Abstract
AbstractThis study investigates whether firms engage in peer‐based benchmarking in their decision‐making regarding selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A) for a large sample of U.S. listed firms. Peer‐based comparison relates to comparing own performance against the performance of a meaningful reference group of other firms. SG&A are to a large extent discretionary, but optimal levels of (relative) SG&A are hard to assess. Based on the behavioural theory of the firm and institutional theory, we argue that peer‐based comparison is likely to be an important input to managers' SG&A decision processes. Results show that peer‐based comparison significantly drives changes in firms' reported SG&A. In addition, the effect of peer‐based comparison is found to depend on the firm's life cycle stage. Findings further indicate that peer‐based comparison has a significantly stronger effect in reference groups characterised by high(er) SG&A similarity. Results are robust to using several industry classification systems, as well as, multiple approaches to identify firm life cycles.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
