Asymmetry in Cost Behavior in Brazilian Hospitals
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical References
3. Hypotheses Development
4. Research Methodology
Variables | Used in the Studies of: |
Net Sales Revenue (NSR) | Calleja et al. (2006); He et al. (2010); Richartz et al. (2014); Banker et al. (2013); Kama and Weiss (2013); Borgert et al. (2015); Grejo et al. (2019). |
Sold Product Cost (SPC) | Calleja et al. (2006); Anderson et al. (2007); Richartz et al. (2014); Banker et al. (2013a); Kama and Weiss (2013); Borgert et al. (2015); Grejo et al. (2019) |
Fixed Assets (FA) | Borgert et al. (2015); Grejo et al. (2019). |
Total Assets (TA) | Calleja et al. (2006); Werbin et al. (2012). |
Fixed Assets/Total Assets (FA/TA) | Kremer (2015); Richartz (2016); Reis and Borgert (2019); Grejo et al. (2019). |
5. Results and Discussion
5.1. Results
5.2. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Models | Asymmetry for Conglomerates versus Singular (ASSIFAS-cong X sing) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
* ASSIFAS-cong | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-un | p-Value | |
ΔREVENUE | 0.807341 | 0 | 0.697542 | 0 |
ΔCROSSED | −0.325627 | 0.816 | 0.025393 | 0.032 |
Constant | 0.009574 | 0.688 | 0.021972 | 0.003 |
Degree of Model Fit—Adjusted R2 | 0.4598 | 0.4145 | ||
Methodology Used | Panel data regression robust to heteroscedasticity. | |||
All models have random effects. |
Models | Asymmetry Regarding the Number of Beds (ASSIFAS-B) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
* ASSIFAS-B > m | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-B < m | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-B < p | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-B > g | p-Value | |
ΔREVENUE | 0.630622 | 0 | 0.778355 | 0 | 0.83527 | 0 | 0.43294 | 0.035 |
ΔCROSSED | −0.047203 | 0.011 | 0.026306 | 0 | 0.022188 | 0.007 | −0.016188 | 0.492 |
Constant | 0.026903 | 0.035 | 0.015378 | 0.063 | 0.002642 | 0.76 | 0.05362 | 0.018 |
Degree of Model Fit—Adjusted R2 | 0.3283 | 0.495 | 0.5422 | 0.1689 | ||||
Methodology Used | Panel data regression robust to heteroscedasticity. | |||||||
All models have random effects. |
References
- Alavinasab, Seyed Mohammad, Mohammad Reza Mehrabanpour, and Abdolhossein Ahmadi. 2017. The effect of economic growth on cost stickiness in Tehran Stock Exchange. International Journal of Finance and Accounting 6: 87–94. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, Mark, Rajiv Banker, Rong Huang, and Srikant Janakiraman. 2007. Cost behavior and fundamental analysis of SG&A costs. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 22: 1–28. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, Mark C., Rajiv Banker, and Srikant Janakiraman. 2003. Are selling, general, and administrative costs “sticky”? Journal of Accounting Research 41: 47–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Areias, Cristiane, and José Carvalho. 2021. Reinsurance in the supplementary health: A counterfactual study on the impacts of reinsurance treaties adoption by healthcare plans operators in Brazil. BBR Brazilian Business Review 18: 217–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Avelar, Eduardo Augusto, Wesley Santos, Anderson Souza, and Roger Cailleau. 2021. Sticky costs and regulation in private healthcare providers. Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações 15: 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Balakrishnan, Ramji, and Thomas Gruca. 2008. Cost stickiness and core competency: A note. Contemporary Accounting Research. Forthcoming. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balakrishnan, Ramji, Eva Labro, and Naomi Soderstrom. 2014. Cost structure and sticky costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research 26: 91–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balakrishnan, Ramji, Mark Petersen, and Naomi Soderstrom. 2004. Does capacity utilization affect the “stickiness” of cost? Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 19: 283–300. [Google Scholar]
- Banker, Rajiv, and Dmitri Byzalov. 2014. Asymmetric cost behavior. Journal of Management Accounting Research 26: 43–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banker, Rajiv, Dmitri Byzalov, and Janice Plehn-Dujowich. 2014. Demand uncertainty and cost behavior. The Accounting Review 89: 839–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banker, Rajiv, Dmitri Byzalov, and Lili Chen. 2013a. Employment protection legislation, adjustment costs and cross-country differences in cost behavior. Journal of Accounting and Economics 55: 111–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banker, Rajiv, Sanjeev Mitra, Vijay Sambamurthy, and Sumit Mitra. 2011. The effects of digital trading platforms on commodity prices in agricultural supply chains. MIS Quarterly 35: 599–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banker, Rajiv, Shunlan Fang, and Mukesh Mehta. 2013b. Cost behavior during the world economic crisis. In Temple University Working Paper. Philadelphia: Fox School of Business. [Google Scholar]
- Bezerra, Aline, Diego Bezerra, Daniele Pinto, Alexandre Bonzi, Raimundo Pontes, and José Paiva. 2018. Perfil epidemiológico de idosos hipertensos no Brasil: Uma revisão integrativa. Revista de Medicina 97: 103–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borgert, Altair, Aline Willemann Kremer, Mara Juliana Ferrari, and Natália de Souza. 2015. Análise do comportamento dos custos no setor de telecomunicações com base nas regulamentações ocorridas no Brasil. Enfoque: Reflexão Contábil 34: 87–102. [Google Scholar]
- Bugeja, Martin, Ming Lu, and Yibin Shan. 2015. Cost stickiness in Australia: Characteristics and determinants. Australian Accounting Review 25: 248–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calleja, Kenneth, Michael Steliaros, and Dylan Thomas. 2006. A note on cost stickiness: Some international comparisons. Management Accounting Research 17: 127–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camacho, Reinaldo R., and Welington Rocha. 2008. Custeio-alvo em serviços hospitalares um estudo sob o enfoque da gestão estratégica de custos. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças 19: 19–30. [Google Scholar]
- Carpanez, Luciana Reis, and Ana Maria Malik. 2021. O efeito da municipalização no sistema hospitalar brasileiro: Os hospitais de pequeno porte. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva 26: 1289–98. [Google Scholar]
- Chirinko, Robert. 1993. Business fixed investment spending: Modeling strategies, empirical results, and policy implications. Journal of Economic Literature 31: 1875–911. [Google Scholar]
- Dalla Via, Nicola, and Paolo Perego. 2014. Sticky cost behaviour: Evidence from small and medium sized companies. Accounting & Finance 54: 753–78. [Google Scholar]
- Dib, Ali. 2003. An estimated Canadian DSGE model with nominal and real rigidities. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d’Économique 36: 949–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fazoli, Julio Cesar, Luiza Santangelo Reis, and Altair Borgert. 2018. O comportamento dos custos das indústrias do estado de Santa Catarina com ênfase nos sticky costs. Enfoque: Reflexão Contábil 37: 37–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garrison, Ray, Eric Noreen, and Peter Brewer. 2021. Managerial Accounting. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
- Grejo, Letícia Matiolli, Katia Abbas, Reinaldo Rodrigues Camacho, and Emanuel Junqueira. 2019. A influência do ativo imobilizado no comportamento assimétrico dos custos. Revista Contemporânea de Contabilidade 16: 35–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haavelmo, Trygve. 1960. A Study in the Theory of Investment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
- He, Daoping, Jenny Teruya, and Takashi Shimizu. 2010. Sticky selling, general, and administrative cost behavior and its changes in Japan. Global Journal of Business Research 4: 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Hoffmann, Kira. 2017. Cost Behavior: An Empirical Analysis of Determinants and Consequences of Asymmetries. Ph.D. thesis, Copenhagen Business School, Frederiksberg, Denmark. [Google Scholar]
- Holzhacker, Martin, Ranjani Krishnan, and Matthias Mahlendorf. 2015. The impact of changes in regulation on cost behavior. Contemporary Accounting Research 32: 534–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Homburg, Carsten, André Hoppe, and Roman Schick. 2019. How Asymmetric Cost Behavior Relates to Payout Policy (January SCHICK, 7, 2019). 2019. Canadian Academic Accounting Association (CAAA) Annual Conference. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3317556 (accessed on 7 May 2024).
- Hyun, Yang Dong, Lee Youn Tae, and Park Kwang Hoon. 2005. Sticky cost behavior analysis of general hospitals in Korea. Health Policy and Management 15: 78–96. [Google Scholar]
- Ibrahim, Awad Elsayed Awad, Hesham Ali, and Heba Aboelkheir. 2022. Cost stickiness: A systematic literature review of 27 years of research and a future research agenda. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation 46: 100439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jalilian, Masoud, and Ebrahim Vahidi Elyssai. 2014. Review and analyzing the factors affecting the stickiness behavior of general administration costs and sales of listed companies in Tehran Stock Exchange. Applied Mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2: 584–96. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, Wei, Wentao Yao, and Yuming Hu. 2016. The enforcement of the Minimum Wage Policy in China and firm cost stickiness. China Journal of Accounting Studies 4: 339–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kama, Itay, and Dan Weiss. 2013. Do earnings targets and managerial incentives affect sticky costs? Journal of Accounting Research 51: 201–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kremer, Aline Willemann. 2015. Análise de Fatores Explicativos Para o Comportamento Assimétrico dos Custos em Ambiente Regulado. Master’s thesis, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. [Google Scholar]
- Lucas, Robert, and Edward Prescott. 1971. Investment under uncertainty. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 39: 659–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Magheed, Boraq Awad. 2016. The determines of the sticky cost behavior in the Jordanian industrial companies listed in Amman stock market. Journal of Accounting, Business and Management (JABM) 23: 64–81. [Google Scholar]
- Medeiros, Otávio Ribeiro de, Patrícia de Souza Costa, and César Augusto Tibúrcio Silva. 2005. Testes empíricos sobre o comportamento assimétrico dos custos nas empresas brasileiras. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças 16: 47–56. [Google Scholar]
- Milgrom, Paul, and John Roberts. 1990. Bargaining costs, influence costs, and the organization of economic activity. Perspectives on Positive Political Economy 57: 60. [Google Scholar]
- Noreen, Eric, and Naomi Soderstrom. 1997. The accuracy of proportional cost models: Evidence from hospital service departments. Review of Accounting Studies 2: 89–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reis, Luiza Santangelo, and Altair Borgert. 2019. Análise conjunta de fatores explicativos para o comportamento assimétrico dos custos. Revista Contemporânea de Contabilidade 16: 91–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richartz, Fernando. 2016. Fatores Explicativos Para o Comportamento Assimétrico dos Custos das Empresas Brasileiras. Ph.D. thesis, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. [Google Scholar]
- Richartz, Fernando, Altair Borgert, and Rogério João Lunkes. 2014. Comportamento assimétrico dos custos nas empresas brasileiras listadas na BM&FBovespa. Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting 7: 339–61. [Google Scholar]
- Saldiva, Paulo Hilário Nascimento, and Mariana Veras. 2018. Gastos públicos com saúde: Breve histórico, situação atual e perspectivas futuras. Estudos Avançados 32: 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, Douglas, and Alexander Preker. 2001. Labour market adjustment in health systems. Paper presented at Workshop on Global Health Workforce Strategy, Annecy, France, December 9–12. [Google Scholar]
- Sousa, Francisco das Chagas Araújo, Hiago Veras Araújo Soares, Luis Eurípedes Almondes Santana Lemos, Diógenes Monteiro Reis, Wenderson Costa da Silva, and Luis Alberto de Sousa Rodrigues. 2020. Perfil epidemiológico de doenças negligenciadas de notificação compulsória no Brasil com análise dos investimentos governamentais nessa área. Research, Society and Development 9: e62911610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Subramaniam, Chandra, and Marcia Weidenmier Watson. 2016. Additional evidence on the sticky behavior of costs. In Advances in Management Accounting. Leeds: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 26, pp. 275–305. [Google Scholar]
- Viana, Mônica Martins, Lígia Schiavon Duarte, Maria Mercedes Escuder, Mariana Garcia, Michelle Fernandez, Maria Izabel Costa, and Miriam Vaz Neves. 2023. Organização da Atenção Primária paulista no enfrentamento da COVID-19: Análise segundo porte populacional. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva 28: 3471–82. [Google Scholar]
- Weidenmier, Marcia Lynne, and Chandra Subramaniam. 2003. Additional evidence on the sticky behavior of costs. Social Science Research Network, 369941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Werbin, Eliana, Luz María Marín Vinuesa, and Marcela Porporato. 2012. Costos pegajosos (sticky costs) en empresas españolas: Un estudio empírico. Contaduría y Administración 57: 185–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wooldridge, Jeffrey. 2008. Instrumental variables estimation of the average treatment effect in the correlated random coefficient model. In Modelling and Evaluating Treatment Effects in Econometrics. Leeds: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 93–116. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Guochao, Yuzhen Kuang, and Bingcheng Li. 2020. Staying idle or investing in prevention: The short-term and long-term impact of cost stickiness on firm value. China Journal of Accounting Studies 8: 298–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Guangyao, Wei Hu, Tianpeng Peng, and Chaoqun Xue. 2021. The influence of corporate financialization on asymmetric cost behavior: Weakening or worsening. Journal of Business Economics and Management 22: 21–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Data | Observations | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Revenue Variation | 502 | 0.11% | 0.10% | −0.09% | 0.32% |
Cost Variation | 450 | 0.10% | 0.11% | −0.12% | 0.33% |
Fixed Assets/Total Assets | 586 | 2.95% | 2.01% | 1.28% | 8.68% |
Private Hospital | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Data | Observations | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
Revenue Variation | 253 | 0.11% | 0.10% | −0.09% | 0.32% |
Cost Variation | 225 | 0.10% | 0.10% | −0.12% | 0.33% |
Fixed Assets/Total Assets | 293 | 3.13% | 2.01% | 1.28% | 8.68% |
Public Hospital | |||||
Data | Observations | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
Revenue Variation | 249 | 0.11% | 0.10% | −0.09% | 0.32% |
Cost Variation | 225 | 0.10% | 0.11% | −0.12% | 0.33% |
Fixed Assets/Total Assets | 293 | 2.78% | 2.01% | 1.28% | 8.68% |
Dummy | |||
---|---|---|---|
Revenue | Frequency | Percentage | Cumulative |
0 | 434 | 86.45 | 86.45 |
1 | 68 | 13.55 | 100 |
Total | 502 | 100 |
Models | Asymmetry for Fixed Assets (ASSIFAS) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
* General ASSIFAS | p-Value | * ASSIFAS < m | p-Value | * ASSIFAS > m | p-Value | * ASSIFAS < p | p-Value | * ASSIFAS > g | p-Value | |
ΔREVENUE | 0.707737 (0.060408) | 0 | 0.800491 (0.07192) | 0 | 0.5895 (0.0952804) | 0 | 0.864299 (0.0980466) | 0 | 0.655828 (0.0937133) | 0 |
ΔCROSSED | 0.024257 (0.0118749) | 2.04 | 0.0215 (0.0054414) | 0 | 0.015549 (0.0211236) | 0.462 | 0.016705 (0.0075317) | 0.027 | 0.040836 (0.0408364) | 0.004 |
Constant | 0.020989 (0.0069638) | 0.003 | 0.008323 (0.0077484) | 0.283 | 0.035411 (0.0137998) | 0.01 | −0.002527 (0.0099947) | 0.8 | 0.033255 (0.0332545) | 0.007 |
Degree of Model Fit—Adjusted R2 | 0.4193 | 0.5188 | 0.3296 | 0.557 | 0.4105 | |||||
Methodology Used | The data was run in Stata using the command to control for heteroskedasticity through the code (vce, robust). The xtserial autocorrelation control did not indicate the presence of autocorrelation in the data. The Chow test rejected the null hypothesis indicating the use of panel data, and the Hausman test, also conducted in Stata, indicated the use of random effects. This aligns with the structure of the data observed in the sample. | |||||||||
All models have random effects, and The data (within parentheses) indicates the standard error |
Models | Asymmetry for Fixed Assets Public Hospitals versus Private Hospitals (ASSIFAS-Hpu X Hpri). | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
* ASSIFAS-Hpri | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-Hpu | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-Hpri > m | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-Hpri < m | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-Hpu > m | p-Value | * ASSIFAS-Hpu < m | p-Value | |
ΔREVENUE | 0.787166 (0.661501) | 0 | 0.641182 (0.0951862) | 0 | 0.82202 (0.1224735) | 0 | 0.793452 (0.1069768) | 0 | 0.44207 (0.1271076) | 0.001 | 0.808618 (0.1095664) | 0 |
ΔCROSSED | 0.024318 (0.0048472) | 0 | 0.027169 (0.0231982) | 0.242 | 0.307038 (0.2879223) | 0.286 | 0.02245 (0.0073946) | 0.002 | 0.031392 (0.0218992) | 0.152 | 0.023602 (0.0993904) | 0.812 |
Constant | 0.014393 (0.0079669) | 0.071 | 0.026631 (0.0111716) | 0.017 | 0.010077 (0.0181297) | 0.578 | 0.109271 (0.0121404) | 0.368 | 0.051181 (0.0200566) | 0.011 | 0.005106 (0.0108065) | 0.637 |
Degree of Model Fit—Adjusted R2 | 0.4996 | 0.3592 | 0.4359 | 0.5438 | 0.2792 | 0.4941 | ||||||
Methodology Used | The data was run in Stata using the command to control for heteroskedasticity through the code (vce, robust). The xtserial autocorrelation control did not indicate the presence of autocorrelation in the data. The Chow test rejected the null hypothesis indicating the use of panel data, and the Hausman test, also conducted in Stata, indicated the use of random effects. This aligns with the structure of the data observed in the sample. | |||||||||||
All models have random effects and The data (within parentheses) indicates the standard error |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Da Silva, J.D.C.B.; Marin, T.I.S.; Abbas, K.; Gaio, L.E.; Bonacim, C.A.G.; Gatsios, R.C. Asymmetry in Cost Behavior in Brazilian Hospitals. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2024, 17, 260. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17070260
Da Silva JDCB, Marin TIS, Abbas K, Gaio LE, Bonacim CAG, Gatsios RC. Asymmetry in Cost Behavior in Brazilian Hospitals. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2024; 17(7):260. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17070260
Chicago/Turabian StyleDa Silva, Josiane Da Conceição Bitela, Tany Ingrid Sagredo Marin, Katia Abbas, Luiz Eduardo Gaio, Carlos Alberto Grespan Bonacim, and Rafael Confetti Gatsios. 2024. "Asymmetry in Cost Behavior in Brazilian Hospitals" Journal of Risk and Financial Management 17, no. 7: 260. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17070260