顧客與供應商關係與成本僵固性

Customer-supplier Relationship and Cost Stickiness

林杰(Chieh Lin)

指導教授 ： 許文馨 ； 劉心才

國立臺灣大學/管理學院/會計學研究所/碩士(2016年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201603608

摘要

傳統的成本模型指出變動成本應與銷貨收入成等比例的變動。然而Anderson et al.(2003)的研究指出許多成本具有僵固性- 成本在銷貨收入上升時的調整幅度大於當銷貨收入下滑時調整之幅度。本研究調查顧客與供應商關係對於公司成本結構的影響。實證結果指出，當供應商的顧客集中度越高時，該供應商的成本結構較不僵固。傳統的顧客與供應商關係理論指出主要顧客較強的議價能力能迫使供應商保留產能，導致成本僵固。然而我們的實證結果指出，供應商與顧客關係將使雙方有更密切的資訊交流，供應商與顧客的資訊交流溝通使得供應商能及時調整產能，因此成本較不僵固。本研究指出供應商與顧客關係應為研究公司成本結構時應考量之因素。

關鍵字

成本僵固性 ； 顧客與供應商關係 ； 顧客集中度

並列摘要

Traditional model of cost behavior assumes that cost changes proportionally with sales. However, Anderson et al. (2003) show that costs may behave sticky in the sense that costs increase in response to the increase in sales, but do not decrease proportionately when sales decrease by the equivalent amount. This study investigates whether and how relationship with major customers can affect its cost stickiness. The evidence shows that costs are less sticky for firms which have higher concentrated customer bases. Different from the conventional view, which suggests that major customers may pressure suppliers to retain resources when sales decrease and thus, increase the stickiness of cost, the study finds that suppliers have more information from their customer-supplier relationship through better information transfers along the supply chain. Suppliers are more certain about future demand, thus adjusting their costs accordingly in time. Overall, my study shows the importance of customer-supplier relationship when analyzing a firm’s cost behavior.

並列關鍵字

Cost stickiness ； Customer-supplier relationship ； Customer-base concentration

參考文獻

Ak, B. K., & Patatoukas, P. N. (2016). Customer‐base concentration and inventory efficiencies: Evidence from the manufacturing sector. Production and Operations Management, 25(2), 258-272.

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.

Balakrishnan, R., & Gruca, T. S. (2008). Cost stickiness and core competency: A note. Contemporary Accounting Research, 25(4), 993-1006.

Balakrishnan, R., Linsmeier, T. J., & Venkatachalam, M. (1996). Financial benefits from JIT adoption: Effects of customer concentration and cost structure. Accounting Review, 183-205.

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.