تاثیر تامین مالی شرکتی بر رفتار نامتقارن هزینه‌ با تاکید بر نقش تعدیل‌کنندگی کنترل داخلی، نمایندگی و سازوکارهای حاکمیتی

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار،گروه مدیریت، دانشگاه اراک، اراک، ایران.

2 کارشناس ارشد، گروه حسابداری، دانشگاه خرم آباد، خرم آباد، ایران.

10.48308/jfmp.2024.104306

چکیده

رفتار نامتقارن هزینه به واکنش متفاوت هزینه‌های متغیر در صورت افزایش یا کاهش در سطح فعالیت عملیاتی شرکت به دلیل تصمیمات تعهد مدیریتی برای حفظ منابع بلااستفاده در زمانی که حجم فعالیت کاهش ‌می‌یابد، اشاره دارد. هدف از پژوهش حاضر، بررسی تاثیر تامین مالی شرکتی بر رفتار نامتقارن هزینه‌ با تاکید بر نقش تعدیل‌کنندگی سازوکارهای حاکمیت شرکتی می‌باشد. بدین منظور  119 شرکت بورس اوراق بهادار تهران به عنوان نمونه آماری پژوهش طی سال‌‌های 1391 تا 1401 انتخاب شده است. نتایج حاصل از آزمون فرضیه‌های پژوهش حاکی از آن است که تامین مالی بر رفتار نامتقارن هزینه تاثیر معکوس و معنادار دارد. همچنین، ‌می‌توان این‌گونه استنباط کرد شرکت‌های که ضعف کنترل داخلی نداشته باشند، رابطه بین تامین مالی و چسبندگی مجموع بهای تمام‌شده کالای فروش‌رفته و هزینه‌های اداری، عمومی و فروش کاهش می‌یابد بنابراین کنترل کیفیت داخلی شرکت نقش مؤثری در مدیریت رفتار هزینه نامتقارن ایفا ‌می‌کند. همچنین، نتایج نشان داد، ساز وکارهای حاکمیتی بهتر نقش نظارتی مؤثری در مهار انگیزه‌های مدیران ایفا ‌می‌کند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effect of Corporate Financing on Asymmetric Cost Behavior With Emphasis on the Moderating Role of Internal Control, Representation and Governance Mechanisms

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Taghi Kabiri 1
  • Keramat Allah Heydari Rostami 1
  • Farinosh Shahmoradi 2
1 Assistant Prof., Department of Management, University of Arak, Arak, Iran
2 MA., Department of Accounting, Khoram Abad University, Khoram Abad, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Asymmetric cost behavior refers to the different response of variable costs in case of an increase or decrease in the level of the company's operating activity due to managerial commitment decisions to preserve unused resources when the volume of activity decreases. The purpose of this research is to investigate the impact of corporate financing on asymmetric cost behavior, emphasizing the moderating role of corporate governance mechanisms. For this purpose, 119 companies of the Tehran Stock Exchange have been selected as the statistical sample of the research during the years 2011 to 2023. The results of the test of the research hypotheses indicate that financing has a significant and opposite effect on the asymmetric behavior of cost. Also, it can be inferred that in companies that do not have weak internal control, the relationship between financing and stickiness of the total cost of goods sold and administrative, general, and sales costs are reduced, so the company's internal quality control plays an effective role in managing asymmetric cost behavior. Also, the results showed that better governance mechanisms play an effective supervisory role in controlling managers' motivations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Financing
  • Asymmetric Cost Behavior
  • Governance Mechanisms of Internal Control
  • Agency

مراجع

  1. Abu-Serdaneh, J. (2023). New Insights of Asymmetric Cost Behavior in Non-Financial MENA Companies. Information Sciences LettersInformation Sciences Letters, 12(1), 1-10.
  2. Alavi, M; Yaqub Nejad, A; Mohammadi Nodeh, F. (2022). Investigating the effect of indicators related to monitoring financing mechanisms and factors affecting it. Financial Economy, 16(60), 325-354. (In Persian)
  3. Ali Akbari, M. (2023). The effect of asymmetric cost behavior on the delay of the auditor's report in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange. Specialized Scientific Quarterly of New Research Approaches in Management and Accounting, 6(23), 125-142. (In Persian)
  4. Ali, H., Shafique, O., Khizar, H. M. U., Jamal, W. N., & Sarwar, S. (2021). Corporate governance and determinants of cost asymmetric behavior: evidence from Pakistan. PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 18(1), 984-1008.
  5. Amos Layola, M., Sophia, S. and Anita, M. (2016), “Effect of corporate governance on loan loss provision in Indian public banks”, Amity Journal of Corporate Governance, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-15.
  6. Anderson, M., Asdmir, O. & Tripathy, A. (2013). Use of precedent and antecedent information in strategic cost management. Journal of Business Research, 66(5), 643–650.
  7. Anderson, M., Banker, R., & Janakiraman, S. (2003). Are selling, general, and administrative costs “sticky”? Journal of Accounting Research, 41(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.00095
  8. AZINFAR, K., mahdavi, R., dadashi, I., & Barzegar, G. (2022). Investigating the impact of financial report readability on financing policy with an emphasis on the role of corporate governance in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.. Journal of Capital Market Analysis, 2(3), 78-111. (In Persian)
  9. Ballas, A., Naoum, V. C., & Vlismas, O. (2020). The effect of strategy on the asymmetric cost behavior of SG&A expenses. European Accounting Review, forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2020.1813601
  10. Ballas, A., Naoum, V. C., & Vlismas, O. (2022). The effect of strategy on the asymmetric cost behavior of SG&A expenses. European Accounting Review, 31(2), 409-447.
  11. Baradaran Hassanzadeh, R., Badavar Nahandi, Y., & Negahban, L. (2014). The Impact of Financial Constraints and Agency Costs of Investment Efficiency. Financial Accounting Research, 6(1), 89-106. (In Persian)
  12. Barandak, S., & mohammadi, F. (2020). The effect of Internal Control Weakness on the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs. Journal of Accounting and Management Vision, 2(17), 38-53. (In Persian)
  13. Chen, C.X.; Lu, H.; Sougiannis, T. (2012). The agency problem, corporate governance, and the asymmetrical behavior of selling, general, and administrative costs. Account. Res. 29, 252–282
  14. Chen, Y., & Ma, Y. (2021). Financing constraints, internal control quality and cost stickiness. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 22(5), 1231-1251.
  15. Choi, Y.S.; Hyeon, J.; Jung, T.; Lee, W.J. (2018). Audit pricing of shared leadership. Mark. Financ. Trade. 54, 336–358.
  16. Costa, Mabel D. , Ahsan Habib (2020). Md. Borhan Uddin Bhuiyan, Financial constraints and asymmetric cost behavior, Journal of Management Control, 10.1007/s00187-021-00314-7
  17. Fallahshams, M. F., Eskandari, B., Azizi, F., & Norouzi, M. (2020). Social Capital and Asymmetric Cost Behavior. Social Capital Management, 7(3), 297-317. doi: 10.22059/jscm.2020.303117.2010. (In Persian)
  18. Hajiha, Z; Oradi, J; Saleh Abadi, M. (2017). Weakness in internal controls and delay in financial accounting audit report. Financial Accounting, 33, 78-96. (In Persian)
  19. J., Li. K., & Xinlei, Z. (2007). Corporate boards and the leverage and debt maturity choices. Available at: http ://ssrn. com/abstract =891300.
  20. Hartlieb, S., Loy, T., & Eierle, B. (2020). Does community social capital affect asymmetric cost behaviour? Management Accounting Research, 46, 100640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2019.02.002
  21. Huang, J. and Kisgen, D.J. (2013), “Gender and corporate finance: are male executives overconfident relative to female executives?”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 108 No. 3, pp. 822-839.
  22. Izadinia, N., Soultani, A., & Fakharmanesh, M. (2015). Effect of Prior Sales Changes on Asymmetric Cost Behavior. Empirical Research in Accounting, 4(4), 205-221. doi: 10.22051/jera.2015.1910. (In Persian)
  23. Koo, J. H., Park, Y. H., & Paik, T. Y. (2008). A asymmetric cost behavior and strategic decision-making. 한국회계학회 학술발표논문집, 1-27.
  24. Lee, J., Park, J. H., & Hyeon, J. (2019). Co-CEOs and asymmetric cost behavior. Sustainability, 11(4), 1046.
  25. Li, W. L. & Zheng, K. (2016). Product market competition and cost stickiness. Rev Quant Finan Acc, Springer Science.
  26. Mahmood, M. and Orazalin, N. (2017). Green governance and sustainability reporting in Kazakhstan’s oil, gas, and mining sector: evidence from a former USSR emerging economy, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 164, pp. 389-397.
  27. Mashaikhi, Bita, & Parsai, Mona. (2013). The relationship between the financing of the company through debts and the quality of profits in the companies admitted to the Tehran Stock 13(53). (In Persian)
  28. Mehedi, S., Rahman, H., & Jalaludin, D. (2020). The relationship between corporate governance, corporate characteristics and agricultural credit supply: evidence from Bangladesh. International Journal of Social Economics, 47(7), 867-885.
  29. Mortazavi Nasiri, M. S., Nikoomaram, H., & Banimahd, B. (2018). Asymmetric Cost Behavior: Review of Literature and Methodology. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 7(28), 29-50. (In Persian)
  30. Nikomaram, H., & Pazouki, P. (2015). Management bonus and earning persistence. Management Accounting, 8(24), 61-71. (In Persian)
  31. Park, A.Y. (2014). Management’s misappropriation and the cost stickiness in KOSDAQ. Korean J. Manag. Account. Res. 14, 1–32.
  32. Salehi, M., Ziba, N., & Gah, A. (2018). The relationship between cost stickiness and financial reporting quality in Tehran Stock Exchange. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 67(9), 1550–1565. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-10-2017-0255
  33. Shafi'inasab, Abdullah, & Ahmadi, Mohsen. (2022). The effect of companies' borrowing costs on the asymmetric behavior of general, administrative and sales costs. Konkash Management and Accounting, 6(2), 96-117. (In Persian)
  34. Sung, S. Y., Choi, J. N., & Kang, S. C. (2017). Incentive pay and firm performance: Moderating roles of procedural justice climate and environmental turbulence. Human Resource Management, 56(2), 287–305. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21765
  35. Tariverdi, Y., Nik kar, J., & Malekkhodae Hasanvand, E. (2018). The Effect of the Company's Strategy and Managerial Ability on Asymmetric Cost Behavior. Accounting and Auditing Review, 24(4), 503-526. doi: 10.22059/acctgrev.2018.239658.1007673. (In Persian)
  36. Vaez, S. A., Montazer Hojat , A. H., & Bonabi Gadim, R. (2018). The Effect of Profit Precision Dimensions On board of Director’s Bonus in Companies Listed in Tehran Stock Exchange. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 9(2), 131-161. doi: 10.22103/jak.2018.10108.2366. (In Persian)
  37. Yasukata, K. (2011). Are “Sticky Costs” the result of deliberate decision of managers? (Working Paper). Kinki University. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1444746
  38. Zamani, Z., & Sohrabi, Z. (2018). The Effect of Corporate Governance and Audit Quality on Bank Loan Financing in Private Companies. Journal of Asset Management and Financing, 6(3), 133-146. doi: 10.22108/amf.2019.101253.1021. (In Persian)
  39. Zhu, G., Hu, W., Peng, T., & Xue, C. (2021). The influence of corporate financialization on asymmetric cost behavior: weakening or worsening. Journal of Business Economics and Management22(1), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.136
چشم انداز مدیریت مالی
دوره 13، شماره 44
1402
صفحه 9-32

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار