請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21548
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 曾智揚 | |
dc.contributor.author | Che-Yi Li | en |
dc.contributor.author | 李哲逸 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T03:37:32Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-08-05 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-07-22 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 李芳如,2014,代理問題、公司治理與銷管費用僵固性,國立中央大學會計學系碩士論文。
曾聯洲,2003,銷管費用僵固性研究,國立政治大學會計學系。 林旻毅,2004,銷管費用僵固性之額外證據,私立輔仁大學會計學系碩士班論 文。 許哲瑜,2015,財務資源調整成本與成本僵固性之關聯性分析,國立台灣大學會 計 學系研究所碩士論文。 陳建中,李芳如,2014,銷管費用不對稱性的成因及對策:建立帝國行為與公司治 理,第 26 屆亞太研討會與 2014 會計理論與實務聯合研討會。 Anderson, M. C., R. D. Banker, and S. N. Janakiraman. 2003. Are selling, general, and administrative costs “sticky”? Journal of Accounting Research 41(1):47-63. Balakrishnan, R., E. Labro, and N. S. Soderstrom. 2014. Cost Structure and Sticky Costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research 26(2): 91-116. Barnard, C. I. 1938. The Functions of the Executive. Harvard University Press. Banker, R. and L. Chen. 2006. Predicting Earnings Using a Model Based on Cost Variability and Cost Stickiness. The Accounting Review. 81(2): 285-307. Banker, R. D., D. Byzalov, and Jose M. Plehn-Dujowich. 2014. Demand Uncertainty and Cost Behavior. Accounting Review. 89(3): 839-865. Barnard, C. 1938. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 3-290 Calleja, K., M. Strliaros, and D. C. Thomas. 2006. A note on cost stickiness: Some international comparisons. Management Accounting Research 17(2):127-140. Dierynck, B., W.R. Landsman, and A. Renders. 2012. Do managerial incentives drive behavior? Evidence about the role of the zero earnings benchmark for labor cost behavior in Belgian private firms. The Accounting Review 87(4):1219-1246. Hambrick, D. C. 1989. Guest editor's introduction: Putting top managers back in the strategy picture.Strategic Management Journal,10:5-15. Hambrick, D. C. and P. A. Mason. 1984. Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers. Academy of Management Review. 9(2): 193-206. Hambrick, D. C., T. S. Cho, and M. J. Chen. 1996. The Influence of Top Management Team Heterogeneity on Firms' Competitive Moves. Administrative Science Quarterly. 41(4): 659-684. He, D., J. Teruya, and T. Shimizu. Sticky Selling, General, and Administrative Cost Behavior and Its Changes In Japan. 2010. Global Journal Of Business Research 4(4):1-10. Jung, S. 2015. Does education affect risk aversion? Evidence from the British education reform. Applied Economics.47(28): 2924-2938 Karagiannidis, I., 2012. The effect of management team characteristics on risk-taking and style extremity of mutual fund portfolios Review of Financial Economic 21: 153- 158. Kitching, K., R. Mashruwala, and M. Pevzner. 2016. Culture and Cost Stickiness: A Cross-country Study. The International Journal of Accounting 51: 402–417. MacCrimmon, K. R. and Wehrung, D. A. 1990. Characteristics of Risk Taking Executives. Kama, I. and D. Weiss. 2012. Do Earnings Targets and Managerial Incentives Affect Sticky Costs? Journal of Accounting Research. 51(1):201-224. Noreen, E. and N. S. Soderstrom. 1994. Are overhead costs strictly proportional to activity? Evidence from hospital service department. Journal of Accounting and Economic 17(1-2): 255-278. Noreen, E. 1991. Conditions under which activity-based systems provide relevant costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research 3(Fall): 159-168. Noreen, E. and N. Soderstrom. 1997.The Accuracy of Proportional Cost Models: Evidence from Hospital Service Departments. Review of Accounting Studies (1997) 2: 89. Nancy, C. and M. Walter. 1977. Traits as prototypes: Effects on recognition memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(1): 38-48. Subramaniam, C. and M. W. Watson. 2016. Additional Evidence on The Sticky Behavior of Costs. Advances in Management Accounting. 26:275-305. Salamah,A. M.and M. E. Abulezz. 2017. Cost Stickiness: Does Manager's Preference Toward Risk Matter? An Empirical Study. SSRN Electronic Journal. Weidenmier, M. L. and C.Subramaniam. 2003. Additional Evidence on the Sticky Behavior of Costs. Working Paper. Texas Christian University and California State University, Northridge. Yasukata, K. 2011. Are 'Sticky Costs' the Result of Deliberate Decision of Managers? SSRN Electronic Journal. Zhou, W. and Wang, Y. 2014. An Empirical Study for Corporate Risk Index: CEO Characteristics Affecting Corporate Risk-Taking. Journal of Applied Sciences, 14: 3520-3525 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21548 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 傳統的成本習性模型將成本分為兩種,變動成本以及固定成本。變動成本依照
成本動因呈現等比例變動。但近年來有越來越多的實證研究指出隨成本動因增加的成本會大於因成本動因減少而降低的成本,此現象被稱作為「成本僵固性」。本研究旨在探討成本僵固性與總經理教育程度之間的關聯。本研究認為具有研究所或以上學歷的總經理因為其對風險規避的特性,在銷貨收入衰退的情況下面對不確定的未來景況會選擇較為保守的應對,進而裁撤較多資源成本,因此減低成本僵固性的效果。 本研究以Anderson et al.(2003)建立研究模型,樣本則選自台灣上市櫃公司2008年至 2017 的資料。實證結果顯示銷管費用確實存在成本僵固性,且具有研究所或更高學歷的總經理對於公司銷管成本會造成反僵固性的現象。額外測試也發現較佳的公司治理會強化高學歷總經理反成本僵固性的現象。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The traditional cost behavior model divides costs into two types, variable costs and fixed costs. The variable costs vary in proportion to the cost drivers. But in recent years, more and more studies have shown that this is not the case. Increasing empirical research indicates that the cost of increased cost drivers will be greater than the cost of reduced cost drivers, such cost behavior was named as” cost stickiness”. This study aims to examine the relationship between cost stickiness and general manager educational background. This study believes that general manager with master degree or above will choose a more conservative response to uncertain future conditions because of their risk averse nature, which will reduce the effect of cost stickiness. Using the study by Anderson et al. (2003) to establish a research model. The sample was selected from the data of Taiwan listed firm from 2007 to 2017. The empirical results show that SG&A cost does sticky, and general manager who has master or higher degree may cause anti-stickiness to the company's SG&A cost. Additional testing also found that companies with better corporate governance would strengthen the anti-cost stickiness effect of highly educated general manager. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T03:37:32Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R06722029-1.pdf: 830457 bytes, checksum: 8c6dfeaf18bb89802092ae008f37f126 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 致謝 i
中文摘要 ii Abstract iii 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景及目的 1 第二節 預期貢獻 3 第三節 研究架構3 第二章 文獻探討及研究假說推論 4 第一節 成本僵固性 4 第二節 高層理論 8 第三節 總經理對公司決策之影響 9 第四節 假說推論 10 第三章 研究方法 11 第一節 樣本選取 11 第二節 研究設計 13 第四章 實證結果與分析 16 第一節 敘述性統計 16 第二節 總經理之學歷與成本僵固性 . 18 第五章 額外測試 25 第一節 公司治理25 第二節 碩博士效果測試 29 第六章 結論 35 第一節 研究結論35 第二節 研究限制 36 第三節 研究建議 37 參考文獻 38 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 總經理教育程度與成本僵固性之關聯性分析 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Relationship between General Manager’s Level of
Education and Cost Stickiness | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 廖芝嫻,戴怡蕙 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 總經理,學歷,成本僵固性,公司治理,獨立董事, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | General Manager,Education,Cost Stickiness,Corporate Governance,Independent Director, | en |
dc.relation.page | 40 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201901701 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-07-22 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 會計學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 會計學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 810.99 kB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。