مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد انواع فساد و عملکرد مالی شرکت – اسپرینگر ۲۰۱۸

مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد انواع فساد و عملکرد مالی شرکت – اسپرینگر ۲۰۱۸

 

مشخصات مقاله
ترجمه عنوان مقاله فساد، انواع فساد و عملکرد مالی شرکت: شواهد جدید از اقتصاد گذار
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله Corruption, Types of Corruption and Firm Financial Performance: New Evidence from a Transitional Economy
انتشار مقاله سال ۲۰۱۸
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی ۱۲ صفحه
هزینه دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد.
منتشر شده در نشریه اسپرینگر
نوع نگارش مقاله مقاله پژوهشی (Research article) – مقاله آماری
نوع مقاله ISI
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی  PDF
رشته های مرتبط مدیریت
گرایش های مرتبط مدیریت مالی، مدیریت عملکرد، مدیریت کسب و کار
مجله مجله اخلاق تجاری – Journal of Business Ethics
دانشگاه Department of Economics – University of Waikato – New Zealand
کلمات کلیدی فساد، عملکرد مالی، SME ها، کیفیت سازمانی، ویتنام
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی Corruption, Financial performance, SMEs, Institutional quality, Vietnam
شناسه دیجیتال – doi
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3016-y
کد محصول E8976
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله  ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید.
دانلود رایگان مقاله دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله سفارش ترجمه این مقاله

 

بخشی از متن مقاله:
Introduction

The linkage between corruption and firm performance has been widely discussed in the literature (e.g. Fisman and Svensson 2007). Theoretically, the effect of corruption on firm performance cannot be explained or predicted by a single extant theory. On the one hand, corruption may be harmful to firms in the long-term. For instance, the costs of corruption can include the erosion of critical resources such as the reputation and culture of firms, the efficient allocations of resources and the motivation for firms’ innovation (Hung 2008; Lou 2002). These costs may lower or drive profit away from firms, and result in talent, technology and innovation not being sufficiently valued. As pointed out by Murphy et al. (1993), firms are disincentivized to provide investment for growth and improve productivity. Corruption is considered as ‘sand-in-the-machine’ (Ades and Di Tella 1996). In addition, some argue that corruption prevents the entry of new firms because incumbents tend to exploit their existing corrupt relationships, and corrupt officials try to delay transactions to extract more bribes from public service users (Rose-Ackerman 1997). Consequently, public resources are misallocated to those offering the highest bribes, not to who can offer the best value for money for society (Jain 2001). By contrast, the above-mentioned views have been challenged by other perspectives, which imply that corruption allows firms to achieve aims or to overcome bureaucratic processes and unclear or complex regulations (e.g. Lui 1985). As a result, firms may save time and conduct business activities more speedily or ‘‘grease the wheels’’, all of which ultimately may promote growth and improve firms’ financial performance (Vial and Hanoteau 2010). Payinginformal costs can be also considered as a type of investment in networks or social capital (De Jong et al. 2012). And this investment, in turn, may help firms overcome the challenges of entering a new market, and facilitate firms’ efforts to achieve higher financial performance. In another approach, firms’ corruption behaviour is explained by institutional theory. This is considered as one of the most popular perspectives in transitional economies (e.g. Hoskisson et al. 2000; Wright et al. 2005). This approach indicates that corruption may not affect firm efficiency because paying bribes is simply an entry cost of firms to join an established game and facilitate their survival in their environment (North 1990). When neighbouring firms pay informal costs, this places pressure on other firms to follow their behaviours. As a result, corruption may have little impact on their performance. In light of the theoretical perspectives and discussions above, empirical research on this topic has been conducted in different countries. Preliminary studies on the effects of corruption on economic efficiency used cross-country macro data (e.g. Pierre-Guillaumeme´on & Sekkat 2005). Nevertheless, using aggregated data cannot control for firm heterogeneity that can potentially affect firm performance (Kasahara and Rodrigue 2008). Furthermore, Halpern et al. (2005) show that the omitted variables and reserve causality bias are other problems for macroeconomic studies.

ثبت دیدگاه