Analysis of Resource-Based Theory to Explain the Relationship between Employee Protection and Investment in Corporate Innovation Activities: The moderating role of political connections

Subject Areas : Management Accounting

Yasser Rezaei pitenoei (Ph.d) ¹ (Assistant Professor of Accounting, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran. (Corresponding Author))
mehdi safari gerayli ² (Associate Professor of Accounting, Department of accounting, Bandargaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bandargaz, Iran.)
mohammad gholamrezapoor ³ (master of accounting, Accounting Dept, Facility Member of Golestan Institute of Higher Education, Gorgan, Iran.)

Received: 2021-05-19 Accepted : 2021-05-19 Published : 2021-02-19

Keywords: Employee Protection, innovation, Resource-Based Theory, Political connections,

Abstract :

Resource-based theory states that employees as a valuable human capital play a very important role in the company's innovative activities. In today's evolving world and with the increasing competition of organizations, employee protections are becoming more and more important. Therefore, the present study investigates the relationship between employee protection and corporate innovation and studies the moderating effect of political connections on this relationship.The research hypothesis was tested using a sample of 55 companies listed in Tehran Stock Exchange during the year's 2014 to 2018 using multivariate regression model based on panel data.The findings of the study indicate that employee protection improves company innovation. In addition, the results show that in companies with political connections, employee protection has a greater impact on company innovation. Also, the results of sensitivity analysis showed that the use of alternative proxy for measuring the employee protection does not affect the main results of the study, thereby confirming the robustness of our findings.

References:

*      تقی‌زاده خانقاه، وحید؛ بادآور نهندی، یونس. (1398). فعالیت‌های بشردوستانه و نوآوری شرکت‌ها در شرایط نامتقارنی اطلاعات. حسابداری سلامت، 8(1)، 89-105.

*      رضازاده، جواد.؛ آشتاب، علی. (1389). رابطۀ دقت پیش‌بینی سود و بازده سهام شرکت‌های جدیدالورود به بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. پژوهشنامه علوم اقتصادی، 9(1)، 76-56.

*      رضازاده، جواد؛ محمدی، عبداله. (1398). توانایی مدیریتی، ارتباطات سیاسی و گزارشگری مالی متقلبانه. بررسی‏‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 26(2)، 217-238.

*      رضایی، فرزین؛ ویسی حصار، ثریا (1393). اثر روابط سیاسی با دولت بر رابطه بین تمرکز مالکیت با کیفیت گزارشگری مالی و هزینه سهام عادی.بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 21(4)، 449- 470.

*      رضائی پیته نوئی، یاسر؛ صفری گرایلی، مهدی ؛ غلامرضاپور، محمد (1398). کیفیت کارکنان و اثربخشی کنترل‌های داخلی: نقش تعدیلی نظارت خارجی، دانش حسابرسی، ۱۹(۷۵)، ۱۲۳-۱۴۱.

*      رهنمای رودپشتی، فریدون؛ محسنی، عبدالرضا. (1397). ارتباطات سیاسی، سود نقدی و بازده سهام در شرکت‌های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. دانش مالی تحلیل اوراق بهادار، 11(38)، 129-144.

*      نمازی، محمد؛ مقیمی، فاطمه. (1397). تأثیر نوآوری و نقش تعدیلی مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی بر عملکرد مالی شرکت‎ها در صنایع مختلف. بررسی‏‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 25(2)، 289-310.

*      Acemoglu, D., Akcigit, U. (2012). Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation. Journal of the European Economic Association, 10(1), 1-42.

*      Ambec, S., Cohen, M. A., Elgie, S., Lanoie, P. (2013). The Porter hypothesis at 20: Can environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 7(1), 2-22.

*      Amore, M. D., Schneider, C., Zaldokas, A. (2013). Credit Supply and Corporate Innovation, Journal of Financial Economics, 109(3), 835-855.

*      Bai, J., Fairhurst, D., Serfling, M. (2020). Employment Protection, Investment, and Firm Growth. The Review of Financial Studies, 33(2), 644–688.

*      Balain, S., Sparrow, P. (2009). Engaged to perform, CPHR white paper. Lancaster Management School.

*      Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 771–792.

*      Bradley, D., Kim, I., Tian, X. (2013). The causal effect of labor unions on innovation. Working paper.

*      Castanias, R. P., & Helfat, C. E. (2001). The managerial rents model, theory and empirical analysis. Journal of Management, 27, 661–678.

*      Claessens, S., Feijen, E., Laeven, L. (2008). Political connections and preferential access to finance: The role of campaign contributions. Journal of Financial Economics, 88, 554-580.

*      Cortes, A. F., Herrmann, P. (2019). CEO Transformational Leadership and SME Innovation: The Mediating Role of Social Capital and Employee Participation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 24(03), 1-25.

*      Cotton, J. L., Vollrath, D. A., Froggatt, K. L., Lengnick-Hall, M. L., Jennings, K. R. (1988). Employee participation: Diverse forms and different outcomes. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 8-22.

*      Cui, C., John, K., Pang, J., Wu, H. (2018). Employment Protection and Corporate Cash Holdings: Evidence from China's Labor Contract, Available at: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3093646 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3093646

*      Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8-19.

*      Faccio, M. (2006). Politically connected firms. American Economic Review, 96 (1), 369-386.

*      Farber, S. (1981). Buyer market structure and R&D effort: A simultaneous equations model. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 63(3), 336-345.

*      Freel, M. S. (2003). Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity. Research Policy, 32, 751-770.

*      Freeman, R. B., Medoff, J. L. (1984). What do unions do? New York: Basic Books.

*      Galasso, A., Simcoe, T. S. (2011). CEO overconfidence and innovation. Management Science, 57(8), 1469-1484.

*      Galende, J., De la Fuente, J. M. (2003). Internal factors determining a firm’s innovative behavior. Research Policy, 32, 715-736.

*      Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 777-798.

*      Gorodnichenko, Y., Schnitzer, M. (2013). Financial constraints and innovation: Why poor countries don’t catch up. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(5), 1115-1152.

*      Griffiths, W., Webster, E. (2010). What governs firm-level R & D: internal or external factors? Technovation, 30, 471-481.

*      Gujarati, D.N. (2009). Basic econometrics. 5th edition. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.

*      Hill, C. W. L., Snell, S. A. (1988). External control, corporate strategy, and firm performance in research-intensive industries. Strategic Management Journal, 9, 577-590.

*      Holman, D., Totterdell, P., Axtell, C., Stride, C., Port, R., Svensson, R., et al. (2012). Job design and the employee innovation process: The mediating role of learning strategies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(2), 177-191.

*      Holmstrom, B. (1989). Agency costs and innovation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 12, 305-327.

*      Karpuz, A., Kim, K., Ozkan, N. (2020). Employment Protection Laws and Corporate Cash Holdings. Journal of Banking and Finance, 111, 105705.

*      Landry, R., Amara, N., Lamari, M. (2002). Does social capital determine innovation? To what extent? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69, 681-701.

*      Leuz, C., Oberholzer-Gee, F. (2006). Political relationships, global financing, and corporate transparency. Journal of Financial Economics, 81(2), 411-439.

*      Lewis, S. (2003). Reputation and corporate responsibility. Journal of Communication Management, 7(4), 356-366.

*      Li, H., Meng, L., Wang, Q., Zhou, L. A. (2008). Political connections, financing and firm performance: Evidence from Chinese private firms. Journal of Development Economics, 87, 283-299.

*      Lin, H. F. (2007). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on employee knowledge sharing intentions. Journal of Information Science, 33(2), 135-149.

*      Ludwig, T. D., Frazier, C. B. (2012). Employee engagement and organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 32(1), 75-82.

*      Makri, M., Lane, P. J., Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2006). CEO incentives, innovation, and performance in technology-intensive firms: A reconciliation of outcome and behavior-based incentive schemes. Strategic Management Journal, 27(11), 1057-1080.

*      Manyika, J., Chui, M., Brown, B., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Roxburgh, C. McKinsey Global Institute. (2011). Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. McKinsey Global Institute, May.

*      Mao, C. X. & Weathers, J. (2019). Employee Treatment and Firm Innovation. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 46(7-8), 977-1002.

*      Miller, D., & Shamsie, J. (1996). The resource-based view of the firm in two environments: The Hollywood Film Studios from 1936 to 1965. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 519–543.

*      Onetti, A., Zucchella, A., Jones, M. V., McDougall-Covin, P. P. (2012). Internationalization, innovation and entrepreneurship: Business models for new technology-based firms. Journal of Management and Governance, 16(3), 337-368.

*      Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: Wiley.

*      Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.

*      Rogers, E. M., Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of Innovations: A Cross-Cultural Approach, 2nd ed., the Free Press, New York, NY.

*      Romijn, H., Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England. Research Policy, 31, 1053-1067.

*      Roper, S., Love, J. H. (2002). Innovation and export performance: Evidence from the UK and German manufacturing plants. Research Policy, 31(7), 1087-1102.

*      Salanova, M., Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). A cross-national study of work engagement as a mediator between job resources and proactive behavior. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(1), 116-131.

*      Sanford, B. (2007). Innovation, success and failure in public management research: Some methodological reflections. Public Management Review, 3(1), 3-17.

*      Schneiberg, M., Bartley, T. (2001). Regulating American industries: Markets, politics, and the institutional determinants of fire insurance regulation. American Journal of Sociology, 107(1), 101-146.

*      Tian, X., Wang, T. Y. (2014). Tolerance for failure and corporate innovation. Review of Financial Studies, 27(1), 211-255.

*      Tong, L., Liu, N., Zhang, M., Wang, L. (2018). Employee Protection and Corporate Innovation: Empirical Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(2), 569-589.

*      Tourigny, D., Le, C. (2004). Impediments to innovation faced by Canadian firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 13(3), 217-250.

*      Truss, K., Soane, E., Edwards, C. Y. L., Wisdom, K., Croll, A., Burnett, J. (2006). Working life: employee attitudes and engagement 2006. Wimbledon: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

*      Wakelin, K. (1998). Innovation and export behavior at the firm level. Research Policy, 26, 829-841.

*      Wang, H. C., He, J., Mahoney, J. T. (2009). Firm-specific knowledge resources and competitive advantage: The roles of economic-and relationship-based employee governance mechanisms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(12), 1265-1285.

*      Wang, D., Sutherland, D., Ning, L., Wang, Y., Pan, X. (2018). Exploring the influence of political connections and managerial overconfidence on R&D intensity in China's large-scale private sector firms. Technovation, 69, 40-53.

*      Zhou, J., George, J. M. (2003). Awakening employee creativity: The role of leader emotional intelligence. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 545-568.