Table 4

Resource allocation verification

(1)(2)
TFP > p50TFP < p50
lnCOGSlnCOGS
lnREV0.982***0.958***
(213.21)(165.28)
DEC×lnREV−0.035−0.138***
(−1.49)(−4.49)
DT0.002***0.003***
(2.92)(2.82)
DEC×lnREV×DT0.016***0.026***
(2.92)(4.54)
EInt−0.005***−0.001
(−4.00)(−0.45)
DEC×lnREV×EInt−0.052***−0.035***
(−8.04)(−5.97)
AInt−0.001−0.001**
(−0.96)(−2.36)
DEC×lnREV×AInt−0.003−0.005**
(−1.42)(−1.97)
Sdec−0.0040.002
(−1.29)(0.43)
DEC×lnREV×Sdec−0.0050.002
(−0.34)(0.08)
GDPgrow0.0280.155**
(0.60)(2.09)
DEC×lnREV×GDPgrow0.816***1.813***
(3.87)(6.60)
Independ0.005−0.001
(0.32)(−0.05)
Top1−0.003−0.005
(−0.59)(−0.51)
Mshare0.015**0.016**
(2.23)(2.05)
Dual−0.0010.004*
(−0.59)(1.73)
Age−0.005***−0.013***
(−3.34)(−5.53)
Soe0.0010.005
(0.29)(1.53)
Lev0.015***0.022***
(3.15)(3.22)
Size0.002*0.003**
(1.93)(2.01)
_cons−0.020−0.034
(−0.98)(−0.97)
Industry and year FEYesYes
N13,55611,775
adj. R20.8920.840
F2154.0221190.689
Chin23.13*

Note(s): Table 4 examines the mediating role of resource allocation efficiency (TFP) in the impact of enterprise digital transformation on cost stickiness. We have divided the sample into two subsamples based on the median of corporate asset allocation efficiency (TFP) and repeated Model 2. Definitions of all variables are provided in Appendix table 1. All models are controlled for industry and year effects

t-values are in parentheses. ***p < 0.01, **p < 0.05 and *p < 0.1

Source(s): Table created by authors

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal