THE EFFECT OF INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL AND COMPANY SIZE ON STICKY COST
Sticky cost behavior becomes very important to know because sticky cost behavior can give a bad influence on the company in terms of obtaining the desired level of profit. By obtaining information about sticky cost behavior, it is expected that company management can be more careful in planning, controlling and making policies or decisions. This study aims to analyze and explain: (1) The effect of Intellectual capital on sticky cost and (2) the effect of company size on sticky cost. The population of this research is the manufacture companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI) in 2014-2017. The total samples of this research are 46 companies. Technical analysis of data in this study is using WarpPLS 5.0. The results of data analysis prove that: (1) Intellectual capital has no significant effect on sticky cost, (2) company size has a significant effect on sticky cost.
Anderson, MC, Banker, RD, &Janakiraman, SN (2003). Are Selling, General, and Administrative Costs ‘Sticky’? Journal of Accounting Research, 41 (1), 47–63. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.00095
Argiles, JM, & Blandon, JG (2009). Cost Stickiness Revisited: Empirical application for Farms. Revista Espanola De Financiacion Y Contabilidad, XXXVIII. E (144), 579–605.
Banker, RD, &Byzalov, D. (2014). Asymmetric Cost Behavior. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 26 (2), 43–79.
Brigham, EF, & Houston, JF (2001). Financial Management (Second). Jakarta: Erlangga Publisher.
Dewi, AAK (2012). Does Cost Stickiness Happen to Manufacturing Companies in Indonesia? Salatiga
Dewi, ASM, &Wirajaya, A. (2013). Effect of Capital Structure, Profitability and Company Size on Firm Value. E-Journal of Accounting, Udayana University, 4 (2), 358–372.
Hartono, J. (2013). Business Information Technology Systems: Strategic Approaches. Jakarta: SalembaEmpat.
Kama, I., & Weiss, D. (2010). Do Managers Deliberate Decisions Induce Sticky Costs? Working Paper
Malcom, RE (1991). Overhead Control Implications of Activity Costing. Accounting Horizons, 5 (4), 69–78.
Moeheriono. (2012). Competency Based Performance Measurement. Jakarta: Raja GrafindoPersada.
Mohammadi, A., &Taherkhani, P. (2017). Organizational capital, intellectual capital and cost stickiness (evidence from Iran). Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18 (3), 625–642. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-06-2016-0066
Prasetyantoko, A. (2008). Corporate Governance; Institutional Approach. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Main Library.
Riyanto, B. (2008). Fundamentals of Corporate Spending. Yogyakarta: BPFE UGM.
Sidabutar, D., Harahap, K., &Nasution, AH (2018). Effect of Size, Free Cash Flow, Discretionary Expense Ratio, ROA, Tobin’s Q, Leverage Ratio, on Sticky Cost Behavior in Manufacturing Companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for the 2013-2015 Period. Indonesian Journal of Accounting, Finance & Taxation, 6 (01), 13-26.
Venieris, G., Naoum, VC, &Vlismas, O. (2015). Organization of capital and sticky behavior of selling, general and administrative expenses. Management Accounting Research, 26, 54–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2014.10.003
Weiss, D. (2010). Cost behavior and analysts’ earnings forecasts. Accounting Review, 85 (4), 1441–1471. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2010.85.4.1441
Windyastuti, W., Sunaryo, K., &Hastuti, S. (2017). Investor Response to Announcement of Profit in the Banking Industry in the Face of Stickiness Kos. Journal of Finance and Banking, 21 (1), 127–134. https://doi.org/10.26905/jkdp.v21i1.1233
Yasukata, K., &Kajiwara, T. (2011). Are ‘Sticky costs’ the Result of Deliberate Decision of Managers? Working Paper
Copyright (c) 2019 Jurnal Akuntansi dan Ekonomika
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.