企業文化如何影響公司價值創造–基於平衡計分卡的分析結果

Abstract

Maximizing value is the core objective of modern corporations, with many continuously seeking ways to achieve this goal. Meanwhile, corporate culture, as a vital intangible asset, is widely acknowledged as a key determinant of long-term sustainability and value creation. However, the existing research on the relationship between corporate culture and value creation activities has two main limitations. First, current studies are fragmented, often focusing on the influence of corporate culture on specific value creation activities or outcomes (e.g., performance indicators, mergers and acquisitions). Yet, corporate value creation is a comprehensive and systematic process, encompassing not only short-term performance but also long-term sustainability, internal efficiency, and external competitive advantage. In other words, existing studies lack a holistic evaluation of the value creation process, making it challenging to systematically explore the effects of corporate culture on value creation. Second, the characteristics of corporate culture are inherently intangible and abstract, making it difficult to measure accurately and comprehensively. Additionally, prior literature particularly lacks large-sample measures of corporate culture in Chinese firms.

This study aims to explore the role of cultural values in driving corporate value creation, thereby contributing to the literature in this field. Specifically, this study investigates Chinese A-share listed firms from 2007 to 2021, employing the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) framework—which includes “financial,” “customer,” “internal processes,” and “learning and growth” perspectives—to comprehensively assess both short- and long-term as well as internal and external value creation. Furthermore, this study utilizes machine learning and text analysis methods to construct metrics of Chinese corporate culture and empirically test its impact on value creation.

The research design is structured as follows. First, public data from listed firms are used to quantify the four dimensions of the BSC. Specifically, for the financial dimension, this study incorporates measures such as accounting performance, market performance, and the cash flow proportion of revenue. For the customer dimension, customer stability is assessed by examining sales volatility with major clients, while market acceptance is measured through sales concentration. For the internal processes dimension, metrics such as production efficiency, total asset turnover, and gross margin are employed. Lastly, for the learning and growth dimension, this study evaluates innovation capability through innovation input, innovation output, and innovation efficiency. Second, to measure corporate culture, this study constructs a cultural dictionary using Word2Vec based on a classic nine-dimension cultural framework, calculating annual culture scores for each firm. The top 25% of firms with the highest scores each year are defined as “strong culture” firms.

The main findings are as follows. First, firms with stronger corporate culture exhibit significantly better performance across all four BSC dimensions—financial, customer, internal processes, and learning and growth—and these results remain robust even after adjusting the measurement methods of the variables and controlling for the internal correlation effect of the BSC. These findings indicate that corporate culture enhances value creation comprehensively. To address potential endogeneity concerns, this study employs propensity score matching (PSM), a difference-in-differences (DID) approach based on Chairman turnover events, and an examination of the differential market reactions to the COVID-19 shock, thereby mitigating the biases caused by omitted variables and reverse causality. Second, regression analyses of different subsamples confirm two potential mechanisms of corporate culture: fostering employee cohesion and collaboration, and complementing formal governance mechanisms. Further factor analysis reveals that there are four types of culture orientation in Chinese listed firms, i.e., team cooperation, human-oriented, social responsibility, and product-oriented. Furthermore, the results indicate significant differences in the effectiveness of value creation across various cultural orientations: a 'product-oriented culture' that emphasizes innovation and quality demonstrates the most substantial impact on value creation. In contrast, the 'social responsibility-oriented culture' exhibits relatively limited effects on value creation. These findings align with Schumpeter's theoretical perspective that innovation is a critical driver of economic development. Lastly, this paper analyzes the moderating role of managerial characteristics and finds that when the chairman has substantial actual power and a higher altruistic tendency, the value creation effect of corporate culture is significantly enhanced; however, if high power coincides with a higher self-serving bias, the value-creating capacity of the culture is diminished. This finding emphasizes that under China's unique institutional backdrop, the goals of maximizing major shareholder benefits may not align with those of maximizing corporate value, thus executives must consider this impact when building corporate culture.

Overall, this study underscores the importance of corporate culture in the process of corporate value creation, offering practical insights for management. Theoretically, this study demonstrates the impact of corporate culture on the four dimensions of the BSC, refining the theoretical foundation of the BSC framework. Additionally, by using machine learning and textual analysis method, this paper constructs the culture dictionaries based on public reports of Chinese listed firms and identifies four prevalent cultural orientations, providing a quantitative foundation for future large-sample studies on corporate culture in China.

Date of Award	5 Mar 2025
Original language	Chinese (Traditional)
Awarding Institution	City University of Hong Kong
Supervisor	Changjiang LYU (External Supervisor) & Wayne W. YU (Supervisor)