تأثیر شفافیت اطلاعاتی بر ارزش شرکت: نقش تعدیل‌گر رقابت‌پذیری صنعت

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران

2 استادیار گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه رازی، کرمانشاه، ایران

3 استادیار حسابداری، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

هدف: افشای اطلاعات این امکان را به ذینفعان می‌دهد که به درک کاملی از کیفیت اساسی، وضعیت مالی و ریسک‌های شرکت‌ برسند تا بتوانند تصمیمات منطقی‌تری بگیرند. هرچند شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار موظف‌اند اطلاعات را به روش‌های مختلف افشا کنند، اما همچنان در نحوۀ ارائه اطلاعات دارای آزادی عملی هستند که می‌تواند ابهامات اطلاعاتی را تشدید کند. شفافیت اطلاعاتی با کاهش عدم تقارن اطلاعات، تقویت کانال‌های ارتباطی بین شرکت‌ها و سهامداران و ممانعت از رفتارهای فرصت‌طلبانه مدیران، به افزایش ارزش شرکت‌ها کمک می‌کند. علی‌رغم وجود نتایج تجربی درخصوص رابطۀ مثبت بین شفافیت اطلاعاتی و ارزش شرکت و تأثیر رقابت‌پذیری صنایع بر این رابطه، جهت اثرگذاری متغیر رقابت همچنان موضوع بحث است. این پژوهش با استفاده از شاخص‌های شفافیت اطلاعاتی مبتنی بر داده‌های حسابداری و داده‌های بازار سهام هر شرکت، رابطه بین شفافیت اطلاعاتی و ارزش شرکت را مورد بررسی قرار داده و تأثیر رقابت‌پذیری صنایع را بر این رابطه تحلیل کرده است.

روش: به‌منظور آزمون فرضیه‌های پژوهش، داده‌ها برای 143 شرکت (معادل با 1716 سال ـ شرکت) در بازۀ زمانی 1402-1391 از بانک اطلاعاتی ره‌آوردنوین و سایت کدال گردآوری شده است. مدل‌های مورد استفاده در آزمون فرضیه‌های پژوهش با کنترل نمودن اثرات ثابت سال‌ها و صنایع و به‌کارگیری رویکرد حداقل مربعات تعمیم‌یافته برازش گردیده‌اند. افزون بر آن، برای کنترل اثر ناهمسانی واریانس و همبستگی جملات خطای مدل‌ها، از تصحیح خوشه‌ای در سطح شرکت‌ها استفاده شده است. همچنین، مدل‌های رگرسیونی که برای سنجش شفافیت اطلاعاتی مبتنی بر داده‌های حسابداری به‌کار رفته‌اند، در هر سال از 1391 تا 1402، در سطح 12 صنعت (یعنی در مجموع، 132 رگرسیون) برآورد شده‌اند. در نهایت، در بخش تحلیل حساسیت از معیارهای مبتنی بر داده‌های بازار برای سنجش شفافیت اطلاعاتی استفاده گردیده است.

یافته‌ها: نتایج پژوهش بیانگر آن است که بهبود در شفافیت اطلاعاتی موجب افزایش ارزش شرکت می‌شود. این نتیجه با مفاهیم مطرح در نظریۀ علامت‌دهی سازگار است. همچنین، نتایج پژوهش از اثر تشدیدگر رقابت‌پذیری صنعت بر رابطۀ مثبت بین شفافیت اطلاعاتی و ارزش شرکت حکایت دارد. این یافته با پیش‌بینی‌های مطرح در نظریۀ نمایندگی همخوانی دارد. افزون بر آن، نتایج تکمیلی حاصل از به‌کارگیری معیارهای سنجش شفافیت اطلاعاتی مبتنی بر داده‌های بازار، مؤید یافته‌های اصلی پژوهش است و نشان می‌دهد که نتایج پژوهش نسبت به استفاده از تعاریف جایگزین برای سنجش شفافیت اطلاعاتی، حساسیت ندارد.

نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج پژوهش مؤید اثر مثبت شفافیت اطلاعاتی بر ارزش شرکت و نقش پررنگ رقابت‌پذیری صنایع بر تقویت این رابطه است. این موضوع نقش واحدهای تجاری و نهادهای ناظر را در افزایش کیفیت گزارش‌های مالی، کاهش ناقرینگی اطلاعاتی و در نهایت، افزایش شفافیت اطلاعاتی، مورد تأکید قرار می‌دهد. افزون بر آن، به دلیل پیامدهای مثبت رقابت‌پذیری صنایع در کاهش رفتار فرصت‌طلبانۀ مدیران، وادار نمودن آنان برای اتّخاذ تصمیم‌های کارا و ارزش‌افزا، کاستن از تمایل مدیران به احتکار اطلاعات و ترغیب آنان به افشای داوطلبانه اطلاعات بیشتر، مورد تأکید قرار می‌گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effect of Information Transparency on Firm Value: The Moderating Role of Industry Competitiveness

نویسندگان [English]

  • Abbas Aflatooni 1
  • Farzad Eivani 2
  • Zahra Nikbakht 3
1 Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran
2 Assistant Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Social Sciences, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.
3 Assistant Prof., Department of Accounting, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Purpose: Transparent information disclosure enables stakeholders to gain a comprehensive understanding of a company's fundamental quality, financial health, and associated risks, allowing them to make well-informed decisions. While publicly traded firms are required to disclose information through various mechanisms, they still retain significant flexibility in how they present it, which can sometimes lead to increased informational ambiguity. Enhanced transparency mitigates information asymmetry, strengthens communication channels between companies and shareholders, and discourages managerial opportunistic behavior, ultimately contributing to higher firm valuation. Despite the presence of empirical evidence supporting the positive relationship between information transparency and firm value, as well as the moderating effect of industry competitiveness on this relationship, the precise influence of competition remains an ongoing subject of academic discussion. This study explores the relationship between information transparency and firm value by employing both accounting-based and market-based transparency indicators, further examining the role of industry competitiveness in shaping and potentially reinforcing this relationship.

Method: To test the research hypotheses, data for 143 firms (equivalent to 1,716 firm-years) from the Rahavard Novin database and the Codal website were collected for the period 2012–2023. The models used in hypothesis testing were estimated using the generalized least squares approach while controlling for the fixed effects of years and industries to ensure accurate estimation. Additionally, to account for heteroskedasticity and correlation in the model errors, clustered standard errors at the firm level were applied, enhancing robustness. Furthermore, regression models employed to measure information transparency based on accounting data were estimated annually from 2012 to 2023 across 12 industries (amounting to 132 regressions in total). Finally, in the sensitivity analysis section, market-based metrics were used to assess information transparency and validate the core findings of the study.

Results: The results of this research indicate that an increase in information transparency increases the firm value. This finding is consistent with the concepts proposed in signaling theory. Additionally, the research results suggest that industry competitiveness intensifies the positive relationship between information transparency and firm value, aligning with predictions from agency theory. Moreover, supplementary results using market data-based measures of information transparency support the main findings of the study, indicating that the results are not sensitive to the use of alternative definitions for measuring information transparency.

Conclusion: The research findings confirm the positive effect of information transparency on firm value and emphasize the significant role of industry competitiveness in strengthening this relationship. This highlights the role of business units and regulatory bodies in improving the quality of financial reports, reducing information asymmetry, and ultimately enhancing information transparency. Furthermore, due to the positive consequences of industry competitiveness in reducing opportunistic managerial behavior, compelling managers to make efficient and value-creating decisions, decreasing their tendency to hoard information, and encouraging voluntary disclosure of more information.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Information Transparency
  • Firm Value
  • Industry Competitiveness
  • Signaling Theory
  • Agency Theory

مراجع

  1. Aflatooni, A. (2020). Disciplining Role of Debts, Information asymmetry and firm value: Two-step generalized methods of moments. Journal of Asset Management and Financing, 8(1), 105-122. (In Persian)
  2. Aflatooni, A., Khatiri, M., & Eivani, F. (2023). The effect of COVID-19 pandemic on capital structure speed of adjustment. Financial Management Perspective, 13(44), 127-149.
  3. Akbari, M., Farkhondeh, M., & Ayagh, Z. (2019). Investigating the effect of product market competition on financial performance by moderating role of information disclosure quality: The companies listed in Tehran stock exchange. Journal of Asset Management and Financing, 7(1), 29-44. (In Persian)
  4. Ali, A., Klasa, S., & Yeung, E. (2014). Industry concentration and corporate disclosure policy. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 58(2-3), 240-264.‏
  5. Ammann, M., Oesch, D., & Schmid, M. M. (2013). Product market competition, corporate governance, and firm value: Evidence from the EU area. European Financial Management, 19(3), 452-469.‏
  6. Anderson, R. C., Duru, A., & Reeb, D. M. (2009). Founders, heirs, and corporate opacity in the United States. Journal of Financial Economics, 92(2), 205-222.‏
  7. Baek, J. S., Kang, J. K., & Park, K. S. (2004). Corporate governance and firm value: Evidence from the Korean financial crisis. Journal of Financial Economics, 71(2), 265-313.‏
  8. Bagnoli, M., & Watts, S. G. (2010). Oligopoly, disclosure, and earnings management. The Accounting Review, 85(4), 1191-1214.‏
  9. Barzegar, G., Talebtabar ahangar, M., & Esabat tabari, E. (2014). The relationship between product market competition and earnings management. Financial Accounting Research, 6(4), 73-88. (In Persian)
  10. Basle Committee on Banking Supervision. (1998). Enhancing Bank Transparency. https://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs41.pdf
  11. Bhattacharya, U., Daouk, H., & Welker, M. (2003). The world price of earnings opacity. The Accounting Review, 78(3), 641-678.‏
  12. Boubaker, S., Saffar, W., & Sassi, S. (2018). Product market competition and debt choice. Journal of Corporate Finance, 49, 204-224.‏
  13. Bushman, R. M., & Smith, A. J. (2003). Transparency, financial accounting information, and corporate governance. Economic Policy Review, 32(1-3), 237-333.
  14. Chan, K., & Hameed, A. (2006). Stock price synchronicity and analyst coverage in emerging markets. Journal of Financial Economics, 80(1), 115-147.‏
  15. Chen, B., Kurt, A. C., & Wang, I. G. (2020). Accounting comparability and the value relevance of earnings and book value. Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 31(4), 82-98.‏
  16. Cheng, P., Man, P., & Yi, C. H. (2013). The impact of product market competition on earnings quality. Accounting & Finance, 53(1), 137-162.‏
  17. Chhaochharia, V., Grinstein, Y., Grullon, G., & Michaely, R. (2017). Product market competition and internal governance: Evidence from the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Management Science, 63(5), 1405-1424.‏
  18. Chung, H., Judge, W. Q., & Li, Y. H. (2015). Voluntary disclosure, excess executive compensation, and firm value. Journal of Corporate Finance, 32, 64-90.‏
  19. Datta, S., Iskandar-Datta, M., & Singh, V. (2013). Product market power, industry structure, and corporate earnings management. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(8), 3273-3285.‏
  20. Deb, P., David, P., & O'Brien, J. (2017). When is cash good or bad for firm performance?. Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 436-454.‏
  21. Durnev, A., Errunza, V., & Molchanov, A. (2009). Property rights protection, corporate transparency, and growth. Journal of International Business Studies, 40, 1533-1562.‏
  22. Duru, A., Wang, D., & Zhao, Y. (2013). Staggered boards, corporate opacity and firm value. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(2), 341-360.‏
  23. Elliott, W. B., Krische, S. D., & Peecher, M. E. (2010). Expected mispricing: The joint influence of accounting transparency and investor base. Journal of Accounting Research, 48(2), 343-381.‏
  24. Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417.
  25. Fama, E. F., & MacBeth, J. D. (1973). Risk, return, and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of Political Economy, 81(3), 607-636.‏
  26. Fathi, S., & Esmaeilian, P. (2023). Investigating the marginal impact of product market competition on performance by changing at different levels of earning management in companies listed on the Tehran stock exchange. Financial Management Perspective, 13(42), 117-144. (In Persian)
  27. Firth, M., Wang, K., & Wong, S. M. (2015). Corporate transparency and the impact of investor sentiment on stock prices. Management Science, 61(7), 1630-1647.‏
  28. Francis, J. R., Huang, S., Khurana, I. K., & Pereira, R. (2009). Does corporate transparency contribute to efficient resource allocation? Journal of Accounting Research, 47(4), 943-989.‏
  29. Francis, J., LaFond, R., Olsson, P., & Schipper, K. (2005). The market pricing of accruals quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39(2), 295-327.‏
  30. Ghauory Moghadam, A., Hajeb, H., & Parsa, H. (2014). Investigation of the impact of product market competition on earnings quality of listed companies in Tehran stock exchange (TSE). Journal of Accounting and Social Interests, 4(4), 19-34. (In Persian)
  31. Giroud, X., & Mueller, H. M. (2011). Corporate governance, product market competition, and equity prices. The Journal of Finance, 66(2), 563-600.‏
  32. Hansen, B., Miletkov, M. K., & Wintoki, M. B. (2015). Investor protection and the role of firm‐level financial transparency in attracting foreign investment. Financial Review, 50(3), 393-434.‏
  33. Hart, O. D. (1983). The market mechanism as an incentive scheme. The Bell Journal of Economics, 14(2), 366–382.
  34. Hidalgo-Cabrillana, A. (2013). Endogenous governance transparency and product market competition. SERIEs, 4(1), 113-136.‏
  35. Hope, O. K., & Thomas, W. B. (2008). Managerial empire building and firm disclosure. Journal of Accounting Research, 46(3), 591-626.‏
  36. Huang, P., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Does enhanced disclosure really reduce agency costs? Evidence from the diversion of corporate resources. The Accounting Review, 87(1), 199-229.‏
  37. Jiang, Y., Luo, L., Xu, J., & Shao, X. (2021). The value relevance of corporate voluntary carbon disclosure: Evidence from the United States and BRIC countries. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 17(3), 100279.‏
  38. Kordestani, G., Aldebs, A., & Saber, A. (2018). High growth sale, leading in industry and the impacts of product market competition on the corporate investment. Financial Management Perspective, 8(22), 29-49. (In Persian)
  39. Kothari, S. P., Leone, A. J., & Wasley, C. E. (2005). Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39(1), 163-197.‏
  40. Kutner, M. H.; Nachtsheim, C. J.; & Neter, J. (2004). Applied Linear Regression Models. 8th McGraw-Hill Irwin.
  41. Lee, J. H., Byun, H. S., & Park, K. S. (2019). How does product market competition affect corporate takeover in an emerging economy? International Review of Economics & Finance, 60, 26-45.‏
  42. Lerner, A. (1995). The Concept of Monopoly and the Measurement of Monopoly Power (55-76). Macmillan Education UK.‏
  43. Leuz, C., & Verrecchia, R. E. (2000). The economic consequences of increased disclosure. Journal of Accounting Research, 38(1), 91-124.‏
  44. Liu, C., Li, Q., & Lin, Y. E. (2023). Corporate transparency and firm value: Does market competition play an external governance role? Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 19(1), 100334.‏
  45. Majeed, M. A., Yan, C., & Tauni, M. Z. (2018). How does competition shape managerial decisions? Product market competition and financial statement comparability. Management Decision, 56(11), 2437-2471.‏
  46. Markarian, G., & Santalo, J. (2014). Product market competition, information and earnings management. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 41(5-6), 572-599.‏
  47. Nikbakht, M. R., & Kalhornia, H. (2017). Determining the relationship between information transparency, liquidity and company valuation. The Financial Accounting and Auditing Research, 9(33), 1-16. (In Persian)
  48. Patel, Sandeep A. and Dallas, George S. (2002). Transparency and disclosure: overview of methodology and study results - United States. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=422800
  49. Rajgopal, S., & Venkatachalam, M. (2011). Financial reporting quality and idiosyncratic return volatility. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 51(1-2), 1-20.‏
  50. Schmidt, K. M. (1997). Managerial incentives and product market competition. The Review of Economic Studies, 64(2), 191-213.‏
  51. Sheikh, S. (2018). CEO power, product market competition and firm value. Research in International Business and Finance, 46, 373-386.‏
  52. Shleifer, A. (2004). Does competition destroy ethical behavior? American Economic Review, 94(2), 414-418.‏
  53. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737-783.‏
  54. Stoughton, N. M., Wong, K. P., & Yi, L. (2017). Investment efficiency and product market competition. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 52(6), 2611-2642.‏
  55. Truong, L. D., Le, T. X., & Friday, H. S. (2022). The influence of information transparency and disclosure on the value of listed companies: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(8), 345.‏
  56. Vaez, S. A., Ghalambor, M. H., & Ghanavati, N. (2015). Effect of product market competition on earnings quality, using factor analysis. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 6(21), 133-154. (In Persian)
  57. Venkatesh, P.C., & Chiang, R. (1986). Information asymmetry and the dealer’s bid-ask spread: a case study of earnings and dividend announcements. The Journal of Finance, 41(5), 1089-1102.
  58. Yu, E. P. Y., Guo, C. Q., & Luu, B. V. (2018). Environmental, social and governance transparency and firm value. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(7), 987-1004.
چشم انداز مدیریت مالی
دوره 14، شماره 47
1403
صفحه 89-107

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار