بررسی چسبندگی هزینه‌ها در شرکت‌های دارویی پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار حسابداری دانشگاه یزد.

2 دانشجوی کارشناسی‌ارشد حسابداری دانشگاه یزد.

چکیده

مقدمه: هدف این پژوهش بررسی رفتار چسبنده هزینه‌های عملیاتی و بهای تمام شده کالای فروش‌رفته و برخی عوامل احتمالی (شامل دارایی‌ها، بدهی‌ها، جریان نقد آزاد و تولید ناخالص داخلی) اثرگذار بر میزان چسبندگی هزینه‌های عملیاتی در شرکت‌های دارویی پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران است.
روش پژوهش: طرح پژوهش بر اساس هدف، کاربردی و با استفاده از رویکرد پس‌رویدادی از طریق اطلاعات گذشته است. برای آزمون فرضیه‌های مطرح شده از داده‌های سری زمانی-مقطعی استفاده شده است. جامعه و نمونه آماری پژوهش شامل 24 شرکت دارویی پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران در بازه زمانی 1393-1382 است که در صنعت دارو فعالیت داشته‌اند. روش آماری مورد استفاده در این پژوهش، رگرسیون چندمتغیره است. برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها از نرم‌افزارهای Excel نسخه 13 و Eviews نسخه 8 استفاده شده است.
یافته‌ها: یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که هزینه‌های عملیاتی نسبت به تغییرات درآمد فروش رفتار چسبنده دارد اما شواهدی مبنی بر چسبنده بودن بهای تمام‌شده کالای فروش‌رفته یافت نشد. هم‌چنین، نتایج بدست آمده حاکی از وجود رابطه معنادار بین میزان چسبندگی هزینه‌های عملیاتی و جریان نقد آزاد است. به این گونه که در شرکت‌های با جریان نقد آزاد بالاتر، چسبندگی هزینه‌ها بیش­تر است. افزون براین، نتایج از وجود رابطه مستقیم و معنادار بین میزان چسبندگی هزینه­های عملیاتی و تولید ناخالص داخلی حکایت دارد اما اثرگذاربودن دارایی‌ها و بدهی‌ها بر میزان چسبندگی هزینه‌های عملیاتی مورد تأیید قرار نگرفت.
نتیجه‌گیری: در صورت پیش­بینی افزایش فروش آینده یا در دوره­های رشد اقتصادی، برای استفاده مناسب از فرصت‌ها و هم‌چنین به دلیل آن که تحصیل و آماده­سازی مجدد منابع نیازمند زمان و هزینه مضاعف است، مدیران منابع را در شرکت حفظ می­کنند تا از بازگشت فروش به سطح قبلی، بیش‌ترین مزیت را کسب کنند که این امر چسبندگی هزینه­های عملیاتی را به دنبال خواهد داشت.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the Stickiness of Costs in the Pharmaceutical Companies Listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange

نویسندگان [English]

  • M. Nazemi Ardakani 1
  • F. Hekmati 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Yazd University.
2 M. A. Student in Accounting, Yazd University.
چکیده [English]

Introduction: The aim of this research is to examine the stickiness of operational costs and the cost price of sold product and some probable effective factors (such as assets, debts, free cash flow and Gross Domestic Product) on the stickiness of operational costs in the pharmaceutical companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.
Method: The research is applied in terms of purpose, and it has been conducted through Critical Incident Technique by the use of past information. In order to test the presented hypotheses, Time Series Analysis has been used. The statistical sample and population of the research involve 24 pharmaceutical companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange during 2003-2014 which have been active in the Pharmaceutical Industry. The applied statistical method in this research is multiple linear regression.In order to analyze the data, Excel Software Version 13 and Eviews Version 8 have been used.
Results: The findings of the research indicate that the operational costs have sticky behavior in relation to sale income changes, but no evidence was found for the stickiness of the cost price of the sold product. Also, the results state a meaningful relationship between the rate of stickiness of operational costs and free cash flow in such a way that in the firms with higher free cash flow, stickiness of costs are higher. Additionally, the results suggest a direct and meaningful relationship between the rate of stickiness of operational costs and Gross Domestic Production, but the effectiveness of the assets and debts on the stickiness of the operational costs did not validate.
Conclusion: In the case of predicting an increase in the future sale or in the economic growth periods, for a proper use of opportunities, and also because the achievement and further preparation of resources are in needs of time and double cost, managers protect the resources in the firm in order to gain a higher privilege by sale return to the previous level of sale which will lead to the stickiness of operational costs.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Operational Cost
  • Pharmaceutical Companies
  • Sale Income
  • the Asymmetric Behavior of Cost
  • The Stickiness of Cost
1      Anderson, M. C.; Banker R. D.; and S. N. Janakiraman (2003). “Are Selling, General, and Administrative Costs “Sticky”?”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 41, No 1, pp. 47-63.

2      Noreen, E. and N. Soderstrom (1994). “Are Overhead Costs Strictly Proportional to Activity?: Evidence from Hospital Departments”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol.17, No. 1, pp. 255-278.

3      Solomons, D. (1968). “The Analysis of Standard Cost Variances”, Available at: https://www.econbiz.de/Record/the-analysis-of-standard-cost-variances-so lomons-david/10002837122. [Online] [4 March 2015]

4      Sorros, J. and A. Karagiorgos (2013). “Understanding Sticky Costs and the Factors Affecting Cost Behavior: Cost Stickiness Theory and its Possible Implementations”, Available at: http:// ssrn.com/abstract=2239368. [Online] [8 February 2013]

5      Banker R. D.; Byzalov, D.; and J. M. Plehn-Dujowich (2011). “Sticky Cost Behavior: Theory and Evidence”, Working Paper, Temple University, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139 /ssrn.1659493. [Online][4 March 2015]

6      Bulu, Gh.; Khan Hossieni, D.; Moazzez, E.; and M. Niku Nesbati (2012). “Investigating the Relationship between Managers’ Viewpoint and Sticky Costs Listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange”, Journal of Planning and Budgeting, Vol. 3, pp. 79-95. [In Persian]

7      Kama, I. and D. Weiss (2013). “Do Earnings Targets and Managerial Incentives Affect Sticky Costs?”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 201-224.

8      Banker R. D.; Ciftci, M.; and R. Mashruwala (2008). “Managerial Optimism, Prior Period Sales Changes, and Sticky Cost Behavior”, Working Paper, Temple University and University of Illinois, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1599284. [Online][21 March 2015]

9      Sepasi, S.; Shibeh, S.; and Z. Fathi (2014). “The Empirical Test of Sticky Costs: Some Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange”, Journal of Empirical Research in Accounting, Vol. 3, No. 12, pp. 163-177. [In Persian]

10  Namazi, M. and I. Davanipoor (2010). “Experimental Investigation of Sticky Behavior of Costs Listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange”, The Iranian Accounting and Auditing Review, Vol. 67, No. 62, pp. 89-102. [In Persian]

11  Setayesh, M.; Dehghani Saa'di, A.; Salehinia, M.; and Z. Karami (2015). “The Strategy of Pharmaceutical Companies and the Economic Value Added”, Journal of Health Accounting, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 20-36.[In Persian]

12  Mahdavi, Gh. and M. Maher (2013). “Investigating Managers’ Attitudes toward the Quality of Financial Reports (A Case Study: Fars Province University of Medical Sciences)”, Journal of Health Accounting, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 78-96.[In Persian]

13  Banker R. D.; Huang, R.; and R. Natarajan (2013). “Equity Incentives and Long‐Term Value Created by SG&A Expenditure”, Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 794-830.

14  Ghaemi, M. and M. Nematollahi (2006). “Investigating the Behavior of Sale, Distribution, Public, and Administrative Expenses and the Cost Price of Sold Goods in the Manufacturing Companies Listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange”, Empirical Studies in Financial Accounting, Vol. 16, pp. 71-90. [In Persian]

15  Horngren Ch. T.; Dater, M.; and V. Rajan (2010). “Cost Accounting: A Managerial Emphasis”, Issues in Accounting Education, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 789-790.

16  Balakrishnan, R. and T. Gruca (2008). “Cost Stickiness and Core Competency: A Note”, Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 993-1006.

17  Xue, Sh. and Y. Hong (2015). “Earnings Management, Corporate Governance and Expense Stickiness”, China Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 41-58.

18  Banker, R. and L. Chen (2006). “Labor Market Characteristics and Cross-Country Differences in Cost Stickiness”, Working Paper, Georgia State University, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.921419. [Online][4 March 2015].

19  Chen, C. X.; Lu, H.; and T. Sougiannis (2008). “Managerial Empire Building, Corporate Governance, and the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs”, AAA 2008 Financial Accounting and Reporting Section (FARS) Paper, (CAAA) 2008 Annual Conference Paper, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2139/ssrn.1014088. [Online][25 March 2015]

20  Anderson, W. and N. Lanen (2007). “Understanding Cost Management: What Can We Learn from the Evidence on Sticky Costs?”, Working Paper, Rice University and University of Michigan, Available at: http://dx. doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.975135. [Online] [4 March 2015]

21  Chen, C. X.; Lu, H.; and T. Sougiannis (2012). “The Agency Problem, Corporate Governance, and the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs”, Contemporary Accounting Research,Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 252-282.

22  Weidenmier, M. L. and C. Subramaniam (2003). “Additional Evidence on the Sticky Behavior of Costs”, Available at: http://ssrn.com/. [Online][4 March 2015]

23  Khani, A.; Amiri, H.; and M. ShahMohammadi (2014). “The Effect of Personal Incentives Managers on Costs Asymmetric in Tehran Stock Exchange”, Journal of Financial Accounting Research, Vol. 6, No. 1,pp.57-74. [In Persian]

24  Zanjirdar, M.; GhaffariAshtiani, P.; and Z. Maddahi (2014). “Analysis the Factors Affecting on the Cost Stickiness”, Journal of Management Accounting, Vol. 7, No. 20, pp. 79-91. [In Persian]

25  Dalla, V. N. and P. Perego (2014). “Sticky Cost Behaviour: Evidence from Small and Medium Sized Companies”, Accounting and Finance,Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 753-778.

26  Yukacu, S. and O. Hakan (2011). “Cost Behavior in Turkish Firms: Are Selling, General and Administrative Costs and Total Operating Costs Sticky?”, World of Accounting Science, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 1-27.

27  Porporato, M. and E. M. Werbin (2011). “Active Cost Management in Banks: Evidence of Sticky Costs in Argentina, Brazil and Canada”, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139 /ssrn.1659228. [Online][25 March 2015]

28  Cannon, J. (2012). “Determinants of Sticky Costs: An Analysis of Cost Behavior using United States Air Transportation Industry Data”, Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract =1895615. [Online][17 May 2013]

29  Chen, K.; Chen, Z.; and K. Wei (2011). “Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow and the Effect of Shareholder Rights on the Implied Cost of Equity Capital”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 46, No.1, pp. 171-207.

30  Balakrishnan, R.; Labro, E.; and N. Soderstrom (2014). “Cost Structure and Sticky Costs”, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 91-116.

31  Calleja, K.; Steliaros, M.; and D. Thomas (2006). “A Note on Cost Stickiness: Some International Comparisons”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 127-140.

32  Namazi, M. and A. Shokrollahi (2014). “Investigating the Interaction between Debt Policy and Institutional Ownership among Pharmaceutical and Non-Pharmaceutical Companies Listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange via Simultaneous Equations”, Journal of Health Accounting, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 80-103.[In Persian]