1 Anderson et al. 2 1% 0. 35% Calleja et al. 3 Balakrishnan et al. 4

Transcription

1 F275 A DOI:0.3269/j.cnki.ier Anderson et al. 2 % 0. 55% % 0. 35% Calleja et al. 3 Balakrishnan et al. 4 5 % % % %

2 Banker et al A R&D 2

3 INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH Anderson 2 Holmstrom H 25 2a 2b H2a 3

4 H2b 3 H Eviews3. 0. SGA SGA SGA t - ] = β 0 + β - ] + β 2 D t [ t - ] + 3 β j INDUSTRY t + YEAR 4 + ε t β 0 ε t β t - t SGA D t t - t D t 0 D t 0 % SGA % D t % SGA β + β 2 % β 2 0 β + β 2 < β β 2 < 0β 2 β 2 2. HHI HHI HHI = n i = X i /X 2 X i i X HHI HHI 0 5 HHI / PM 4. / COST 5. G GDP 2 A / 3 E / SGA SGA t - ] = β 0 + β - ] + β 2 D t - ] + β 3 D t [ t - ] G + β 4 D t A t + β 5 D β j INDUSTRY t + YEAR + ε t 4 t E t 2 3

5 INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH 2a 2b D t. SGA t SGA t - = β 0 + β + β 2 D t + β 3 HHI t D t t + 3 β j INDUSTRY t + YEAR + ε t 4 j = 4 HHI t β 3 β 3 β a SGA t SGA t - = β 0 + β + β 4 PM t D t 2a + β 2 D t + 4 β j INDUSTRY t + YEAR + ε t j = 5 PM β b SGA t SGA t - = β 0 + β + β 5 COST t D t 2b + β 2 D t β j INDUSTRY t + YEAR + ε t 6 j = 6 COST β SGA t SGA t - = β 0 + β + β 4 PM t D t + YEAR + ε t + β 2 D t + β 5 COST t D t % 8. 9% 70. 2% + β 3 HHI t D t + 5 j = 6 β j INDUSTRY t / % 70. 2% 08. 9% 73. 2% 3. 54% SGA t /SGA t % % % % % HHI PM COST G A E * p < 0. 0 ** p < *** p < % 3. 45% % 5

6 *** β *** = t = β 2 = t = % % % % D Log S t /S t *** *** D t Log S t /S t *** ** D % 2 t Log S t /S t- G *** t Log S /S A t t- t *** D t Log S t /S 3 2 HHI β t = t- E t ** R N % t. S 2. * p < 0. 0 ** p < *** p < β t = % *** *** Log S t /S t *** *** D t Log S t /S t *** *** D t Log S t /S t- G β *** t = t = % t 2a 2 5 β t = t = 3. 0 % 5% t 2b D t Log S t /S t- A t *** D t Log S t /S t- E t *** D t Log S t /S t- HHI *** *** R N * p < 0. 0 ** p < *** p <

7 INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH *** *** *** *** *** *** Log S t /S t *** *** *** *** *** *** D t Log S t /S t *** *** *** *** ** *** D t Log S t /S t- G *** *** *** D t Log S t /S t- E t *** *** *** D t Log S t /S t- PM *** ** *** D t Log S t /S t- COST *** *** ** *** R N * p < 0. 0 ** p < *** p < *** *** ** *** *** ** Log S t /S t *** ** ** *** ** ** D t Log S t /S t *** *** *** *** *** *** D t Log S t /S t- G *** *** *** D t Log S t /S t- E t *** *** *** D t Log S t /S t- HHI *** *** ** *** *** ** D t Log S t /S t- PM ** ** ** *** D t Log S t /S t- COST *** *** *** *** R N * p < 0. 0 ** p < *** p <

8 β t = t = % t 3 6 β t = t = % % t β t = t = % NOREEN E SODERSTROM N. Are overhead costs strictly proportional to activity Evidence from hospital service departments J. Journal of accounting and economics ANDERSON M C BANKER R D JANAKIRA-MAN S N. Are selling general and administrative costs sticky J. Journal of accounting research CALLEJA K STELIAROS M THOMAS D C. A note on cost stickiness some international comparisons J. Management accounting research BALAKRISHNAN R PETERSON M SODERSTROM N. Does capacity utilization affect the stickiness of cost J. Journal of accounting auditing and finance J BANKER R BYZALOV D PLEHN-DUJOWICH J M. Sticky cost behavior theory and evidence Z. Working paper J J

9 INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH 9. D J J J J A J J J CEO J J J J M HOLMSTROM B. Moral hazard and observe ability J. Bell journal of economies J BANKER R FLASHER R ZHANG D. Strategic positioning and asymmetric cost behavior J. The accounting review PORTER M E. What is strategy J. Harvard business review November-December A Research of Product Market Competition and Competitive Strategy Selection on Cost Stickiness XIE Maohua LIU Siqin YANG Caixia School of Economics & Management Inner Mongolia University Hohhot 0002 China Abstract In business daily management the causes of costs viscous behavior are a mystery. According to the theory of market competition and competitive strategy theory this paper assumes the degree of competition in product markets and competitive strategic choices will affect the cost of business. Shanghai and Shenzhen listed companies in the year were selected as the sample data and an econometric model was built to study the behavior of the company's costs as well as product market competition and competitive strategy set as explanatory variables to study their impact on the cost of stickiness. After empirical test it comes to the conclusion that company's sales and administrative expenses exists cost of viscous behavior the cost stickiness of China's listed companies acts reversely with changes in product market competition relations besides corporate cost stickiness will vary depending on the viscosity of competitive strategy and different performance behavioral characteristics furthermore differentiation strategy and cost stickiness has significant positive correlation while cost leadership strategy and cost stickiness has significant negative correlation. Conclusions for the article suggests when executing cost management and control managers should act based on the strength of competition in the market for the management of costs and enterprises with higher innovation capacity is suitable for differentiation strategy while enterprises of strict cost control is applicable to cost leadership strategy. Key words market competition competitive strategy differentiation strategy cost leadership strategy cost stickiness 9