2010
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1659228
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Active Cost Management in Banks: Evidence of Sticky Costs in Argentina, Brazil and Canada

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0
10

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
15
0
10
Order By: Relevance
“…They found evidence that SG&A costs increased 0.59% every 1% increase in sales, but fell only 0.45% every 1% decrease in sales, on average. Özkaya and Yükcü () provided evidence of stickiness in both SG&A costs and total operating costs in non‐financial Turkish firms, while Porporato and Werbin () found the existence of sticky costs in the banking sectors of Argentina, Brazil, and Canada. Calleja et al.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…They found evidence that SG&A costs increased 0.59% every 1% increase in sales, but fell only 0.45% every 1% decrease in sales, on average. Özkaya and Yükcü () provided evidence of stickiness in both SG&A costs and total operating costs in non‐financial Turkish firms, while Porporato and Werbin () found the existence of sticky costs in the banking sectors of Argentina, Brazil, and Canada. Calleja et al.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), as well as in other countries (e.g., Calleja et al. ; Porporato and Werbin ). However, asymmetric cost behaviour is still in its infancy and there is significant potential for expansion (Banker et al.…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…To explain empirically how costs behave when management adjusts its costs and makes deliberate decisions as responding to certain factors [10], this evidence ignores the model of fixed and variable cost that assumed a mechanical relation between costs and activity change, and argues that the traditional model of cost behavior is not a fit framework to determine a benefit of the current period for future. Kama and Weiss [11] found the deliberate decisions to lessen the degree of costs sticky rather than induce cost sticky.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Weidenmier (2003) Anderson et al (2004), Porporato and Werbin (2010), menyatakan bahwa business environment, macro economic condition seperti infl asi dan pertumbuhan ekonomi akan mempengaruhi komposisi total biaya dan pertimbangan manajerial berkaitan penggunaan utilisasi.…”
unclassified
“…Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk membuktikan secara empiris penelitian Weidenmier dan Subramanyan (2003), Anderson et al (2003), Windyastuti dan Biyanto (2005), Banker (2006), Porporato and Werbin (2010), Teruya et al (2010), Yasukata (2011), Pervan and Pervan (2012) yang menyatakan bahwa salah satu komponen dari lingkungan luar perusahaan yang berupa pertumbuhan ekonomi mempengaruhi tingkat sticky cost pada suatu perusahaan. Apakah terdapat perilaku sticky cost pada biaya penjualan, administrasi dan umum, serta menguji kondisi dan situasi yang berpengaruh terhadap derajat stickiness dengan menggunakan faktor pertumbuhan ekonomi.…”
unclassified