Do Managerial Incentives Drive Cost Behavior? Evidence about the Role of the Zero Earnings Benchmark for Labor Cost Behavior in Private Belgian Firms

By Bart Dierynck, Wayne R. Landsman, A. Renders. 2012

338 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/22dfb4cfe99246f6ea53a8c1bdb71642c1bba9e7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Finance

Citations in the corpus

Demand Uncertainty and Cost Behavior (2014, background): “Anderson et al. (2003), Weiss (2010), Chen, Lu, and Sougiannis (2012), Dierynck, Landsman, and Renders (2012), Banker, Byzalov, Ciftci, and Mashruwala (2014), Kama and Weiss (2013), and others explore sticky cost behavior.”
Asymmetric Cost Behavior (2014, positive): “For example, when managers face strong incentives to meet an earnings target in the current period, they are likely to engage in (myopic) real earnings management: they will cut slack resources excessively when sales decrease and will delay acquisition of needed resources when sales increase (Dieryn”
Institutional investors' horizons and corporate employment decisions (2020, positive): “…and Lillis (2007).2 This model uses an extensive list of economic firm-specific variables to explain normal hiring practices; it has been used by several recent studies to examine deviations from optimal investments in labor (e.g., Dierynck, Landsman, and Renders, 2012; Jung, Lee, and Weber, 2014).”
Organization Capital and Sticky Behaviour of Selling, General and Administrative Expenses (2015, methodology): “…on accounting, and more specifically the growing body of work on the sticky cost phenomenon, uses Petersen’s (2009) methodology to choose the most appropriate econometric estimation procedure for a regression model on a panel dataset (Chen et al., 2012; Dierynck et al., 2012; Kama and Weiss, 2013).”
The Impact of Changes in Regulation on Cost Behavior (2015, neutral): “2011), asymmetric cost behavior appears to be a phenomenon that needs to be investigated when studying related accounting phenomena such as analysts’ earnings forecast (Banker and Chen 2006; Weiss 2010), earnings management (Dierynck et al. 2012) or governance (Chen et al.”
State Ownership, Socio-political Factors, and Labor Cost Stickiness (2018, methodology): “AsInt·Dec· lnSales are in line with previous literature (e.g. Anderson et al., 2003; Chen et al., 2012; Dierynck et al., 2012).”
The Moderating Effect of Prior Sales Changes on Asymmetric Cost Behavior (2014, background): “Following ABJ, numerous studies have documented sticky costs in various contexts (e.g., Weiss 2010; Chen et al. 2012; Dierynck et al. 2012; Kama and Weiss 2013), and ABJ’s theory of cost stickiness has become dominant in research on cost behavior and its implications.”
Political Uncertainty and Cost Stickiness: Evidence from National Elections around the World (2020, background): “Additionally, disclosure regulations are relevant in the context of cost stickiness because prior studies hold that agency-driven incentives shape cost stickiness with tough monitoring mechanisms enabling firms to constrain managers’ opportunistic behaviors (e.g., Chen et al., 2012; Dierynck et al.,”