Profitability
Azam Valizadeh Larijani; Farzaneh Yousefi Asl; Fatemeh Shirzadi; Niloofar Zamani
Abstract
Compliance with social and environmental responsibilities is one of the requirements of the current competitive era, and the competitive pressure on companies in this situation imposes costs that can affect financial performance. This research investigates the moderating role of competitive strength ...
Read More
Compliance with social and environmental responsibilities is one of the requirements of the current competitive era, and the competitive pressure on companies in this situation imposes costs that can affect financial performance. This research investigates the moderating role of competitive strength in the relationship between social and environmental responsibilities and financial performance. The statistical sample for this research consists of companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange between 2016 and 2021. Using a regular screening method, 108 companies were selected as samples. After checking the classical assumptions of regression, the panel data model with fixed effects was used. The results showed that social performance has a positive relationship with financial performance. Competitive strength has a negative moderating effect on the relationship between social performance and financial performance. Environmental performance also has a positive relationship with financial performance, and competitive strength has a negative moderating role in this relationship. According to the coefficients of the variables, the social dimension of the company is more effective in increasing performance than the environmental dimension. IntroductionA balance must be established between the modernization process and social and environmental concerns. Additionally, society's expectations regarding moral, legal, economic, and public interests require companies to commit to the communities in which they operate (Porter & Kramer, 2011). On the other hand, the growing interest of companies, especially large, national, and multinational companies, to demonstrate better environmental and social performance as part of their corporate social responsibility policy is often reflected in their management structures and investment policies. In line with the social responsibility policy, companies invest in the environmental field for three reasons: complying with environmental and social regulations and standards, improving company conditions, creating a favorable image of the company for society, and gaining access to other markets (Zaid et al., 2020).Social responsibilities have been utilized in various businesses to achieve a competitive advantage and create stable relationships with society. In this regard, the theory of social responsibilities refers to the combined pursuit of economic progress, social equality, and environmental protection. The nature of social responsibilities is the interconnected and mutual realization of financial, social, and environmental goals (Donkor et al., 2023).A company's environmental responsibility refers to its organizational behavior and commitment to the natural environment, which symbolizes the company's environmental ethics (Dilla et al., 2019). Several studies have shown conflicting results regarding a firm's environmental performance and financial performance. Some previous studies have shown that environmental responsibility improves long-term performance (Arda et al., 2019; Gilal et al., 2019). In addition, green knowledge and innovation promote an environmental orientation that allows companies to improve performance (Atan et al., 2018). On the contrary, since introducing environmental initiatives is costly (Zhang et al., 2019), evidence has shown that corporate environmental responsibility does not always lead to positive results (Chollet & Sandwidi, 2018). Based on a sample of companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, this study examines the role of competitive strength in the relationship between firms’ social and environmental performance and financial performance. Literature ReviewGreen theory emphasizes that community care helps organizations in sustainable development. Hence, government regulations and customer pressure encourage companies to adopt such practices in emerging markets. Environmental responsibility allows companies to improve their competitive advantages and dynamic capabilities (Arda et al., 2019). Incorporating environmental values supports environmental business in the long term (Gill et al., 2019). In general, green knowledge and innovation promote an environmental orientation and green resource management in companies, subsequently allowing them to improve their performance (Atan et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019). Based on this, this research expects to improve the effectiveness of a company by using organizational resources for environmental performance while simultaneously improving social performance.Proponents of the positive effects of CSR argue that CSR enhances corporate value and image, as well as develops brand positioning, reputation, and corporate image, which in turn enhances financial performance in the long run (Hill, 2020). It is often assumed that the proper use of economic, social, and governance standards requires higher financial efficiency and performance.Managers of firms with fewer resources have fewer opportunities to divert resources to their advantage (Kumar et al., 2023). They are more concerned about their presence in the market and maintaining their market share in the industry, and they consider themselves less socially responsible towards the company, market, and society (Jiang et al., 2019). The moderating power of competition encourages companies to act in socially responsible ways and helps maintain their reputation (Chih et al., 2010; Graafland, 2018). The intensity of competition affects decisions related to social responsibilities, including social and environmental performance (Jiang et al., 2019). Different levels of competition affect the relationship between the social and environmental performance of companies. Social practices and environmental ethics are intangible assets for a company in capital markets, and these assets change with shifts in competition levels. In particular, considering the role of competitive strength, the relationship between social performance and environmental performance with financial performance changes as the level of competition fluctuates (Saeed et al., 2023). Therefore, the following hypotheses can be proposed:Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relationship between social performance and financial performance.Hypothesis 2: Competitive strength moderates the relationship between social performance and financial performance.Hypothesis 3: There is a positive relationship between environmental performance and financial performance.Hypothesis 4: Competitive strength moderates the relationship between environmental performance and financial performance. MethodologyThis research is practical and post-event, conducted using the secondary data collection method. The information from companies was collected by referring to the Codal.ir website and using their financial statements and attached notes. The study period covers 2016 to 2021. Before testing the proposed model and hypotheses, the assumptions of the regression models were checked. The Chow test, Hausman test, and variance heterogeneity test indicated that the panel data model with fixed effects is suitable for the models of this research. In this study, the Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey test was used to check for heteroscedasticity. The results of the heteroscedasticity analysis show that the residuals of the normal regression models do not have constant variance, indicating heteroscedasticity, and the generalized least squares method was used to address this issue. ResultsThe variable coefficient of social performance in models 1 and 2 is 0.0092 and 0.019, respectively, and is significant at the 99% confidence level in both models. There is a positive relationship between social performance and financial performance, meaning that compliance with social responsibilities leads to an increase in financial performance. However, in model 2, the moderating variable (strength of competition) reverses the relationship between social performance and financial performance. At the 99% confidence level, the strength of competition has a negative effect on the relationship between social performance and financial performance. The variable coefficient of environmental performance in models 3 and 4 is 0.003 and 0.004, respectively, and is significant at the 95% confidence level. There is a positive relationship between environmental performance and financial performance, indicating that compliance with environmental responsibilities leads to an increase in financial performance. In model 4, the sign of the coefficient for the moderating variable (strength of competition) is positive, meaning that the strength of competition has a positive relationship with financial performance. However, the moderating variable reverses the relationship between environmental performance and financial performance, so at the 99% confidence level, the strength of competition has a negative effect on the relationship between environmental performance and financial performance. ConclusionDisclosure of social performance leads to increased financial performance. The disclosure of social performance by the company, as a positive signal to the market and shareholders, directly benefits the improvement of the company’s reputation and value. Additionally, this disclosure can indirectly affect the company’s financial performance through mediators such as competitive advantage, reputation, customer satisfaction, access to capital, and environmental resource efficiency. The company's competitive advantages are one of the important dimensions of market characteristics that company leaders should consider in their efforts to make optimal decisions to maximize financial performance. When there are no competitive pressures, managers may become lax in their duties, leading to poor management and high agency costs.Disclosure of environmental performance also leads to increased financial performance. Compliance with environmental responsibilities and publication of periodic reports raise awareness and judgment among society and stakeholders, thereby strengthening the company's brand. To ensure that environmental goals are met, environmental functions such as the development of environmental policies and programs, setting quantitative and measurable goals for reducing environmental pollution, implementing pollution prevention obligations, measuring and evaluating potential environmental effects, revising executive plans, and making reforms must be carried out.Competitive strength has a negative moderating role in the relationship between environmental responsibilities and financial performance. Today, governments support and encourage companies to fulfill social and environmental responsibilities. On the other hand, when facing external pressures, companies rely on government support and try to attract technical and financial incentives to carry out social and environmental responsibilities at a lower cost and more easily. By actively implementing social and environmental responsibilities, companies can communicate with governing bodies and actively participate in the development and approval of environmental responsibility programs. These actions help companies gain external legitimacy and promote their corporate brand. In this way, by taking advantage of these factors, companies can increase profitability while raising product prices and consolidating customer loyalty. Additionally, emphasizing the reduction of physical waste through environmentally friendly solutions can lay the groundwork for reducing costs and increasing profitability.
Mohsen Khoshtinat; Fereshteh Yoosefi
Volume 5, Issue 20 , January 2008, , Pages 37-59
Abstract
This paper studies the relationship between information asymmetry and accounting conservatism in financial statements. Information asymmetry between informed and uninformed equity investors creates an agency cost that ...
Read More
This paper studies the relationship between information asymmetry and accounting conservatism in financial statements. Information asymmetry between informed and uninformed equity investors creates an agency cost that increases the equilibrium return on the firm's equity. This effect gives parties to the firm an incentive to generate a mechanism that reduces information asymmetry. In the other hands Conservatism reduces the manager's incentives and ability to manipulate accounting numbers and then reduces the agency costs.
Our empirical tests express that information asymmetry among equity investors is significantly positively related to conservatism. Further our tests confirm that changes in information asymmetry between equity investors lead changes in conservatism but conservatism doesn't lead to information asymmetry.
This result rejects the FASB proposition that conservatism produces information asymmetry among investors.
