但尤其偏爱于高新科技创新……因为高新科技代表了未来”,“电脑和通信的发展经历了硬件到软件到互联网三个阶段,第一阶段风险投资贡献25%,第二阶段贡献50%,第三阶段贡献100%……没有风险投资就没有今天的互联网,也没有今天的生活”。
    8 由于阿里巴巴属非上市公司,股权结构并术对外界公示,我们只能综合媒体公开信息进行猜测。
    9 此命题的结论显而易见,在此不给予证明。
    10 加此处,定义弹性μ=-p/θ (?)θ/(?)p,弹性为正,且大于1。满足:μ=θ+b/θln(θ+b)/b>1,dμ/dp=bμ~2/(θ+b)p-μ/p=p((bμ/θ+b)-1)
    11 本节的主要内容已发表于《经济体制改革》2007年增刊。
    12 参考郑君君:《风险投资中的道德风险与逆向选择》,武汉大学出版社,2006年。
    13 Sapienza, H., and Korsgaard, M. The Role of Procedural Justice in Entrepreneur-venture Capitalist Relation. Academy of Management Journal. 1996 (39): 544-574.
    14 Chertkoff, J., and Esser, J. A Review of Experiment in Explicit Bargaining. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1976 (12): 464-486.
    15 Schoonhoven, K,. Eisenhardt, K,. and Lyman, K. Speeding Products to Market: Waiting time to First Product Introduction in New Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990 (35): 177-207.
    16 Sapienza, H. Variations in Venture Capitalist-entrepreneur Relations: Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Business Venturing. 1992, (7): 9-27.
    17 Roberts, E. High Stakes for High-tech Entrepreneurs: Understanding Venture Capital Decision Making. Sloan Management Review. 1991, (9): 19-20.
    18 Sapienza, H,. and Gupta, A. Pursuit of Innovation by New Ventures and its Effects on Venture Capitalist-entrepreneur Relations. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. 1989: 304-317.
    19 Bowden, R. Bargaining, Size and Return in Venture Capital Funds. Journal of Business Venturing. 1994 (9): 307-330.
    20 Bygrave, W., and Timmons, J. Venture and Risk Capital: Practice and Performance, Promotion and Policy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
    1 参见胡海峰:《风险投资学》,首都经济贸易大学出版社,2006年第一版,P192。
    2 对创业企业所具有的“新颖性缺陷”的描述,详见《风险投资理论与方法》,安实等著,科学出版社2005年。本文同意该书作者的观点,认为新颖性缺陷是产生创业企业未来不确定性的重要来源,并导致风险投资的高风险性。
    [1] Admati, Anat and Paul Pdeiderer. Robust Financial contracting and the role of venture capitalists. Journal of Finance. 1994, 49: 371-402.
    [2] Aghion, Phillippe, and Patrick Bolton. An Incomplete Contracts Approach to Financial Contracting. Review of Economic Studies. 1992, 77: 338-401.
    [3] Amit R., L. Glosten and E. Muller. Entrepreneurial ability, venture investments, and risk sharing. Management Science. 1990, 36: 1232-1245.
    [4] Baker, George. Incentive contracts and performance measurement. Journal of Political Economy. 1992, 100: 598-614.
    [5] Baker, Malcolm, and Paul Gompers. The determination of board structure at the initial public offering. Working paper. Harvard Business School.
    [6] Barry Christopher B.. New directions in research on venture capital finance. Financial Management. 1994, 23: 3-15.
    [7] Bergemann, Dirk, and Ulrich Hege. Venture capital finance, moral hazard, and learning. Journal of Banking and Finance. 1998, 22: 703-735.
    [8] Bergemann, Dirk and Ulrich Hege. Dynamic venture capital financing, learning, and moral hazard. Journal of Banking and Finance. 1998, 22: 703-735.
    [9] Berglof, Erik. A control theory of venture capital finance. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organizations. 1994, 10: 247-267.
    [10] Black, Bernard S., and Ronald J. Gilson. Venture capital and the structure of capital markets: Banks versus stock markets. Journal of Financial Economics. 1998, 47: 243-277.
    [11] Black, Bernard and Ronald Gilson. Venture capital and the structure of capital markets: banks versus stock markets. SSRN paper. 1997.
    [12] Bowden, R. Bargaining, Size and Return in Venture Capital Funds. Journal of Business Venturing. 1994, 9: 307-330.
    [13] Brennan, Michael J., and Alan Kraus. Efficient financing under asymmetric information. Journal of Finance. 1987, 42: 1225-1243.
    [14] Bygrave, William D., and Jeffry A. Timmons. Venture capital at the crossroad. Cambridge, MA: Harcard Business School Press.
    [15] Bygrave, William D., and Jeffry A. Timmons. Venture and risk capital: Practice and performance, promotion and policy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
    [16] Cable, Daniel M., and Scott Shane. A prisoner's dilemma approach to Entrepreneur-Venture capitalist relationship. The Academy of Management Review. 1997, 22(1): 142-176.
    [17] Casanatta, Catherine. Financing and adversing: Optimal financial contracts with venture capitalists. Journal of Finance. 2003, 58: 2059-2086.
    [18] Chan Yuk-shee. On the positive role of financial intermediation in allocation of venture capital in a market with imperfect information. Journal of Finance. 1983, 38(5): 1543-1561.
    [19] Chevalier, Ellison. Robert financial contracting and the role for venture capitalists. Journal of Finance. 1995, 49: 371-402.
    [20] Christian, Keuschnigg, and Soren Bo Nielsen. Public policy for venture capital. 2001, 8: 557-572.
    [21] Cornelli, Francesca, and Oded Yosha. Stage financing and the role of convertible debt. Review of Economic Studies. 2003, 70:1-32.
    [22] Cummings, Douglas, and Grant Fleming. A law and finance analysis of venture capital exits in emerging markets. SSRN Working Paper, 2003.
    [23] Diamond, Douglas W.. Reputation acquisition in debt markets. Journal of Political Economy. 1989, 97: 828-862.
    [24] Eisenhardt, K. M.. Agency theory: an assessment and review. Academy of Management Review. 1989, 14:57-74.
    [25] Fama, Eugene E, and Michael C. Jenson. Separation of ownership and control, Journal of Law and Economics. 1983, 26: 301-325.
    [26] Gibbons, Robert S., and Kevin J. Murphy. Optimal incentive contracts in the presence of career concerns: Theory and evidence. Journal of Political Economy. 1992, 100: 468-505.
    [27] Gompers, Paul, and Josh Lerner. An analysis of compensation in the U.S. venture capital partnership. Journal of Financial Economics. 1999, 51: 3-44.
    [28] Gompers, Paul, and Josh Lerner. What drives venture fundraising? Brookings papers on economic activity: Microeconomics.1998: 149-192.
    [29] Gompers, Paul, and Josh Lerner. The use of covenants: An empirical analysis of venture partnership agreements. Journal of law and Economics. 1996, 39(2): 463-498.
    [30] Gompers, Paul, and Josh Lerner. The Venture Capital Cycle. Boston: MIT press, Cambridge Mas. 1999.
    [31] Gompers, Paul, and Josh Lerner. The Determinants of corporate venture capital success: Organizational structure, incentive, and complementarities. Cambridge press. 1999.
    [32] Gompers, Paul. Grandstanding in the venture capital industry. Journal of Financial Economics. 1996, 4:133-156.
    [33] Gompers, Paul. Ownership and control in entrepreneurial firms: An examination of convertible securities in venture capital investment. NBER Working Paper, 1997.
    [34] Gompers, Paul. Optimal investment, monitoring, and the staging of venture capital. Journal of Finance. 1995, 50(5): 1461-1489.
    [35] Gorman, Michael, and William Sahlman. What do venture capitalist do? Journal of Business Venturing. 1989, 4: 231-248.
    [36] Grossman, Sanford, and Oliver Hart. An analysis of the principal-agent problem. 1983, 51: 7-46.
    [37] Hansen, Erik. Venture capital finance with temporary asymmetric learning. Working paper, London School of Economics Financial Markets Group.
    [38] Harris, Milton, and Arthur Raviv. Optimal incentive contracts with imperfect information. Journal of Economic Theory. 1979, 20: 231-259.
    [39] Hart, Oliver. Financial Contracting. NBER Working Paper Series. May 2001.
    [40] Hart, Oliver. Firm, contracts, and financial structure. Oxford press. 1995.
    [41] Hellman, Thomas, and Manju Puri. The interaction between product market and financial strategy: the role of venture capital. Review of Financial Studies. 2000, 13: 959-984.
    [42] Hellman, Thomas. The allocation of control rights in venture contracts. RAND Journal of Economics. 1998, 29: 57-76.
    [43] Hermalin, Benjamin E., and Katz Micheal L.. Moral hazard and verifiability: the effect of renegotiation in agency. Econometrica. 1991, 59: 1735-1754.
    [44] Holmstrom, Bengt. Moral hazard and the observability. Bell Journal of Economics. 1979, 10: 74-91.
    [45] Jeng, Leslie A., and Philippe C. Wells. The determinants of venture capital funding: evidence across countries. NBER working paper, 1997.
    [46] Jensen, Michael C. and William H. Meckling. Theory of firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 1976, 3: 305-360.
    [47] Kaplan, Steven. Venture capitalists as principals: contracting, screening, and monitoring. NBER working papers series. April 2001.
    [48] Kaplan, Steven, and Per Stromberg. Financial contracting theory meets the real world: an empirical analysis of venture capital contracts. Review of Economics Studies, 2003, Forthcoming.
    [49] Kaplan, Steven, and Per Stromberg. Characteristics, contracts, and actions: evidence from venture capitalist analysis. Journal of Finance. 2004, 5:2177-2210.
    [50] Kreps D, Milgrom P, Roberts J, Wilson R. Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma. Journal of Economic Theory. 1982, 27: 245-252.
    [51] Lerner, Josh. The syndication of venture capital investments. Financial Management. 1994, 23(3): 16-27.
    [52] Lerner, Josh. Venture capitalists and the oversight of private Firms. Journal of Finance. 1995 (50): 301-318.
    [53] Lerner, Josh. Venture capitalists and the decision to go public. Journal of Financial Economics. 1994 (35): 293-316.
    [54] MacMillan, Ian, D. Kulow, and R. Khoylian. Venture capitalists' involvement in their investments: Extent and performance. Journal of Business Venturing. 1988, 4: 27-37.
    [55] MacMillan, Ian, R. Siegel, and P. N. Subbanarasimha. Criteria used by venture capitalists to evaluate new venture proposal. Journal of Business Venturing. 1985, 1: 119-128.
    [56] Norton E., Tenenbaum B. H.. The effect of venture capitalists' characteristics on the structure of venture capital deal. Journal of Small Business Management, 1993, 31 (4): 32-42.
    [57] OECD. Venture capital: supple and demand issues. OECD paper, 2000.
    [58] Puttermann, Louis, and G. Skillman. The incentive effective effects of monitoring under alternative compensation scheme. International Journal of Industrial Economics. 1998, 6: 109-119.
    [59] Reid, Gavin C.. The application of principal-agent method to investor-investee relations in the UK venture capital industry. Venture Capital. 1999, 1(4): 285-302.
    [60] Reid, Gavin C.. Venture capital investment: an agency analysis of practice. (London: Routledge).
    [61] Roberts, E. High stakes for high-tech entrepreneurs: Understanding venture capital decision making. Sloan Management Review. 1991, 9: 19-20.
    [62] Ross, Stephen. The determination of financial structure: the incentive signaling approach. Bell Journal of Economics. 1999, 8: 23-40.
    [63] Sahlman, William. The structure and governance of venture capital organization. Journal of Financial Economics. 1990, 27: 473-521.
    [64] Sapienza, Harry J., and Anil K. Gupta. Impact of agency risks and task uncertainty on venture capitalist-CEO interaction. The Academy of Management Journal. 1994, 37(6): 1618-1632.
    [65] Sapienza, Harry J., and Anti K. Gupta. Pursuit of innovation by new ventures and its effects on venture capitalist-entrepreneur relations. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 1989, 304-317.
    [66] Sapienza, Harry J., and Korsgaard M. The Role of procedural justice in entrepreneur venture capitalist relation. Academy of Management Journal. 1996, 39: 544-574.
    [67] Sapienza, Harry J.. Variations in venture capitalist-entrepreneur relations: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business Venturing. 1992, 7: 9-27.
    [68] Schoonhoven, K., Eisenhardt K., and Lyman K. Speeding products to market: Waiting time to first product introduction in new firms. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990, 35: 177-207.
    [69] Silver, David. Venture capital: The complete guide for investor. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1985.
    [70] Trester, Jeffrey J.. Venture capital contracting under asymmetric information. Journal of Banking & Finance. 1998, (22): 675-699.
    [71] Tyebjee, Tyzoon T., and Albert V. Bruno. A model of venture capitalist investment activity. Management Science. 1984, 9: 1051-1066.
    [72] Wilson Charles. The nature of equilibrium in markets with adverse selection. Bell Journal of Economics. 1980, 11: 108-130.
    [73] Zeng, Feng. Venture capital investments in China. Doctoral Dissertation. March 2004.
    [1] 安实,王健,何琳.风险企业控制权分配的博弈过程分析[J].系统工程理论与实践,2002,22(12):81-87.
    [2] 安实,王健,何琳.风险企业控制权分配模型研究[J].系统工程学报,2004,19(1):38-44.
    [3] 安实,王健,赵泽滨.风险投资理论与方法[M].科学出版社,2005年5月.
    [4] 安实,周艳丽,赵泽斌.基于不完全信息动态博弈分析的风险企业融资策略研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2003,10:120-124.
    [5] 蔡莉,李雪灵,卫国红.我国风险投资公司宏观支撑环境与运作机制[M].中国人民大学出版社,2006年10月.
    [6] 陈德棉.风险投资国际比较与经验借鉴[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2003.
    [7] 陈灏康.风险投资中委托代理风险及其治理机制研究[J].科学管理研究,2006,2:114-116.
    [8] 陈业宏,黄媛媛.公司制与有限合伙制风险投资之比较与选择[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2003,11:136-140.
    [9] 陈永庆,王浣尘.风险企业的有效融资机制研究[J].系统工程,2001,7:61-66.
    [10] 成思危.进一步推动风险投资事业发展[J].民主与建设出版社,1999.
    [11] 成思危.科技风险投资论文集[M].北京:民主与建设出版社,1997.
    [12] 崔晓燕.设计风险投资基金中激励与约束机制的理论基础[J].江汉论坛,2005,7:77-80.
    [13] 杜沔,蒋根伍.我国风险投资制度创新研究[J].经济纵横,2005,12:16-18.
    [14] 冯宗宪,谈毅,邵丰.高技术风险投资契约理论研究述评[J].预测,2000,6.
    [15] 付强.风险投资的风险代理关系成因[J].河北大学学报,2005,1:62-65.
    [16] 付强.风险投资的风险代理关系类型[J].科学管理研究,2004,6:108-111.
    [17] 管军,马晓国,温向军,李高扬.提高风险投资过程中两级委托——代理效率的思考[J].科学管理研究,2004,2:112-115.
    [18] 郭名媛.信息不对称条件下风险投资机构在风险投资中的代理风险规避研究[J].科学管理研究,2005,4:92-95.
    [19] 郝宇,韩文秀.风险企业控制权配置研究[J].天津大学学报(社会科学版),2005,3:102-104.
    [20] 何伟.风险投资中控制权信号传递博弈模型[J].财经研究,2005,6:68-77.
    [21] 胡海峰.创业资本契约理论文献综述[J].改革,2002,5:81-89.
    [22] 胡海峰.创业资本投资过程中的契约安排:理论回顾与展望[J].南开经济研究,200,3:64-66.
    [23] 胡海峰.风险投资学[M].首都经济贸易大学出版社,2006年9月.
    [24] 胡石明,黄利红.投资者与风险投资家的契约关系[J].中南大学学报(社会科学版),2003,4:219-222.
    [25] 黄孝武.风险投资者与风险投资企业的激励约束机制初探[J].财贸经济,2002,1:38-41.
    [26] 黄宝印,吕克敏,王称意.风险投资——理论、政策、实务[M].北京:中国经济出版社,1999年出版.
    [27] 金永红,慈向阳,叶中行,奚玉芹.风险投资多阶段动态信号传递契约安排[J].上海交通大学学报,2004,3:434-437.
    [28] 金永红,奚玉芹,叶中行.风险投资中的逆向选择:分离均衡式契约安排[J].上系统工程学报,2002,12:556-561.
    [29] 康洪艳.可转换证券与风险投资的最优退出决策[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2006,1:107-111.
    [30] 柯迪.风险投资与中国实践研究[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,2002.
    [31] 孔凡保.资本市场与风险投资[M].中国经济出版社,2005年3月.
    [32] 孔立.论我国风险投资的退出机制[J].兰州大学学报(社会科学版),2005,5:104-108.
    [33] 劳剑东,李湛.非对称信息下的创业投资决策[J].预测,2001,4:40-43.
    [34] 李成,张鹏.我国风险投资的制度缺陷及其改进[J].经济社会体制比较,200,2:54-59.
    [35] 李冬梅.投资者与风险投资家委托代理问题探析[J].价值工程,2005,1:119-121。
    [36] 李红梅.风险投资中的委托代理问题研究[J].决策借鉴,2002,8:61-64.
    [37] 李金龙,费方域,胡海鸥.风险投资中控制权分配及其影响因素的研究[J].财经研究,2005,12:107-115.
    [38] 李晟,李瑞彬.中国专业风险投资机构现状研究[J].中国软科学,1999,2:102-105.
    [39] 李永周.高技术产业风险投资研究[M].经济科学出版社,2006年6月.
    [40] 刘曼红,胡波.风险投资理论:投资过程研究的理论发展和前沿[J].国际金融研究,2004.3:8-14.
    [41] 刘曼红.风险投资:创新与金融[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1998.
    [42] 刘少波,蒋海.风险投资进入与退出的信息经济学分析[J].财贸经济,2000,3:36-40.
    [43] 刘霞,徐向阳.浅析风险投资中信息不对称及其治理[J].经济师,2005,6:79-80.
    [44] 刘志阳.创业资本的金融政治经济学[M].经济管理出版社,2005年4月.
    [45] 罗伯特·吉本斯.博弈论基础[M].中国社会科学出版社1999年.
    [46] 马君潞,马晓军,崔金林.风险投资与风险资本市场[M].南京:南京大学出版社,2003.
    [47] 孟晓华.创业家与风险投资家所有权与控制权的博弈[J].技术经济与管理研究,2003,6:30-31.
    [48] 牛海霞.我国风险投资机构激励约束机制研究[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005,3:82-89.
    [49] 彭为民,任啸.创业投资与风险企业资本结构安排[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版),2002,10:31-35.
    [50] 蒲祖河.风险投资学[M].浙江:浙江大学出版社,2004.
    [51] 邱国栋.风险投资与风险企业的有效机制[J].改革,2003,3:90-94.
    [52] 邱华炳,庞任平.风险投资交易设计研究[J].财经论丛,2000,5,65-71.
    [53] 沈峰,刘勇.Black Scholes期权定价模型在风险投资企业中的应用[J].现代管理科学,2005,2:
    [54] 盛立军.风险投资:操作·机制与策略.上海:上海远东出版社,1999年出版.
    [55] 盛军锋.风险投资中双重委托代理风险的治理[J].投资研究,2002,1:20-23.
    [56] 石树琴.信号传递和信息甄别模型浅析及其应用[J].复旦学报(自然科学版),2003,4:246-252.
    [57] 孙昌群.风险投资契约关系的理论研究[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2003,5:118-144.
    [58] 孙昌群.风险资本融资契约设计与履约机制研究[J].江汉论坛,2004,1:36-39.
    [59] 孙淑红.风险投资与融资[M].北京:对外经济贸易大学出版社,2002.
    [60] 谈毅,冯宗宪.风险投资基金经理人的激励与约束机制[J].管理科学,1999,4:56-58.
    [61] 田增瑞.创业资本在不对称信息瞎博弈的委托代理分析[J].中国软科学,2001,6:22-26.
    [62] 田志龙.经营者监督与激励:公司治理的理论与实践[M].北京:中国发展出版社,1999年.
    [63] 屠峥嵘.风险企业与风险投资的博弈分析[J].财经科学,2005,3:127-132.
    [64] 王景涛.新编风险投资学[M].东北财经大学出版社,2005年1月.
    [65] 王松奇,丁蕊.创业投资企业的组织形式与代理成本[J].金融研究,2001,12:73-80.
    [66] 王雪霞.将持股比例引入风险投资三方委托代理模型的研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2005,2:121-126.
    [67] 魏娟,梁静国.商业研究[J].商业研究,2005,9:75-77.
    [68] 文宁.我国风险投资产业的现状研究——基丁产业组织理论SCP框架的分析[J].武汉理工大学学报,2005,4:200-203.
    [69] 吴文建.风险投资退出研究综述[J].重庆社会科学,2005,6:21-26.
    [70] 吴艳鹏.创业板市场[M].北京:中国民航出版社,1999.
    [71] 熊季霞,黄腾飞.风险投资中的信息不对称问题研究[J].理论经纬,2005,5:111-13.
    [72] 熊文,王筱金,蔡莉.风险企业家逆向选择隐匿信息的有效甄别[J].工业技术经济,2005,10:102-104.
    [73] 徐玖平,陈书建.不对称信息下风险投资的委托代理模型研究[J].系统工程理论与实践,2004,1:19-24.
    [74] 杨艳萍.风险投资中双重委托代理风险及其防范[J].积极体制改革,2003,1:110-112.
    [75] 姚佐文,陈晓剑.风险资本家与企业家合作的博弈分析[J].预测,2001,5:24-26.
    [76] 姚佐文.风险资本家与企业家之间的控制权分配和转移[J].安徽农业大学学报(社会科学版),2004,5:26-28.
    [77] 尹久,刘曼红.风险投资成功退出的风险识别与微观控制路径设计[J].中央财经大学学报,2006,5:92-96.
    [78] 应瑞瑶,赵永清.风险投资中激励机制与代理成本分析[J].财经研究,2004,6:22-29.
    [79] 俞自由,李松涛,赵荣信.风险投资理论与实践[M].上海:上海财经大学出版社,2001.
    [80] 张东升,刘建钧.创业投资基金的运作机制的制度经济学分析[J].经济研究,2000,4:35-40.
    [81] 张汉江,陈收.风险资本的分段最有激励合同[J].系统工程,2001,1:6-9.
    [82] 张陆洋.高技术发展的风险投资[M].经济科学出版社,1999.
    [83] 张陆洋.美国风险(创业)投资有限合伙制[M].复旦大学出版社,2005年6月.
    [84] 张维迎.博弈论与信息经济学[M].上海人民出版社,1997年5月.
    [85] 张维迎.企业的企业家——契约理论[M].上海:上海三联书店,1996.
    [86] 张新立,王青建.风险投资家的最优激励契约模型研究——一种基于逆向选择和道德风险条件下的博弈模分析[J].财经研究,2006,5:129-135.
    [87] 张新立,杨德礼,魏东岚.风险投资的供给需求分析[J].商业研究,2005,15:115-118.
    [88] 张秀珍.风险投资成功退出的风险识别与微观控制路径设计[J].中央财经大学学报,2006,5:92-96.
    [89] 张元萍.创业融资与风险投资[M].中国金融出版社,2006年9月.
    [90] 赵国忻.风险投资退出机理研究[J].当代财经,2005,1:105-108.
    [91] 郑辉.风险投资家的逆向选择、道德风险及契约设计[J].广西管理干部学院学报,2007,2.
    [92] 郑辉.风险投资中逆向选择的解决:信号传递和信息甄别[J].工业技术经济,2007,3,75-81.
    [93] 郑辉.囚徒困境框架下风险投资参与人之间的关系[J].经济体制改革,2007年增刊.
    [94] 郑君君,刘恒.基于委托——代理关系的风险投资者对风险投资家激励模型的研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2005,5:151-156.
    [95] 郑鲁闽,刘志云.外国风险投资资本的市场准入及相关问题探讨[J].投资研究,2006,5:8-12.
    [96] 朱心来,和丕禅.影响风险企业控制权分配的因素分析[J].科技进步与对策,2003,10:113-115.
    [97] 朱心来、和丕禅.风险企业控制权安排的博弈分析[J].软科学,2003,4:46-40.
    [98] 左松林.风险投资中的委托代理问题研究[J].江苏社会科学,2005,4:81-85.

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700