브랜드 경영 효율성이 기업 수익성과 주주가치에 미치는 영향

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Study results have shown that effects of firms’ interim performance of brand management like sales, sales growth, market share, customer satisfaction, or brand equity on firms’ final performance like profitability or shareholder value are not consistent. Most studies focusing on the relationship between these two variables ceremonially omit input factors for the brand management in their study design. To deal with such a problem, current study employs brand management efficiency index calculated through Data Envelopment Analysis. Data Envelopment Analysis considers input factors as well as output factors for the calculation of efficiency. In the current study, 4 input factors - assets, salaries, general administration expenses, and advertising and sales promotion - and 3 output factors - sales, 2 year composite sales growth rate, and operating income - are used for the calculation of efficiency indices. Two hypotheses are developed in the study. Hypothesis 1 is about the relationship between brand management efficiency and firm profitability, and hypothesis 2 is about the relationship between brand management efficiency and shareholder value. Because firm profitability has backward looking nature, the relationship between brand management efficiency and firm profitability is hypothesized as having an inverted U shape. In other words, although firm profitability would increase as efficiency gets higher, it would decrease after efficiency exceeds a certain level. The relationship between brand management efficiency and shareholder value is hypothesized as having a U shape due to forward looking nature of shareholder value. That is, initially shareholder value would decrease as efficiency increases. However, as efficiency increases higher over a certain level, shareholder value would eventually turn upward. Using Malmquist Index formula, this study breaks down brand management efficiency into two elements - Efficiency Change and Technical Efficiency (or Frontier Shift), and then tests the effects of these two brand management efficiency indices on firm’s profitability and shareholder value. In the study ROI and Tobin’s Q were used for the measures of profitability and shareholder value respectably. A set of panel data from 103 firms listed in the Korea Composite Stock Price Index(KOSPI) and Korean Securities Dealers Automated Quotation (KOSDAQ) between 1999 and 2007 was collected and used. For the analysis of data, two 2-way error components models using ROI and Tobin’s Q each as a dependent variable. According to analysis results, hypothesis 1 was strongly supported. Efficiency Change index and Technical Efficiency index both positively influence firm profitability, and square terms of two efficiency indices are negative and significant. As hypothesized, firm profitability(ROI) initially goes up as efficiency increases. After a certain level of efficiency, however, firm profitability went downward. Hypothesis 2 was partially supported. Only Efficiency Change worked as hypothesized. Efficiency Change index has a negative effect on Tobin’s Q and its square term has a positive influence on Tobin’s Q. In short, as Efficiency Change index gets higher, shareholder value gets lower. After Efficiency Change index exceeds over a certain level, however, shareholder value starts to increase. For Technical Change index, no significant effect was identified. Results of this study tell us a couple of lessons. First, brand management efficiency should be pushed up only to a certain limit. If a firm’s efficiency level is too high, firm profitability could be negatively affected. Second, performance indices for a firm need to be distinguished into two groups. Forward looking indices like Tobin’s Q, EVA(economic value added), and FCF(future cash flow) represent a firm’s profitability, and backward looking indices like ROI(ruturn on investment), ROA(return on assets), and ROE(return on equity) represent a firm’s market value or shareholder’s value

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 반성식, "무형자산투자가 Tobin’s Q에 미치는 영향" 22 : 391-411, 1999

2 김안호, "국내 무역항만의 효율성 변화분석:맴퀴스트접근" 한국항만경제학회 21 (21): 173-188, 2005

3 박상준, "고객만족지수와 기업성과" 한국마케팅학회 18 (18): 19-50, 2003

4 이유재, "고객만족이 기업의 수익성과 가치에 미치는 영향" 한국마케팅학회 21 (21): 85-113, 2006

5 Annacker, D., "Unobservable Effects in Structural Models of Business Performance" 57 (57): 507-517, 2004

6 Wernerfelt, B., "Tobin’s q and the Importance of Focus in Firm Per formance" 78 : 246-250,

7 Farrell, M. J., "The Measurement of Productive Efficiency" 120 (120): 253-281, 1957

8 Hjorth-Anderson, C., "The Concept of Quality and the Efficiency of Markets for Consumer Products" 11 : 708-711, 1984

9 Montgomery, C. A., "Sources of Superior Performance: Market Share versus Industry Effects in the US Brewing Industry" 37 (37): 954-959, 1991

10 Tornow, W. W., "Service Quality and Management Practices: A Look at Employee Attitudes, Customer Satisfaction, and Bottom-line Consequences" 14 (14): 105-115, 1991

11 Boles, J. S., "Salesperson Evaluation Using Relative Performance Efficiency: The Application of Data Envelopment Analysis" 15 (15): 31-49, 1995

12 Donthu, N., "Retail Productivity Assessment Using Data Envelopment Analysis" 74 (74): 89-105, 1998

13 전인수, "ROCSI: 고객만족투자 과연 효과 있는가?" 한국마케팅학회 20 (20): 65-84, 2005

14 김흥식, "Q비율을 이용한 합병의 경제적 효과에 관한 연구" 7 (7): 187-205, 1990

15 Zhu, J., "Quantitative Models for Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking" Springer 2003

16 Bucklin, L. P., "Productivity in Marketing" American Marketing Association 1978

17 Kamakura, W., "Productivity Assessment of Multiple Retail Outlets" 72 (72): 333-356, 1996

18 Fare, R., "Production Frontiers" Cambridge University Press 1994

19 Aigner, D. A., "On Estimating the Industry Production Function" 58 (58): 826-839, 1968

20 Luo, X., "Neglected Outcomes of Customer Satisfaction" 71 (71): 133-149, 2007

21 Rabe_Hesketh, S., "Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata, 2nd ed" Stata Press 2008

22 Charnes, A., "Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units" 2 (2): 429-444, 1978

23 Kamakura, W., "Measuring Market Efficiency and Welfare Loss" 15 : 289-302, 1988

24 Luo, X., "Marketing’s Credibility: A Longitudinal Investigation of Marketing Communication Productivity and Shareholder Value" 70 (70): 70-91, 2006

25 Fisk, G., "Marketing Systems: An Introductory Analysis" Harper & Row 1967

26 Sevin, C. H., "Marketing Productivity Analysis" McGraw Hill 1965

27 Kotler, P., "Marketing Management, 12th ed" Pearson/Prentice Hall 2009

28 Malmquist, S., "Malmquist Index Numbers and Indifference Surfaces" 4 (4): 209-242, 1953

29 Frees, E. W., "Longitudinal and Panel Data:Analysis and Applications in the Social Sciences" Cambridge University Press 2004

30 Rao, V. R., "How is Manifest Branding Strategy Related to the Intangible Value of a Corporation?" 68 (68): 126-141, 2004

31 Cooper, W. W., "Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis" Kluwer Adademic Publishers 2004

32 Ruffa, S. A., "Going Lean: How the Best Companies Apply Lean Manufacturing Principles to Shatter Uncertainty, Drive Innovation, and Maximize Profits" AMACOM Div. American Mgmt Assn 2008

33 Yeung, M., "From Customer Satisfaction to Profitability" 8 (8): 313-326, 2000

34 Aigner, D., "Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Models" 6 (6): 21-37, 1977

35 Horsky, D., "Evaluation of Sales Force Size and Productivity Through Efficient Frontier Benchmarking" 15 (15): 301-320, 1996

36 Luo, X., "Evaluating the Profitability and Marketability Efficiency of Large Banks:An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis" 56 (56): 627-635, 2003

37 Wooldridge, J. M., "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data" the MIT press 2002

38 Kaplan, S. N., "Do Investment Cash Flow Sensitivities Provide Useful Measures of Financing Constraints?" 112 (112): 169-215, 1997

39 Day, G. S., "Diagnosing the Experience Curve" 47 (47): 44-58, 1983

40 Goddard, J., "Determinants of Profitability in European Manufacturing and Services: Evidence From a Dynamic Panel Model" 15 (15): 1269-1282, 2005

41 Cooper, W. W., "Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA Solver Software, 2nd ed" Springer 2007

42 홍봉영, "DEA를 이용한 소매점의 효율성측정" 한국경영학회 32 (32): 4-448, 2003

43 박만희, "DEA 효율성 및 Malmquist 생산성 분석시스템 개발" 한국생산성학회 22 (22): 241-265, 2008

44 Anderson, E. W., "Customer Satisfaction, Productivity, and Profitability: Differences Between Goods and Services" 16 (16): 129-145, 1997

45 Anderson, E. W., "Customer Satisfaction, Market Share, and Profitability: Findings from Sweden" 58 (58): 53-66, 1994

46 Anderson, E. W., "Customer Satisfaction and Shareholder Value" 68 (68): 172-185, 2004

47 Xue, M., "Customer Efficiency:Concept and Its Impact on e-Business Management" 4 (4): 253-267, 2002

48 Murthi, B.P.S., "Controlling for Observed and Unobserved Managerial Skills in Determining First Mover Market Share Advantages" 33 (33): 329-336, 1996

49 Armstrong J. S., "Competitororiented Objectives: The Myth of Market Share" 12 (12): 117-136, 2007

50 Armstong J. S., "Competitor Orientation: Effects of Objectives and Information on Managerial Decisions and Profitability" 33 (33): 188-199, 1996

51 Ghemawat, P., "Building Strategy on the Experience Curve" 42 (42): 143-149, 1985

52 Luo, X., "Benchmarking Advertising Efficiency" 41 (41): 7-18, 2001

53 Cocanaugher, A. B., "BARS Performance Rating for Sales Force Personnel" 42 (42): 87-95, 1978

54 Aaker, D. A., "Are You Overadvertising?" 22 (22): 57-70, 1982

55 Szymanski, B., "An Analysis of the Market Share-Profitability Relationship" 57 (57): 1-18, 1993

56 Pilling, B., "Accounting for the Impact of Territory Characteristics on Sales Performance: Relative Efficiency As a Measure of Salesperson Performance" 19 (19): 35-45, 1999

57 Ratchford, B., "A Study of Productivity Changes in Food Retailing" 4 : 292-311, 1985