پارس پروژه پرتال خدمات دانشگاهی
این مقاله علمی پژوهشی (ISI) به زبان انگلیسی از نشریه اسپرینگر مربوط به سال ۲۰۲۱ دارای ۱۹ صفحه انگلیسی با فرمت PDF می باشد در ادامه این صفحه لینک دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی و بخشی از ترجمه فارسی مقاله موجود می باشد.
کد محصول: M1204
سال نشر: ۲۰۲۱
نام ناشر (پایگاه داده): اسپرینگر
نام مجله: Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade
نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی (Research articles)
تعداد صفحه انگلیسی: ۱۹ صفحه PDF
عنوان کامل فارسی:
مقاله انگلیسی ۲۰۲۱ : رابطه غیر خطی بین اندازه شرکت و رشد در صنعت خودرو
عنوان کامل انگلیسی:
The Nonlinear Relationship Between Firm Size and Growth in the Automotive Industry
برای دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی بر روی دکمه ذیل کلیک نمایید
وضعیت ترجمه: این مقاله تاکنون ترجمه نشده برای سفارش ترجمه تخصصی مقاله بر روی دکمه ذیل کلیک نمایید (کد مقاله:M1204)
مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع: برای مشاهده سایر مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع (با ترجمه و بدون ترجمه) بر روی دکمه ذیل کلیک نمایید
Abstract
The automotive industry dominates the economy of the west part of Romania, making necessary the identification of firm growth drivers. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to analyse the nonlinear impact of firm size in influencing firm growth. To do so, we use a panel quantile regression with fixed effects for a set of 19 automotive companies over the period 2007–۲۰۱۵, while controlling for the role of research and development activities and firm’s financial performances. We show that firm size positively sustains firm growth at all quantiles, whereas this relationship is stronger for companies that grow less fast. Our findings are robust to the computation of firm growth and size based on different indicators and are not influenced by the agglomeration effect.
Keywords: Firm growth · Firm size · Panel quantile regression · Nonlinear effect · Gibrat’s law · Automotive industry
۱.Introduction
The relationship between firm size and growth is explained by Gibrat’s (1931) theory and the so-called law of proportionate effect, which shows that in the short run, the firms’ growth rate is independent of their size. The subsequent theories and empirical studies posit, however, that small firms record different growth patterns compared with large companies (for a survey of these theories, please refer to Coad 2009).
Early studies (e.g. Hart 1962; Singh and Whittington 1975; Hart and Oulton 1996), conducted on the United Kingdom (UK) manufacturing sector, show that large firms grow fast because the survival does not represent their main objective. Thus, large firms might accept a trade-off between growth and profit and look for a decentralized structure that generate an increase of investment’s level and employees’ number. In addition, these firms are “managerially dominated” (Singh 1975) and, in contrast to the small, owner-controlled firms, they are willing to grow for strategic reasons. Therefore, early empirical works conducted on a cross-sectional basis underline the positive relationship between firm size and growth…
۶.Conclusions and Implications for Management Decision
The objective of this paper was to provide a new perspective on the relationship between firm size and growth. Therefore, we have considered that this relationship is not only different between small and large firms, but also depends on the growth dynamics of firms.
Our fixed effect panel quantile regression estimator shows that size matters for firm growth in the automotive industry from Timis region in Romania. Moreover, the size is more important for firms that grow less fast. That is, the coefficients’ size decreases at upper quantiles. This result is robust to our re-sampling procedure, considering the potential agglomeration effects for companies located in the Timisoara metropolitan area—the Timis county seat. Therefore, in line with most of the recent empirical papers, we reject Gibrat’s (1931) law. Furthermore, we show that R&D activities are positively impacting firm growth, at middle and upper quantile (for firms that grow faster). Finally, the profitability positively influences firm growth, whereas the effect of liquidity is negative. These results can be explained by the fact that for precautionary reasons, managers might sacrifice the investment in detriment of cash holding, and underline at the same time a trade-off between firm profitability and liquidity. Our findings are robust to the use of alternative metrics for firm growth and firm size…
| مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع |