EFECTO DE LA DUALIDAD DEL CEO EN EL COMPORTAMIENTO ASIMÉTRICO DE COSTOS

Palabras clave: Comportamiento de costos asimétrico, Sticky Costs, Dualidad del CEO, Teoría de la Agencia

Resumen

Este estudio tuvo como objetivo analizar el efecto de la dualidad del CEO sobre el comportamiento asimétrico de los costos. Se analizaron 178 empresas públicas brasileñas en el período 2012-2021. Se utilizó estadística descriptiva y regresión lineal jerárquica, operacionalizada mediante el software SPSS®. Los resultados mostraron que las empresas con dualidad de CEO, ante períodos de caída de ventas, presentaron un mayor grado de asimetría en costos que las empresas donde no existe dualidad de CEO, lo que sugiere que los gerentes con dualidad tienen estrategias de reducción de costos más agresivas durante períodos de reducción de costos. ventas. Este estudio puede ser útil para accionistas y miembros de consejos de administración, ya que puede advertir sobre el efecto que la dualidad del CEO puede tener en el comportamiento de costes de las organizaciones. Así, se pueden crear mecanismos, como separar el rol de CEO y miembro del consejo de administración, con el objetivo de mitigar el comportamiento oportunista del directivo. También ayuda a profesionales, como auditores y analistas de mercado, a considerar en sus procedimientos de trabajo el efecto que la dualidad del CEO puede tener en el comportamiento de costos de las empresas.

Biografía del autor/a

Stephan Klaus Bubeck, Universidade Regional de Blumenau (FURB)

Estudiante de Doctorado en Ciencias Contables y de la Administración en la Universidade Regional de Blumenau (FURB)

Nelson Hein, Universidade Regional de Blumenau (FURB)

Doctor en Ingeniería de Producción por la Universidad Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) y profesor del Programa de Postgrado en Ciencias Contables de la Universidade Regional de Blumenau (FURB)

Citas

Abudy, M. M., & Shust, E. (2022). Cost Behavior and Profitability of Family Firms. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4160644

Anderson, M. C., Banker, R. D., & Janakiraman, S. N. (2003). Are selling, general, and administrative costs “sticky”?. Journal of Accounting Research, 41(1), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.00095

Balakrishnan, R., Petersen, M. J., & Soderstrom, N. S. (2004). Does capacity utilization affect the “stickiness” of cost?. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 19(3), 283-300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X0401900303

Balakrishnan, R., Labro, E., & Soderstrom, N. S. (2014). Cost structure and sticky costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 26(2), 91-116. https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-50831

Ballas, A., Naoum, V. C., & Vlismas, O. (2020). The effect of strategy on the asymmetric cost behavior of SG&A expenses. European Accounting Review, 31(2), 409-447. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2020.1813601

Banker, R. D., Byzalov, D., & Chen, L. T. (2013). Employment protection legislation, adjustment costs and cross-country differences in cost behavior. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 55(1), 111-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2012.08.003

Banker, R. D., & Byzalov, D. (2014). Asymmetric cost behavior. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 26(2), 43-79. https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-50846

Banker, R. D., Byzalov, D., & Plehn-Dujowich, J. M. (2014). Demand uncertainty and cost behavior. The Accounting Review, 89(3), 839-865. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50661

Banker, R. D., Byzalov, D., Fang, S., & Liang, Y. (2018). Cost management research. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 30(3), 187-209. https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-51965

Berle, A.; Means, G. (1932). The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: Macmillan.

Bugeja, M., Lu, M., & Shan, Y. (2015). Cost stickiness in Australia: Characteristics and determinants. Australian Accounting Review, 25(3), 248-261. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12066

Calleja, K., Steliaros, M., & Thomas, D. C. (2006). A note on cost stickiness: Some international comparisons. Management Accounting Research, 17(2), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2006.02.001

Chen, C. X., Lu, H., & Sougiannis, T. (2012). The agency problem, corporate governance, and the asymmetrical behavior of selling, general, and administrative costs. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29(1), 252-282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2011.01094.x

Degenhart, L., Lunardi, M. A., da Silva Zonatto, V. C., & Dal Magro, C. B. (2021). Effect of Financial Restriction on Sticky Costs: Empirical Evidence from Brazil. Revista de Negócios, 26(1), 6-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.7867/1980-4431.2021v26n1p6-21

Dierynck, B., Landsman, W. R., & Renders, A. (2012). Do managerial incentives drive cost behavior? Evidence about the role of the zero earnings benchmark for labor cost behavior in private Belgian firms. The Accounting Review, 87(4), 1219-1246. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50153

Eisenhardt, K. M. (2015). Teoria da agência: uma avaliação e revisão. RGC-Revista de Governança Corporativa, 2(1), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.21434/IberoamericanJCG.v2i1.14

Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288-307. https://doi.org/10.1086/260866

Florackis, C., & Ozkan, A. (2009). The impact of managerial entrenchment on agency costs: An empirical investigation using UK panel data. European Financial Management, 15(3), 497-528. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-036X.2007.00418.x

Geletkanycz, M. A., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 654-681. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2393653

Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2001). Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(1-3), 405-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00018-0

Ibrahim, A. E. A. (2018). Board characteristics and asymmetric cost behavior: evidence from Egypt. Accounting Research Journal, 31(2), 301-322. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-11-2015-0148

Ibrahim, A. E. A., Ali, H. M. H. O., & Aboelkheir, H. N. E. R. (2022). Cost stickiness: a systematic literature review of 27 years of research and a future research agenda. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 46, 1-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2021.100439

Instituto Brasileiro de Governança Corporativa (2023). Código das Melhores Práticas de Governança Corporativa. (6. ed.). São Paulo: IBGC.

Jensen, M. C. J., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3(4), 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Jensen, M. C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. The Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831-880. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1993.tb04022.x

Kama, I., & Weiss, D. (2013). Do earnings targets and managerial incentives affect sticky costs?. Journal of Accounting Research, 51(1), 201-224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2012.00471.x

Li, W. L., & Zheng, K. (2017). Product market competition and cost stickiness. Review of quantitative finance and accounting, 49, 283-313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-016-0591-z

Li, J., & Sun, Z. (2023). Government audit, employee efficiency and labor cost stickiness. Plos one, 18(9), e0291014. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0291014

Lin, Y. C., Wang, Y. C., Chiou, J. R., & Huang, H. W. (2014). CEO characteristics and internal control quality. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(1), 24-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/corg.12042

Malik, M. (2012). A review and synthesis of 'cost stickiness' literature. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2276760.

Medeiros, O. R. D., Costa, P. D. S., & Silva, C. A. T. (2005). Testes empíricos sobre o comportamento assimétrico dos custos nas empresas brasileiras. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, 16, 47-56. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-70772005000200005

Pamplona, E., Leite, M., & Costa da Silva Zonatto, V. (2018). Fatores associados ao comportamento dos custos em períodos de prosperidade e crise econômica em empresas dos países que compõe o PIIGS. Estudios Gerenciales, 34(148), 305-319. https://doi.org/10.18046/j.estger.2018.148.2603

Reis, L. S., & Borgert, A. (2018). Análise das pesquisas em comportamento dos custos. Custos e Agronegócio, 14(1), 184-210.

Richartz, F., & Borgert, A. (2021). Fatores explicativos para o comportamento assimétrico dos custos das empresas listadas na B3. Revista Universo Contábil, 16(3), 07-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.4270/ruc2020313

Saito, R., & Silveira, A. D. M. D. (2008). Governança corporativa: custos de agência e estrutura de propriedade. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 48, 79-86. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902008000200007

Salehi, M., Ghanbari, E., & Orfizadeh, S. (2021). The relationship between managerial entrenchment and accounting conservatism. Journal of Facilities Management, 19(5), 612-631. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-11-2020-0087

Subramaniam, C., & Watson, M. W. (2016). Additional evidence on the sticky behavior of costs. In Advances in Management Accounting (Vol. 26, pp. 275-305). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-787120150000026006

Weiss, D. (2010). Cost behavior and analysts’ earnings forecasts. The Accounting Review, 85(4), 1441-1471. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2010.85.4.1441

Yu, M. (2023). CEO duality and firm performance: A systematic review and research agenda. European Management Review, 20(2), 346-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12522

Publicado
2025-05-02
Sección
Artigos