{"title":"成本粘性行为与金融危机:来自英国化工行业的证据","authors":"Ahmed Hassanein, Mohsen Younis","doi":"10.22495/cocv17i2art4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditional cost behavior assumes that variable costs vary symmetrically according to changes in the level of activity. This means that variable costs change proportionately with changes in the cost driver. The key notion in symmetric cost behavior is that variable costs change identically by the same percentage in the two directions (i.e., upward and downward in cost driver) regardless whether the response rate of variable costs is less, equal or more than the rate of change in cost driver (Balakrishnan & Gruca, 2008; Malik, 2012). However, fixed costs remain constant in total despite changes in the cost driver within the relevant range. On the other hand, some costs are neither precisely variable nor fixed; this type of cost known as mixed cost. According to traditional analysis of cost behavior, managerial decisions (i.e., pricing, cost planning, cost control, budgeting, cost variances, cost standardization, cost reduction and cost allocation) are, precisely, based on prior analysis of cost behavior (Novák et al., 2018). The recent stream of research in cost accounting has criticized prior thinking in terms of traditional cost behavior. More specifically, many researchers have provided empirical evidence that emphasize the asymmetric cost behavior throughout Abstract","PeriodicalId":438501,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Ownership and Control","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost stickiness behavior and financial crisis: Evidence from the UK chemical industry\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Hassanein, Mohsen Younis\",\"doi\":\"10.22495/cocv17i2art4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Traditional cost behavior assumes that variable costs vary symmetrically according to changes in the level of activity. This means that variable costs change proportionately with changes in the cost driver. The key notion in symmetric cost behavior is that variable costs change identically by the same percentage in the two directions (i.e., upward and downward in cost driver) regardless whether the response rate of variable costs is less, equal or more than the rate of change in cost driver (Balakrishnan & Gruca, 2008; Malik, 2012). However, fixed costs remain constant in total despite changes in the cost driver within the relevant range. On the other hand, some costs are neither precisely variable nor fixed; this type of cost known as mixed cost. According to traditional analysis of cost behavior, managerial decisions (i.e., pricing, cost planning, cost control, budgeting, cost variances, cost standardization, cost reduction and cost allocation) are, precisely, based on prior analysis of cost behavior (Novák et al., 2018). The recent stream of research in cost accounting has criticized prior thinking in terms of traditional cost behavior. More specifically, many researchers have provided empirical evidence that emphasize the asymmetric cost behavior throughout Abstract\",\"PeriodicalId\":438501,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Ownership and Control\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Ownership and Control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv17i2art4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Ownership and Control","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv17i2art4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
摘要
传统的成本行为假设可变成本根据活动水平的变化对称地变化。这意味着可变成本随着成本动因的变化成比例地变化。对称成本行为的关键概念是,无论可变成本的响应率是小于、等于还是大于成本驱动因素的变化率,可变成本在两个方向上(即成本驱动因素向上和向下)的变化百分比都是相同的(Balakrishnan & Gruca, 2008;马利克,2012)。然而,尽管成本驱动因素在相关范围内发生了变化,但固定成本在总量上保持不变。另一方面,有些成本既不是精确可变的,也不是固定的;这种成本称为混合成本。根据传统的成本行为分析,管理决策(即定价、成本计划、成本控制、预算、成本差异、成本标准化、成本降低和成本分配)精确地基于对成本行为的事先分析(Novák et al., 2018)。最近的成本会计研究对传统成本行为的先验思维提出了批评。更具体地说,许多研究者提供的经验证据表明,整个摘要都强调了成本行为的不对称
Cost stickiness behavior and financial crisis: Evidence from the UK chemical industry
Traditional cost behavior assumes that variable costs vary symmetrically according to changes in the level of activity. This means that variable costs change proportionately with changes in the cost driver. The key notion in symmetric cost behavior is that variable costs change identically by the same percentage in the two directions (i.e., upward and downward in cost driver) regardless whether the response rate of variable costs is less, equal or more than the rate of change in cost driver (Balakrishnan & Gruca, 2008; Malik, 2012). However, fixed costs remain constant in total despite changes in the cost driver within the relevant range. On the other hand, some costs are neither precisely variable nor fixed; this type of cost known as mixed cost. According to traditional analysis of cost behavior, managerial decisions (i.e., pricing, cost planning, cost control, budgeting, cost variances, cost standardization, cost reduction and cost allocation) are, precisely, based on prior analysis of cost behavior (Novák et al., 2018). The recent stream of research in cost accounting has criticized prior thinking in terms of traditional cost behavior. More specifically, many researchers have provided empirical evidence that emphasize the asymmetric cost behavior throughout Abstract