Cost Stickiness and Firm Performance: Evidence from Manufacturing Enterprises in China

Understanding how costs behave relative to changes in activity is crucial to improving managerial decision-making and financial performance. This study investigated the relationship between cost stickiness and firm performance among manufacturing enterprises in China. Cost stickiness occurs when costs rise more quickly with an increase in sales but decrease more slowly when sales decline. Employing a descriptive–correlational design, the study used secondary financial data from 50 listed manufacturing firms over a five-year period (2018–2022). Results indicated that administrative, selling, and operating expenses exhibited significant stickiness (ranging from β = –0.35 to –0.12), and cost stickiness was negatively correlated with profitability (ROA: r = –0.47, p < 0.01). The findings highlight the importance of flexible cost management and managerial adaptability for sustaining firm performance under volatile market conditions.

Cost stickiness, firm performance, managerial behavior

1. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.00095 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Banker, R. D., & Chen, L. (2006). Predicting earnings using a model based on cost variability and cost stickiness. The Accounting Review, 81(2), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2006.81.2.285 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Calleja, K., Steliaros, M., & Thomas, D. C. (2006). A note on cost stickiness: Some international comparisons. Management Accounting Research, 17(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2006.02.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Chen, C. X., Lu, H., & Sougiannis, T. (2012). The agency problem, corporate governance, and the asymmetrical behavior of selling, general, and administrative costs. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29(1), 252–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2011.01094.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Dierynck, B., Landsman, W. R., & Renders, A. (2012). Do managerial incentives drive cost behavior? Accounting Review, 87(6), 1913–1938. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50256 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Weiss, D. (2010). Cost behavior and analysts’ earnings forecasts. The Accounting Review, 85(4), 1441–1471. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2010.85.4.1441 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Xu, S., & Sim, J. (2017). Asymmetric cost behavior and financial performance: Evidence from China’s manufacturing firms. China Journal of Accounting Studies, 5(3), 320–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/21697213.2017.1383057 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Role of Value and Growth Stocks in Portfolio Returns: Insights From the Nigerian Stock Market
• The Impact of Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) and Profitability on Firm Value Moderated by Firm Size
• Assessment of the Impact of Environmental Operating Costs on Return on Assets: Evidence from Listed Breweries in Nigeria
• Mobile Money and Digital Financial Services Ecosystem in Adamawa State
• A Quantitative Approach of Professional Skepticism and Fraud Detection among Malaysian Internal Auditors