IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijfss/v10y2022i3p48-d853869.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Managerial Ability Lead to Different Cost Stickiness Behavior? Evidence from ASEAN Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Mitha Dwi Restuti

    (Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia
    Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga 50711, Indonesia)

  • Lindawati Gani

    (Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia)

  • Elvia R. Shauki

    (Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia)

  • Lianny Leo

    (Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia)

Abstract

This study aims to test cost stickiness behavior under different managerial ability levels. Managerial ability plays an important role in resource-related decision making. Previous cost stickiness research assumes that managers exhibit similar abilities to manage resources. However, managers with different managerial abilities may make different resource decisions, which leads to different cost stickiness levels. More able managers can manage resources efficiently and deal with resource shortages. This study also tests the effects of environmental uncertainty on cost stickiness under different managerial ability levels. Managers’ resource decisions must consider environmental uncertainty to generate optimal returns. More able managers are more willing to take risks and manage resources efficiently to deal with uncertainty. Meanwhile, less able managers tend to retain resources to cope with environmental uncertainty. We ran the panel regression analysis of 19,612 listed firm-year observations in ASEAN countries from 2013 to 2019. The results show that firms led by less able managers exhibit cost stickiness. Less able managers cannot manage resources efficiently and are more likely to retain resources than make costly adjustments. Further, the effect of environmental uncertainty on cost stickiness is stronger in firms led by less able managers. Less able managers tend to retain resources when sales decline.

Suggested Citation

  • Mitha Dwi Restuti & Lindawati Gani & Elvia R. Shauki & Lianny Leo, 2022. "Does Managerial Ability Lead to Different Cost Stickiness Behavior? Evidence from ASEAN Countries," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijfss:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:48-:d:853869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7072/10/3/48/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7072/10/3/48/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baruch Lev & Suresh Radhakrishnan & Weining Zhang, 2009. "Organization Capital," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 45(3), pages 275-298, September.
    2. Lee, Eunsuh & Kim, Chaehyun & Leach-López, Maria A., 2021. "Banking competition and cost stickiness," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Itay Kama & Dan Weiss, 2013. "Do Earnings Targets and Managerial Incentives Affect Sticky Costs?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 201-224, March.
    4. Wu-Lung Li & Kenneth Zheng, 2017. "Product market competition and cost stickiness," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 283-313, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Ronny Prabowo & Reggy Hooghiemstra & Paula Van Veen-Dirks, 2018. "State Ownership, Socio-political Factors, and Labor Cost Stickiness," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(4), pages 771-796, August.
    7. Peter Demerjian & Baruch Lev & Sarah McVay, 2012. "Quantifying Managerial Ability: A New Measure and Validity Tests," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(7), pages 1229-1248, July.
    8. Yasemin Y. Kor, 2003. "Experience-Based Top Management Team Competence and Sustained Growth," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 707-719, December.
    9. Claessens, Stijn & Djankov, Simeon & Lang, Larry H. P., 2000. "The separation of ownership and control in East Asian Corporations," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1-2), pages 81-112.
    10. Ibrahim, Awad Elsayed Awad & Ali, Hesham & Aboelkheir, Heba, 2022. "Cost stickiness: A systematic literature review of 27 years of research and a future research agenda," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    11. Ling Xue & Gautam Ray & Bin Gu, 2011. "Environmental Uncertainty and IT Infrastructure Governance: A Curvilinear Relationship," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 389-399, June.
    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. Cristiana Cattaneo & Gaia Bassani, 2020. "Sticky costs: le determinanti e le sfide per manager e accademici," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2020(Suppl. 1), pages 103-126.
    2. Ibrahim, Awad Elsayed Awad & Ali, Hesham & Aboelkheir, Heba, 2022. "Cost stickiness: A systematic literature review of 27 years of research and a future research agenda," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    3. Mabel D. Costa & Ahsan Habib & Md. Borhan Uddin Bhuiyan, 2021. "Financial constraints and asymmetric cost behavior," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 33-83, March.
    4. Christian Riegler & Katrin Weiskirchner-Merten, 2021. "Research note: an analytical perspective on market decisions and asymmetric cost behavior," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 991-1005, May.
    5. Tingyong Zhong & Fangcheng Sun & Haiyan Zhou & Jeoung Yul Lee, 2020. "Business Strategy, State-Owned Equity and Cost Stickiness: Evidence from Chinese Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Wulung Li & Ramachandran Natarajan & Yan Zhao & Kenneth Zheng, 2021. "The effect of management control mechanisms through risk-taking incentives on asymmetric cost behavior," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 219-243, January.
    7. Ziyang Li & Qianwei Ying & Yuying Chen & Xuehui Zhang, 2020. "Managerial risk appetite and asymmetry cost behavior: evidence from China," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(5), pages 4651-4692, December.
    8. Li, Tongxia & Lu, Chun, 2022. "Stakeholder orientation and cost stickiness: Evidence from a natural experiment," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(PA).
    9. Li, Tongxia & Lu, Chun & Chen, Zhihua, 2023. "The unintended consequence of collateral-based financing: Evidence from corporate cost behavior," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1).
    10. Peng Liang & Hasan Cavusoglu & Nan Hu, 2023. "Customers’ managerial expectations and suppliers’ asymmetric cost management," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1975-1993, June.
    11. Sven Hartlieb & Thomas R. Loy, 2022. "The impact of cost stickiness on financial reporting: evidence from income smoothing," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(3), pages 3913-3950, September.
    12. Mabel D. Costa & Ahsan Habib, 2021. "Trade credit and cost stickiness," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(1), pages 1139-1179, March.
    13. Costa, Mabel D’ & Opare, Solomon, 2022. "Cost asymmetry around seasoned equity offerings," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).
    14. Chowdhury, Hasibul & Hossain, Ashrafee & Tan, Kelvin & Zheng, Jiayi, 2022. "Do external labor market incentives improve labor investment efficiency?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).
    15. Komang Ayu Krisnadewi & Noorlailie Soewarno, 2021. "Optimism and profit-based incentives in cost stickiness: an experimental study," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 7-31, March.
    16. Joanna Golden & Kenneth Zheng, 2022. "Cost management and corporate payout decisions," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 911-938, April.
    17. Thomas Guenther & Anja Riehl & Richard Rößler, 2014. "Cost stickiness: state of the art of research and implications," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 301-318, February.
    18. Chih-Yang Tseng, 2020. "Family firms and long-term orientation of SG&A expenditures," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1181-1206, November.
    19. Gao, Mingze & Leung, Henry & Qiu, Buhui, 2021. "Organization capital and executive performance incentives," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    20. Xiaotao (Kelvin) Liu & Xiaoxia Liu & Colin D. Reid, 2019. "Stakeholder Orientations and Cost Management," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 486-512, March.

    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:gam:jijfss:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:48-:d:853869. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.