پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 952 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,826 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 13,029,278 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 9,228,405 |
تأثیر مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت بر رفتار چسبندگی هزینه | ||
| پژوهش های تجربی حسابداری | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 7، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 23، خرداد 1396، صفحه 1-28 اصل مقاله (4.61 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/jera.2017.8651.1161 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| جواد نیک کار* 1؛ الهام حمیدی2؛ اکرم جلیلی3 | ||
| 1مربی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران شرق | ||
| 2استاد یار دانشگاه غیر انتفاعی خاتم | ||
| 3کارشناس ارشد حسابداری | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف این تحقیق، بررسی تأثیر مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت بر رفتار چسبندگی هزینه در شرکت‌های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران است. بدین منظور پنج فرضیه برای بررسی این موضوع تدوین و داده‌های مربوط به 105 شرکت عضو بورس اوراق بهادار برای دوره‌ی زمانی بین سال‌های 1384 تا 1393 مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت. الگوی رگرسیون پژوهش با استفاده از روش داده‌های تلفیقی با رویکرد اثرات ثابت، بررسی و آزمون شد. نتایج نشان داد که در شرکت‌های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران، پدیده چسبندگی هزینه وجود دارد. علاوه بر این، نتایج تحقیق نشان داد که نسبت تعداد کارکنان به کل دارایی‌ها، نسبت هزینه تحقیق، توسعه و تبلیغات به فروش و نسبت مالیات به فروش شرکت به عنوان شاخص‌های مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت، تأثیر مثبت معناداری بر رفتار چسبندگی هزینه دارد. همچنین، نتایج موید آن است که نسبت دارایی‌های ثابت به کل دارایی‌ها و متغیر توانایی راهبری شرکتی به عنوان شاخص‌های مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت تأثیر معناداری بر رفتار چسبندگی هزینه در شرکت‌های ایرانی ندارد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت؛ رفاه عمومی؛ چسبندگی هزینه و عدم تقارن رفتار هزینه | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Sticky Cost Behavior | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| javad nik kar1؛ elham hamidi2؛ | ||
| 1Faculty member of Tehran Azad University East | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| This study is aimed to investigate effects of corporate social responsibility on sticky cost behaviour in firms listed in Tehran Stock Exchange. For this purpose, five hypotheses are developed and data on the 105 firms listed in Tehran Stock Exchange for the period from 2006 to 2015 are analysed. The hypotheses are tested by regression model using panel data with fixed effects approach. The results show that there is sticky cost phenomenon in firms listed in Tehran Stock Exchange. In addition, the results show that the ratio of employee number to total assets, the ratio of research, development and advertising costs to sales and the ratio of tax to sales, as indicators of corporate social responsibility, have significant positive influence on sticky cost behaviour. Also, the results indicate that the ratio of fixed assets to total assets and corporate governance ability, as indicators of corporate social responsibility, have no significant effect on sticky cost behaviour of Iranian firms. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Corporate Social Responsibility, Public Welfare, Cost Sticky, The asymmetry of Cost behavior | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Aflatoni, A & Nikbakht, L. (2010). Application of econometrics in accounting research, Financial Management and Economic Sciences, Tehran, Publications Terme, printed. Anderson, M., R. Banker, & S. Janakiraman. (2003). Are selling, general and administrative costs ‘‘sticky’’? Journal of Accounting Research, 41 (1): 47–63. Banker, R. D., Byzalov, D., & Chen, L. T. (2013). Employment protection legislation, adjustment costs and cross-country differences in cost behavior. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 55 (1) , 111-127. Banker, R., Basu, S,. Byzalov, D & Chen, J, Y. (2015). The Confounding Effect of Cost Stickiness on Conservatism Estimates, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2130897. Barrios, J, M, Fasen, M & Nanda, D. (2015). Is Corporate Social Responsibility an Agency Problem? Evidence from CEO Turnovers,. Calleja K, Steliaros M, Thomas D.C. (2006). A Note on Cost Stickiness: Some International Comparisons. Management Accounting Research 2006; 17 (2): 127- 140. Chen, C. L.; H. LU; AND T. Sougiannis. (2012). The Agency Problem, Corporate Governance, and the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs, ? Journal of Accounting Research, 29 (2012): 252–82. Chen, C.X., Gores, T., Nasev, J., (2013). Managerial overconfidence and cost stickiness. Working paper. Choi, Jong-Seo; Kwak, Young-Ming; Choe, CHongwoo. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance: Evidence from Korea. Australian Journal of Management, 53 (3) , 291-311 Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A., & Barnett, M.L. (2000). Opportunity platforms and safety nets: Corporate citizenship and reputational risk. Business and Society Review 105 (1) , 85-106. Foroughi, D, Mir Shams Shahshahani, M & Hossein Pour, S. (2009). Managers attitudes about disclosure of social accounting information companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange, Review of Accounting and Auditing, No. 52, pp. 57-70. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 13, September, 32–33. Godfrey, P.C., Merrill, C.B., & Hansen, J.M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal 30 (4) , 425-445. Habib, A and Monzur Hasan, M. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and cost stickiness, www.ssrn.com. Hajiha, Z & Sarafraz, B. (2014). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and cost of equity in the companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange, Empirical Research in Accounting, Issue 14, Winter 2014, pp. 105-123. Huang, Chi-Jui. (2010). Corporate governance, corporate social responsibility and corporate performance. Journal of Management and Organization, 16 (5) , 641-655. Jalili, S & Kaiser, F. (2014). The relationship between earnings quality and corporate social responsibility listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange, Knowledge Audit, Issue 57, Winter 2014, pp. 147-170. Kama, I., and D. Weiss. ) 2013 (. Do earnings targets and managerial incentives affect sticky costs? Journal of Accounting Research, 51 (3) , 201-224. Keller, G., & Warrack, B. (2003). Statistics for management and economics (6th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press. Khajavi, S & Ibrahim, M. (2012). The effect of product market power on the liquidity of stocks listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, view financial management, (5) , 41-55. Kim, Y., & Statman, M. 2012. Do corporations invest enough in environmental responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 105 (1) , 115-129. -Kotchen, M., & Moon, J. J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility for irresponsibility. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 12 (1). Lanis, R & Richardson, G. (2014). Is Corporate Social Responsibility Performance Associated with Tax Avoidance?, J Bus Ethics (2015) 127:439–457. Mehrani S., Karami, GH, Seid Hoseini, M, & Jahromy, M. (2014). Accounting Theory, Volume II, Knowledge View Publications, printing. -Muller, A., & Kräussl, R. (2011). Doing good deeds in times of need: a strategic perspective on corporate disaster donations. Strategic Management Journal, 32 (9) , 911-929. Namazy, M, Ghaffari, MJ and Fereidoni., M. (2012). Fundamental analysis sticky behavior of costs and cost of the range of variation in the Tehran Stock Exchange. Advances in Accounting, Volume IV, Issue II, Winter 2012, pp. 151-177. Nykvmram, H, & Mohammad Zadeh, H. (2010). Relationship between corporate governance and earnings management, management beyond, Issue 15, Winter 2010, pp. 187-210. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L., & Rynes, S.L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization studies 24 (3) , 403-441. Sajadi, H, Hajizadeh, S, & Nikkar, J. (2014). Cost stickiness effect on the asymmetry time to profit with an emphasis on the relationship between stickiness cost and conditional conservatism, knowledge of accounting, Issue 16, Spring 2014, pp. 81-99. Sepasi, S., Fathi, Z & Shaybah, S. (2014). Experimental test Cost Sticky: Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange, Empirical Research in Accounting, Issue 12, Summer 2014, pp. 163-177. Strike, V. M., Gao, J., & Bansal, P. (2006). Being good while being bad: Social responsibility and the international diversification of US firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (6) , 850-862. Tang, Y., Qian, C., Chen, G., & Shen, R. (2015). How CEO hubris affects corporate social (ir) responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 1338–1357 Weiss, D. ) 2010 (. Cost behavior and analysts' earnings forecasts. The Accounting Review 85 (4): 1441-1471.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 3,339 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 4,548 |
||