동종․이종 합병에 따른 원가의 구조 및 행태 차이

This study aims to examine the processes and the results by which managers adjust human and capacity resources to increase efficiency or maximize value in the post-M&A period considering M&A Type. It carefully observes the alteration of managers’ decision-making on allocating resources after M&A event and its influence on the cost structure and the cost behavior, comparing M&A of same industry with M&A of different industry. In analyzing cost structure and its behavior, we consider committed costs such as labor and depreciation costs as managers can change and adjust the related resources by decision-making. The empirical results are as follows. First, the ratio of both labor and depreciation costs in manufacturing sectors decreased more in case of M&A in the same industry than M&A in the different industry. It possibly reflects that, in M&A of same industry, the economy of scale in manufacturing departments occurs and the economy of scale induces the efficiency of human resources and capacity resources because manufacturing departments can be integrated more easily. Meanwhile, the ratio of labor and depreciation costs in non-manufacturing sectors decreased in both cases of M&A in the same industry and in the different industry. However, we cannot find the significant difference. At this, we infer that, in both M&A cases, the ratio of non-manufacturing costs can decrease because integration and adjustment of overlapping functions become easy to perform. Second, the stickiness of labor costs in manufacturing sectors turned up definitely after M&A in the same industry though the stickiness of labor costs did not exist in pre-M&A periods. Also, the stickiness of depreciation costs in manufacturing sectors strengthened after M&A in the same industry. In the other hands, the stickiness of manufacturing labor and depreciation costs in M&A of different industry did not change significantly. It induces the following inferences. In case of M&A in the same industry, manager is confronted with the difficulty to reduce existing capacity in spite of bad economic condition because M&A may be performed for the economy of scale through enlargement of scale. On the other hand, managers may perform decision-making to retract or reduce poor business or division when economic environment is weaker because it may be performed for the adjustment of business portfolio in case of M&A in the different industry. Therefore, stickiness of committed costs in manufacturing sectors may be higher in M&A of same industry than in M&A of different industry. Meanwhile, both type of M&A did not trigger the significant differences in the stickiness of labor and depreciation costs of non-manufacturing sectors. Two empirical results could imply that, in M&A of same industry, the economy of scale in manufacturing departments and the efficiency processes of human resources and capacity resources occur, and, after efficiency processes proceed considerably as time passes, managers may maintain committed resources and bear the costs of operating to maintain the economy of scale though volume falls. The distinction and contribution of this study are as follows. First, it tried to investigate re-allocation of the resources after M&A. Second, it examined manager’s strategic decision-making considering manufacturing or non-manufacturing divisional resource allocation by dividing the committed costs into manufacturing and non-manufacturing parts, connecting cost structure with cost behavior. Third, it tried to analyze M&A’s effect considering the type of M&A. Finally, it extended the analysis duration and improve data-gathering method by combining manufacturing statement, income statement and value-added information in the footnotes of financial statements. This study implies some comparative insights about management’s effort and its results related to the efficient resource allocation after M&A that previous studies might not have suggested.