IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ausecp/v60y2021i1p163-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Peer‐based comparison and firms' discretionary cost decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Tom Van Caneghem
  • Walter Aerts
  • Oveis Madadian

Abstract

This study investigates whether firms engage in peer‐based benchmarking in their decision‐making regarding selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A) for a large sample of U.S. listed firms. Peer‐based comparison relates to comparing own performance against the performance of a meaningful reference group of other firms. SG&A are to a large extent discretionary, but optimal levels of (relative) SG&A are hard to assess. Based on the behavioural theory of the firm and institutional theory, we argue that peer‐based comparison is likely to be an important input to managers' SG&A decision processes. Results show that peer‐based comparison significantly drives changes in firms' reported SG&A. In addition, the effect of peer‐based comparison is found to depend on the firm's life cycle stage. Findings further indicate that peer‐based comparison has a significantly stronger effect in reference groups characterised by high(er) SG&A similarity. Results are robust to using several industry classification systems, as well as, multiple approaches to identify firm life cycles.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Van Caneghem & Walter Aerts & Oveis Madadian, 2021. "Peer‐based comparison and firms' discretionary cost decisions," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 163-185, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ausecp:v:60:y:2021:i:1:p:163-185
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8454.12199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8454.12199
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8454.12199?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Theresa K. Lant, 1992. "Aspiration Level Adaptation: An Empirical Exploration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 623-644, May.
    2. John Joseph & Vibha Gaba, 2015. "The fog of feedback: Ambiguity and firm responses to multiple aspiration levels," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(13), pages 1960-1978, December.
    3. Joel A. C. Baum & Kristina B. Dahlin, 2007. "Aspiration Performance and Railroads’ Patterns of Learning from Train Wrecks and Crashes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 368-385, June.
    4. Mark C. Anderson & Rajiv D. Banker & Surya N. Janakiraman, 2003. "Are Selling, General, and Administrative Costs “Sticky”?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 47-63, March.
    5. H. Robert Dodge & Sam Fullerton & John E. Robbins, 1994. "Stage of the organizational life cycle and competition as mediators of problem perception for small businesses," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 121-134, February.
    6. Clara Xiaoling Chen & Hai Lu & Theodore Sougiannis, 2012. "The Agency Problem, Corporate Governance, and the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 252-282, March.
    7. Audia, Pino G. & Brion, Sebastien, 2007. "Reluctant to change: Self-enhancing responses to diverging performance measures," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 255-269, March.
    8. Mark Washburn & Philip Bromiley, 2012. "Comparing Aspiration Models: The Role of Selective Attention," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(5), pages 896-917, July.
    9. Israel Drori & Benson Honig & Zachary Sheaffer, 2009. "The Life Cycle of an Internet Firm: Scripts, Legitimacy, and Identity," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(3), pages 715-738, May.
    10. Kristina Dahlin & Joel A.C Baum, 2007. "Aspiration performance and railroads' patterns of learning from train wrecks and crashes," Post-Print hal-00480399, HAL.
    11. Healy, Paul M. & Palepu, Krishna G., 2001. "Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 405-440, September.
    12. Faulkender, Michael & Yang, Jun, 2010. "Inside the black box: The role and composition of compensation peer groups," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 257-270, May.
    13. Massini, Silvia & Lewin, Arie Y. & Greve, Henrich R., 2005. "Innovators and imitators: Organizational reference groups and adoption of organizational routines," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1550-1569, December.
    14. Wei‐Ru Chen & Kent D. Miller, 2007. "Situational and institutional determinants of firms' R&D search intensity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 369-381, April.
    15. Albuquerque, Ana, 2009. "Peer firms in relative performance evaluation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 69-89, October.
    16. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1997. "Industry costs of equity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, February.
    17. Mitchell A. Petersen, 2009. "Estimating Standard Errors in Finance Panel Data Sets: Comparing Approaches," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 435-480, January.
    18. Katherine A. Gunny, 2010. "The Relation Between Earnings Management Using Real Activities Manipulation and Future Performance: Evidence from Meeting Earnings Benchmarks," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 855-888, September.
    19. Lev, B & Thiagarajan, Sr, 1993. "Fundamental Information Analysis," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 190-215.
    20. George P. Huber, 1991. "Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 88-115, February.
    21. James G. March & Zur Shapira, 1987. "Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1404-1418, November.
    22. Daniela P. Blettner & Zi-Lin He & Songcui Hu & Richard A. Bettis, 2015. "Adaptive aspirations and performance heterogeneity: Attention allocation among multiple reference points," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(7), pages 987-1005, July.
    23. Sanjeev Bhojraj & Charles M. C. Lee & Derek K. Oler, 2003. "What's My Line? A Comparison of Industry Classification Schemes for Capital Market Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 745-774, December.
    24. Nagar, Neerav & Radhakrishnan, Suresh, 2015. "Firm Life Cycle and Real-Activity Based Earnings Management," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-12-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    25. Kamran Ahmed & Mohammed Jinan, 2011. "The association between research and development expenditure and firm performance: testing a life cycle hypothesis," International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(4), pages 267-286.
    26. Pino G. Audia & Henrich R. Greve, 2006. "Less Likely to Fail: Low Performance, Firm Size, and Factory Expansion in the Shipbuilding Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 83-94, January.
    27. Oveis Madadian & Walter Aerts & Tom Van Caneghem, 2018. "Social comparison of cost behaviour and financial analysts," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(7), pages 805-839, November.
    28. Anthony, Joseph H. & Ramesh, K., 1992. "Association between accounting performance measures and stock prices : A test of the life cycle hypothesis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2-3), pages 203-227, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Songcui Hu & Zi-Lin He & Daniela P. Blettner & Richard A. Bettis, 2017. "Conflict inside and outside: Social comparisons and attention shifts in multidivisional firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(7), pages 1435-1454, July.
    2. Michael Lounsbury & Christine M. Beckman, 2015. "Celebrating Organization Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 288-308, March.
    3. Thomas P. Moliterno & Nikolaus Beck & Christine M. Beckman & Mark Meyer, 2014. "Knowing Your Place: Social Performance Feedback in Good Times and Bad Times," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1684-1702, December.
    4. Saemundsson, Rögnvaldur & Candi, Marina & Sigurjonsson, Throstur Olaf, 2022. "The influence of performance feedback and top management team orientation on decisions about R&D in technology-based firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    5. Cheng, Lulu & Xie, En & Fang, Junyi & Mei, Nan, 2022. "Performance feedback and firms’ relative strategic emphasis: The moderating effects of board independence and media coverage," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 218-231.
    6. Jiang, Guoliang Frank & Holburn, Guy L.F., 2018. "Organizational performance feedback effects and international expansion," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 48-58.
    7. Dongil D. Keum & J. P. Eggers, 2018. "Setting the Bar: The Evaluative and Allocative Roles of Organizational Aspirations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1170-1186, December.
    8. Daniel A. Levinthal & Claus Rerup, 2021. "The Plural of Goal: Learning in a World of Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 527-543, May.
    9. Verver, Hugo & van Zelst, Marino & Lucas, Gerardus Johannes Maria & Meeus, Marius, 2019. "Understanding Heterogeneity in the Performance Feedback – Organizational Responsiveness Relationship: A Meta-Analysis," OSF Preprints hq4uw, Center for Open Science.
    10. Kent Ngan-Cheung Hui & Yuanyuan Gong & Qi Cui & Naipeng Jiang, 2022. "Foreign investment or divestment as a near-term solution to performance shortfalls? The moderating role of vicarious learning," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 1481-1509, December.
    11. Pasi Kuusela & Thomas Keil & Markku Maula, 2017. "Driven by aspirations, but in what direction? Performance shortfalls, slack resources, and resource-consuming vs. resource-freeing organizational change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 1101-1120, May.
    12. Martínez-Noya, Andrea & García-Canal, Esteban, 2021. "Innovation performance feedback and technological alliance portfolio diversity: The moderating role of firms’ R&D intensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    13. Abraham Carmeli & Ari Dothan & Dev Kumar Boojihawon, 2020. "Resilience of sustainability‐oriented and financially‐driven organizations," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 154-169, January.
    14. Daehun Chung & Dongyoub Shin, 2021. "When do firms invest in R&D? Two types of performance feedback and organizational search in the Korean shipbuilding industry," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(5), pages 583-617, November.
    15. Lin-Hua Lu & Poh-Kam Wong, 2019. "Performance feedback, financial slack and the innovation behavior of firms," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 1079-1109, December.
    16. John Joseph & Ronald Klingebiel & Alex James Wilson, 2016. "Organizational Structure and Performance Feedback: Centralization, Aspirations, and Termination Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1065-1083, October.
    17. David W. Lehman & Jungpil Hahn & Rangaraj Ramanujam & Bradley J. Alge, 2011. "The Dynamics of the Performance--Risk Relationship Within a Performance Period: The Moderating Role of Deadline Proximity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1613-1630, December.
    18. Oveis Madadian & Walter Aerts & Tom Van Caneghem, 2018. "Social comparison of cost behaviour and financial analysts," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(7), pages 805-839, November.
    19. Elizabeth Boyle & Zur Shapira, 2012. "The Liability of Leading: Battling Aspiration and Survival Goals in the Jeopardy! Tournament of Champions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1100-1113, August.
    20. Iny Hwang & Taejin Jung & Woo‐Jong Lee & Daniel G. Yang, 2021. "Asymmetric Inventory Management and the Direction of Sales Changes†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 676-706, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ausecp:v:60:y:2021:i:1:p:163-185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0004-900X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.