Investigating the Relationship between Board of Directors’ Compensation and Intellectual Capital in Companies Listed in Tehran Stock Exchange

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
zahra hossieni 1
gholamreza mansiurfar 2
parviz piri 2
1 Postgraduate student, Accounting Department, Faculty of Economics and Management, Al-Zahra University, Urmia, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Accounting Department, Faculty of Economics and Management, Al-Zahra University, Urmia, Iran.
Abstract
Today, intellectual capital in firms is an important topic that has drawn the attention of many financial market researchers. Also, firm managers’ compensation results in more value creation. The purpose of this research was to study the relationship between intellectual capital and its components and the board of directors’ compensation at Tehran Stock Exchange listed companies. The study covered a sample of 171 companies between 2007 and 2016. Multi-variable regression and the panel data method were used to test the research hypotheses. Results of testing the hypotheses of this research using Pulic’s model (Pulic, 2000) show that even after controlling company’s board of directors’ size, debt structure (financial leverage) and the independence of the board of directors, there is a positive and significant relationship between intellectual capital and the board of directors’ compensation. Furthermore, among the components of intellectual capital and the board of directors’ compensation, there is positive and significant relationship between the efficiency of the human capital and the efficiency of capital utilized; but the relationship between the efficiency of the structural capital and the board of directors’ compensation is positive but statistically insignificant.
Keywords
Board of Directors’ Compensation – Intellectual Capital

Subjects

Barney, J. (1331). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 33-120. Doi :10111770014320653101700108.
2. Bontis, Nick (1338). Intellectual capital: An exploratory study that develops measures and models. Management Decision, 56 (2), 65-76.
5 . Fama, E. F. (1380). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288-507. doi:10110860260866.
4 . Frydman, C., & Saks, R. E. (2010). Executive compensation: A new view from a longterm perspective, 1356–2003. Review of Financial Studies, 25(3), 2033
2158.doi:1011035/rfs/hhp120
3 . James G. Combs, Maura S. Skill” MANAGERIALIST AND HUMAN CAPITAL EXPLANATIONS FOR KEY EXECUTIVE PAY PREMIUMS:A CONTINGENCY PERSPECTIVE(2017). Strategic Management Journal.
6 . Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1376). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 5(4), 503-560
7 . Luminita Maria Gogan*, Alin Artene, Ioana Sarca, Anca Draghici ( 2016 ) ” The Impact of Intellectual Capital on Organizational Performance” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 221- 134 – 202
8. Makki, M. & Lodhi, S. (2008). Impact of intellectual
capital efficiency on profitability (a case study of LSE23
companies). Lahore Journal of Economics, 15(2), 81-38. Retrieved from
http://www.lahoreschoolofeconomics.edu.pk/EconomicsJournal
3. Pablos, Particia Ordonezde.2002."Evidence of Intellectual Capital Measurement form Asia, Europe and The Middle East" Journal of intellectual Capital, Vol .5, No.5, pp.502-
287.
10 . Pulić, A. (2004). Intellectual capital--does it create or destroy value? Measuring Business Excellence, 8(1), 62-
68. doi:101110801568504041
11. Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (2005). Intellectual capital and firm performance of US multinational firms. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(2), 213-226.
doi:1011108014631350510472853
12 . Valančienė, L., & Gimžauskienė, E. (2008). Dimensions of open systems in performance measurement: Theoretical aspect. Economics & Management, 15, 73-87.Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net
Organizational Resources Management Researches
Volume 10, Issue 1
July 2020
Pages 77-92