Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

Third International Conference On Economics Education, Economics, Business and Management, Accounting and Entrepreneurship (PICEEBA 2019)

The Effect of Institutional Ownership, Capital Structure, Dividend Policy, and

Company’s Growth on Firm Value (Study of Property Real Estate and Building
Construction Companies)

Reza Mulia Sari1, Dina Patrisia2

1Universitas Negeri Padang, Padang, Indonesia,  [email protected]

2Universitas Negeri Padang, Padang, Indonesia,  [email protected]

Abstract
This paper aims to examine whether the impact of institutional ownership, capital structure,
dividend policy and company's growth on firm value. This study employed property real
estate and building construction companies which are listed in The Indonesian Stock
Exchange as the population. By using purposive sampling, we used 36 companies with
observation period from 2012 to 2017 as the samples. We applied multiple linear regression
as the data analysis tool. The results showed that the institutional ownership and company
growth has no significant effect on company value, while the capital structure and dividend
policies have positive impacts on firm value.
Keywords: Institutional ownership, capital structure, dividend policy, growth companies,
and firm value

Introduction
One of the main objectives of go public companies is to enhance prosperity of the owners or
shareholders by increasing corporate value (Salvatore, 2011). Whilst, the purpose of corporate
financial management is to increase the value of the company, which is reflected in the stock price
(Fama, 1978). Increasing company value means maximizing the wealth or welfare of shareholders.
According to (Ghalandari, 2013) the value of each company could be related to share price so
investors decide to invest by monitoring of firm value. According to (Alpi, 2017) the firm value is the
investor's perception of the level of success of the company in managing resources. For the listed
companies in the capital market, the stock price is an indicator of the company's value.
Firm value has significant role as high corporate value will be followed by high prosperity
shareholders (Brigham & Houston, 2011). The greater the ratio of PBV, the higher companies rated by
investors. It can be concluded that the firm value is important information for investors because it is
an indicator for the market to assess the company as a whole. When investors want to invest,
investors will seek information in advance about the company to invest and choose which company is
most profitable for investors. This study used firm value indicator namely price to book value (PBV).
(Salvatore, 2011)mentions that there are several factors that affect firm value such as dividend policy,
capital structure, the company's growth, ownership structure, investment decisions, and size of the
company. This study will only focus on four factors considered dominant influence to firm value as
institutional ownership, capital structure, dividend policy and the company's growth.
One of the main factors that influence firm value is institutional ownership. Institutional
ownership according to (Gusti, 2013) is the ownership of shares of companies owned by institutions
or institutions such as insurance companies, banks, investment companies and other institutional
ownership. With high institutional ownership, institutional investors will have the opportunity to
control the company. According to (Jensen & Meckling, 1976) and (Sofyaningsih & Hardiningsih,
2011) (Buchanan, Cao, & Chen, 2018) the existence of an institutional investor is considered capable of
being an effective monitoring mechanism in any decision taken by manager. A high level of
institutional ownership will encourage institutional investors to conduct business greater scrutiny as
well. It makes opportunistic behavior of managers can be prevented. In line with the opinion
expressed by (Xiong, 2016) which says that institutional ownership (INST) can increase the firm value
through participation in corporate governance and oversee the company's activities so that it will
increase the value of the company. Because of this situation, agency problems arising between

Copyright © 2019, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). 637
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

shareholders and managers can be minimized. Investors will get better ratings on companies whose
shares are owned by institutional investors, and as result it will increase firm value. A study
conducted by (Gusti, 2013) states that institutional ownership affected firm value. (Vintila &
Gherghina, 2014), (Sualehkhattak & Hussain, 2017), (Ghalandari, 2013) and (Yuliyanti, 2014)
conclude an effect of institutional ownership on firm value. On the other hand, (Isshaq, Bokpin, &
Onumah, 2009) and (Sugiarto, 2011) finds that there was no effect of institutional ownership to firm
value.
The second factor that influences firm value is capital structure. Capital structure as stated by
(Karadeniz et all, 2009) is balance or ratio between the amount of long-term debt and equity.
According to the signalling theory the high debt level capital structure is used as a signal to
distinguish good and bad companies. Only a healthy and strong company can pay off with the risks.
(Myers, 1984) which states that capital structure can influence firm value. (Jensen, 1986) states that
with debt, it can be used to control excessive free cash flow by management. The main sources that
companies can use to meet their funds or finance are internal sources, namely equity, and external
sources which can be in the form of debt. Most companies use a mixture of equity and debt that will
form a capital structure (Nassar, 2016). Therefore, the capital structure is measured by the ratio of
debt to equity (Seetanah et all, 2014). (Nawaz et all, 2011) said that capital structure theory explains
that financial policies in determining a company's capital structure (a mixture of debt and equity) are
intended to optimize the value of the company. The ratio commonly used to see the effect of loans
from creditors both used as additional capital and sources of funds for the purchase of assets is the
debt ratio, which is seen from the capital structure, namely Debt to Equity Ratio (Prasetia et all, 2018).
Another research conducted by (Sujoko & Soebiantoro, 2007) find that capital structure has a negative
and significant impact to firm value. This research (Harahap & Wardhani, 2011) and (Sugiarto, 2011)
where capital structure does not affect firm value. However, (Sualehkhattak & Hussain, 2017),
(Adenugba et all, 2016), (Ghalandari, 2013), (Hasbi, 2015) and (Hermuningsih, 2013) find that positive
effect of capital structure to firm value.
The third factor that influences firm value is dividend policy. Dividend policy according to
(Rakhimsyah & Gunawan, 2011) are policies on dividend payments are very important decisions in a
company. According to (Titman et all, 2014) Dividend policy is a company decision in determining
the amount of dividends and the time of dividend distribution to shareholders.This policy will
involve two parties that have different interests, namely the first party of the shareholders and the
second party of the company itself. Dividends is defined as payments to shareholders by the
company for the profits they receive. The amount of dividend distributed by company may affect
stock price, since according to theory of bird in the hand, investors prefer return coming from
dividends compared with capital gains. This policy is often regarded as a signal to investors in
assessing merits of a company's performance as well as a source of income for investors. According to
signaling theory explaining that dividend policy has information content as a result company's policy
to pay high dividends have positive information content for investors about the future profitability
which will affect corporate value. High dividend distribution to shareholders is expected to corporate
value will increase as well (Rachman, 2016). According to (Abidin et all, 2014), and (Rakhimsyah &
Gunawan, 2011) conclude that dividend policy adversely affect firm value. While a study conducted
by (Ghalandari, 2013), (Sugiarto, 2011) , (Rizqia et all, 2013), (Artini & Puspaningsih, 2011) state that a
positive influence of dividend policy to firm value. In contrary, (Sualehkhattak & Hussain, 2017) find
that no effect of dividend policy to firm value.
The other factor is company growth. (Seftiani & Ratih, 2011) state that company growth illustrates
how investors respect to companies so investors are willing to invest their capital in the company.
Growth is expressed as growth in total assets in order to see the growth of past assets which would
reflect the future profitability. Company growth is a change (decrease or increase) in total assets
owned by the company. The company's growth is expected by internal and external parties of a
company because it can provide positive aspect for them. From the investor's point of view, the
growth of a company is a sign that the company has a profitable aspect and they expect rate of return

638
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

from their investment to provide better results. According to (Dhani & Utama, 2017), companies with
good asset growth are companies that are able to manage resources to generate profits so that they
can add their own assets. Companies with large asset growth are companies that have good
performance in generating profits so that they can increase company value. (Dewi & Sudiartha, 2017)
state that the increase in asset growth experienced by the company reflects that the company is in
good performance so it experiences the development of company itself, this becomes a positive signal
for investors to invest in the company, as a result the company's value will be high and it can be
clearly seen on the stock price found in the company. This research (Sukriyawati, 2016), (Nadillah,
2017) where company growth does not affect firm value. However, Febrianti (2012), (Syardiana et al,
2015) dan (Rakhimsyah & Gunawan, 2011) find that positive effect of company growth to firm value.
Based on above background, the researcher is very keen to conduct research entitle “The Effect of
Institutional Ownership, Capital Structure, Dividend Policy, and Company Growth to Firm Values In
Property Real Estate And Building Construction Companies Listed On The Indonesia Stock
Exchange”

Methods
This paper aims to examine whether there is significant institutional ownership, capital structure,
dividend policy and company's growth to firm value. Sample of this study uses purposive sampling
method in order to obtain a final sample accounting 36 companies with observation period from 2012
to 2017. Type of data in this study is secondary data and uses multiple linear regression as an
analytical tool.

Results and Discussion

Multiple linier regression analysis was used to determine the effect of institusional ownership,
capital structure, dividend policy and company growth on firm value in property real estate
companies and building construction listed on the indonesian stock exchange. From processing data
with SPSS obtained as in the following table :

Table 1 The result of multiple regression

Regression R
Variable t count sig. F count Sig
coefficient square
B
Constant -6.079 .208 13.833 .000
Institusional ownership .094 1.128 .261
Capital structure .309 3.748 .000
Dividend policy .270 4.114 .000
Company growth .104 1.605 .110
Source: Secondary Data Processed (2019)
From the table above can be determined the multiple regression equation as follows :
Y = a + b1X1 + b2X2 +b3X3 + b4X4
Y = -6.079 + 0.094 + 0.309 + 0.270 + 0.104

Where :
Y = Firm Value
a = Constanta
b = Regression coefficient
X1 = Institusional ownership
X2 = Capital structure
X3 = Dividend policy
X4 = Company growth
e = Other factors not examined

639
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

Based on the regression equation above, it can be interpreted as follows:

1. The amount of constant obtained is -6,079, without the existence of independent variables namel
institutional ownership (X1), capital structure (X2), dividend policy (X3), and company growth
(X4), and then the company value (Y) is -6,079.
2. The regression coefficient (b) of the institutional ownership variable (X1) obtained is positive
which is 0.094, it indicates that each improvement of institutional ownership variable to one
point, and then it will result in an increase of company value approximately 0.094 point.
3. The regression coefficient (b) of the capital structure variable (X2) obtained is positive which is
0.309, it indicates that each improvement of capital structure variable to one point, and then it
will result in an increase of company value approximately 0.309 point.
4. The regression coefficient (b) of the dividend policy variable (X3) obtained is positive which is
0.270, it indicates that each improvement of dividend policy variable to one point, and then it
will result in an increase of company value approximately 0.270 point.
5. The regression coefficient (b) of the company growth variable (X4) obtained is positive which is
0.104, it indicates that each improvement of company growth variable to one point, and then it
will result in an increase of company value approximately 0.104 point.

Feasibility Test
From the feasibility test, the F count is 13,883 with sig 0,000 < 0,05. It means that from the F test
carried out together with exogenous variables whose positive and significant influence to company
value, as a result that the exogenous variables together have positive and significant relationship to
the endogenous variables.
The coefficient of determination is needed to see how big the dependent variable (X) to the
independent variable (Y). Calculated by squaring a predetermined assessment coefficient. Based on
table 1, the contribution of institutional ownership variables, capital structure, dividend policy and
company growth to firm value is 21%, and the remaining 79% of the firm's value variable is given by
other unidentified factors such as profitability, activities and others.

Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis 1
Institutional ownership affects the company value in property real estate and building
construction companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Based on the analysis test results, it is
known that Sig. 0.261> 0.05). It means that H0 is accepted and Ha is rejected, so the alternative
hypothesis proposed in the study is rejected, so institutional ownership does not affect the value of
the company.
Hypothesis 2
Capital structure affects the company value in property real estate and building construction
companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Based on the analysis test results, it is known that
Sig. 0.000 < 0.05). It means that H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted, so the alternative hypothesis
proposed in the study is accepted, so capital structure affect the value of the company.
Hypothesis 3
Dividend policy affects the company value in property real estate and building construction
companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Based on the analysis test results, it is known that
Sig. 0.000 < 0.05). It means that H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted, so the alternative hypothesis
proposed in the study is accepted, so dividend policy affect the value of the company.
Hypothesis 4
Company growth affects the company value in property real estate and building construction
companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Based on the analysis test results, it is known that
Sig. 0.100 > 0.05). It means that H0 is accepted and Ha is rejected, so the alternative hypothesis
proposed in the study is accepted, so company growth does not affect the value of the company.

640
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

The Effect of Institutional Ownership on Company Values on Property, Real Estate and building
Construction Companies which is listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange
Based on the submission of the first hypothesis in Table 1, it was found that institutional
ownership variables did not affect the company value of property real estate companies and building
construction listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX). The results obtained indicate that the size
of the proportion of institutional share ownership in the company would not affect changes in
company value. The results obtained were due to the relatively small proportion of institutional
ownership in each company, as a result the function of the existence of institutional ownership was
not going well, so it could not affect changes in company value measured by price to book value
especially in real estate property and building construction on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. The
small proportion owned by institutional investors makes them have a small role to carry out
monitoring activities on internal activities, consequently monitoring or supervision activities are
rarely carried out, and implementation is carried out at an unsustainable timeframe, which results in
institutional investors not influencing company value.
The results of this study contradicted to the agency theory stating that one way that can be used to
reduce agency problem and agency cost is by increasing institutional ownership of the company,
because the ownership of institutional investors such as insurance companies, investment banks and
other institutions that are shaped like companies would encourage management improvement
supervision that is more optimal in managing the company (Moh’d et all, 1998). The results obtained
in this study are in line with the opinion of (Sofyaningsih & Hardiningsih, 2011) which proves that
institutional ownership is not proven to affect company value. This happens because of the
information asymmetry between investors and managers so that managers are difficult to control by
institutional investors. The same results are also obtained in the study of (Aditya & Supriyono, 2014)
find that institutional ownership do not affect the value of the company. This is due to the fact that
the large or small institutional ownership of the company has not been able to control and supervise
the opportunistic actions of managers in running the company, on the other words institutional
investors cannot optimize their control functions. Likewise with the results of the study conducted
by(Isshaq et al., 2009), (Widyaningsih, 2018), and (Abdullah et all, 2017) study, each study reveals that
institutional ownership is not a variable affecting company value.

The Effect of Capital Ownership on Company Values on Property, Real Estate and building
Construction Companies which is listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange
Based on the second hypothesis testing result in Table 1, it is found that the capital structure as
measured by the Debt to Equity Ratio has a positive and significant effect on company value.
Companies that use debt in their operational activities will give a positive signal to investors because
companies that use debt bravely means that the company believes that they can pay off their debts
and manage debts as well as possible to produce a good investment activity in the company. As a
result, the higher the capital structure (debt to equity ratio), the more increase of company value.
The result of this study supports the statement from (Modigliani & Miller, 1963) which states that
by including corporate income tax, the use of debt will increase the company value, because the cost
of debt interest is cost that reduces tax payments. The higher the debt of a company, the higher the
interest cost. The amount of interest costs can increase the reduction of income, so that the taxes paid
will also be smaller. In addition, the signaling theory states that financing obtained through debt or
with its own capital can provide a signal providing guidance to investors. This signal will be used by
investors to assess good and bad corporate prospects in the future. Only healthy and strong
companies can be liable by taking the risk. So, the signal will affect company value.
The results of this study is supported by (Yando, 2018), where the results of his research found
that the capital structure had a positive and significant effect on company value. This can indicate that
the management of the company is able to pay a balance or comparison of company capital
originating from the source of debt (creditors) and at the same time the share of equity from the
owner (equity) to create company value reflects a balance that is both absolute and relative. This

641
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

research is also supported by (Wardhani et all, 2017), (Yuniati et all, 2016), (Pratiwi & Mertha, 2017)
and (Prastuti & Sudiartha, 2016) which find that capital structure has a positive and significant effect
on company value.

The Effects of Dividend Policy on Company Values on Property, Real Estate and building
Construction Companies which is listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange.
Based on the third hypothesis testing results as in Table 1, it is found that the dividend policy
measured by dividend payout ratio has a positive and significant effect on company value. Dividend
policy is an important aspect that aims to maximize company value. This dividend policy relates to
the policy on how much profit of the company to be distributed to shareholders. With the positive
influence of the dividend payout ratio variable on company value, the greater the dividend paid to
shareholders will cause the higher the company value. The amount of dividends distributed by
companies can affect stock prices, with high stock prices and followed by companies distributing
dividends consistently will attract investors to invest their funds in the company so that the company
value in the view of investors is higher.
The results of this study are in line with the theory of bird in the hand, where investors prefer
returns derived from dividends compared to capital gains. This policy is often seen as a signal for
investors in assessing the bad performance of a company and being a source of income for investors.
This research is also supported by the signaling theory that this theory explains that dividend policy
has information content and can be used as a sign for investors in the company's cash flow in the
future. The company's policy of paying high dividends has a positive information content (positive
signal) for investors about future profitability and free cash flow that will affect the company value.
The results of this study are in line with (Ayem & Nugroho, 2016) who state that the greater the
profit distributed to shareholders, the greater investor interest in the company so it increases the
company value. The result of this study is also supported a study conducted (Wardhani et al.,
2017),(Jiang, 2012), (Rizqia et all, 2013), (Yuniati et all, 2016), (Febrianti, 2012), (Artini & Puspaningsih,
2011), (Aditya & Supriyono, 2014), (Ghalandari, 2013) and (Prastuti & Sudiartha, 2016) found that
dividend policy has a positive and significant effect on company value. It can be concluded that the
market will assume the increase in dividends is a sign of an increase in the performance of the
company for current and the future situation.

The Effect of Company Growth on Ownership on Company Values on Property, Real Estate and
building Construction Companies which is listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange
Based on the fourth hypothesis testing result as in Table 1, it is found that company growth as
measured by growth assets do not affect the company value. This study shows that the high and low
growth of assets cannot be used to assess a company. That is because assets that are too high in the
company show unproductive assets that cannot generate high profits. And also supported because
investors not only see from the high and low growth of assets owned by the company, but more to
the operations of the company's active company and the good performance of the company's
management will be reflected in the financial statements will be more beneficial for investors in
making decisions whether to invest or not. Investors trust companies that are already established and
not growing. Therefore, if the company's growth is high, it will not affect the investor’s confidence so
it can be concluded that the company's growth does not affect the company value. The result of this
study is supported by (Dhani & Utama, 2017) a study conducted by (Sukriyawati, 2016), (Nadillah,
2017) found that company growth does not affect the company value.

Conclusion
Based on the analysis and discussion result of institutional ownership, capital structure, dividend
policy and company growth to company values in property real estate and building construction
companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange, on the conclusion note about institutional
ownership and company growth do not affect company value, while the capital structure variables

642
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

and dividend policies have a positive effect on company value. Based on the study result that has
been put forward, then to increase the company value, the researcher suggests: (1). On institutional
ownership variables, for shareholders or external parties are expected to further improve the routine
of monitoring activities to be carried out, such as empowering the institutional investors function,
empowering the monitoring function that will make the internal parties' movements especially
managers more limited so it can make limitation of scope for managers fraud, therefore increasing the
role of monitoring carried out by institutional investors will further increase the company value
observed from t price to book value (2). In the capital structure (debt to equity ratio) the
determination of capital structure by using debt at a certain level (as long as greater benefits,
additional debt is still allowed) as a source of funding which can increase the company value. (3). The
dividend policy variable is very important in determining the progress and survival of the company.
One of the decisions is to take a dividend policy that shares profits with shareholders in the form of
dividends that can increase the company value. In addition, company management is expected to be
able to do good cash management so that the amount of cash is very well as a result, the amount of
company cash is not excessive or deficient and adjusted to the company circumstances. (4). In the
company's growth variable, the value is still low so that the company is advised to pay attention to
the company growth rate, because investors also see companies whose high growth rates that can
manage the company itself. Thus, investors take more consideration for investment decisions.

References
Abdullah, N. A. I. N., Ali, M. M., & Haron, N. H. (2017). Ownership Structure , Firm Value And
Growth Opportunities : Malaysian Evidence. American Scientific Publishers, (August).
Https://Doi.Org/10.1166/Asl.2017.9479
Abidin, Z., Yusniar, M. W., & Ziyad, M. (2014). Pengaruh Struktur Modal, Kebijakan Dividen Dan
Size Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan (Studi Pada Perusahaan Properti Di Bursa Efek Indonesia).
Jurnal Wawasan Manajemen, 2(3), 91–102.
Adenugba, A. A., Ige, A. A., & Kesinro, O. R. (2016). Financial Leverage And Firms’ Value: A Study
Of Selected Firms In Nigeria. European Journal Of Research And Reflection In Management Sciences,
4(1), 14–32. Retrieved From Www.Idpublications.Org
Aditya, D., & Supriyono, E. (2014). Pengaruh Profitabilitas Dan Kepemilikan Institusional Terhadap
Nilai Perusahaan Dengan Kebijakan Dividen Sebagai Variabel Intervening Pada Perusahaan
Manufaktur Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia, 307–326.
Alpi, M. F. (2017). Studi Kebijakan Hutang : Anta Seden Dan Dampaknya Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan.
Jurnal Riset Finansial Bisnis, 1(2), 9–20. Https://Doi.Org/10.5281/Zenodo.1034686
Artini, L. G. S., & Puspaningsih, N. L. A. (2011). “Struktur Kepemilikan Dan Struktur Modal
Terhadap Kebijakan Dividen Dan Nilai Perusahaan”. Keuangan Dan Perbankan, 15(1), 66–75.
Ayem, S., & Nugroho, R. (2016). Pengaruh Profitabilitas, Struktur Modal, Kebijakan Deviden, Dan
Keputusan Investasi Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Akuntansi, 4(1), 31–39.
Brigham, E. F., & Houston, J. F. (2011). Dasar-Dasar Manajemen Keuangan. (S. Empat, Ed.). Jakarta.
Buchanan, B., Cao, C. X., & Chen, C. (2018). Corporate Social Responsibility, Firm Value, And
Influential Institutional Ownership. Journal Of Corporate Finance, 52, 73–95.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Jcorpfin.2018.07.004
Dewi, D. A. I. Y. M., & Sudiartha, G. M. (2017). Pengaruh Profitabilitas, Ukuran Perusahaan, Dan
Pertumbuhan Perusahaan Aset Terhadap Struktur Modal Dan Nilai Perusahaan. E-Jurnal
Manajemen Unud, 6(4), 2222–2252.
Dhani, I. P., & Utama, A. . G. S. (2017). Pengaruh Pertumbuhan Perusahaan, Struktur Modal, Dan
Profitabilitas Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Dan Bisnis Airlangga, 2(1), 135–
148.
Fama, E. (1978). The Effects Of A Firm’s Investment And Financing D. The American Economic Review,
68(3), 272–284.
Febrianti, M. (2012). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Nilai Perusahaan Pada Industri

643
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

Pertambangan Di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 14(2), 141–156.
Ghalandari, K. (2013). The Moderating Effects Of Growth Opportunities On The Relationship
Between Capital Structure And Dividend Policy And Ownership Structure With Firm Value In
Iran: Case Study Of Tehran Securities Exchange. Research Journal Of Applied Sciences, Engineering
And Technology, 5(4), 1424–1431.
Gusti, B. F. (2013). Pengaruh Free Cash Flow Dan Struktur Kepemilikan Saham Terhadap Kebijakan
Hutang Dengan Investment Opportunity Set Sebagai Variabel Moderating. Jurnal Akuntansi,
1(2), 1–25.
Harahap, L., & Wardhani, R. (2011). Analisis Komprehensif Pengaruh Family Ownership; Masalah
Keagenan; Kebijakan Dividen; Kebijakan Hutang; Corporate Governance Dan Opportunity
Growth Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Indonesia, 1–36.
Hasbi, H. (2015). Islamic Microfinance Institution: The Capital Structure, Growth, Performance And
Value Of Firm In Indonesia. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 211, 1073–1080.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Sbspro.2015.11.143
Hermuningsih, S. (2013). Pengaruh Profitabilitas , Growth Opportunity , Sruktur Modal Terhadap
Nilai Perusahaan Pada Perusahaan Publik Di Indonesia. Buletin Ekonomi Moneter Dan
Perbankan, 127–148.
Isshaq, Z., Bokpin, G. A., & Onumah, M. J. (2009). Corporate Oovernance, Ownership Structure, Cash
Holdings, And Firm Value On The Ghana Stock Exchange. Journal Of Risk Finance, 10(5), 488–
499. Https://Doi.Org/10.1108/15265940911001394
Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency Cost Of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, And Takeovers. American
Economic Review, 76(2), 323–329. Https://Doi.Org/10.2139/Ssrn.99580
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory Of The Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs
And Ownership Structure. Journal Of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/0304-405x(76)90026-X
Jiang, K. J. (2012). Capital Structure, Cost Of Debt And Dividend Payout Of Firms In New York Stock
Exchanges. International Journal Of Economics And Financial, 1(3), 117–125.
Karadeniz, E., Kandir, S. Y., Balcilar, M., & Onal, Y. B. (2009). Determinants Of Capital Structure:
Evidence From Turkish Lodging Companies. International Journal Of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 21(5), 594–609. Https://Doi.Org/10.1108/09596110910967827
Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. H. (1963). Corporate Income Taxes And The Cost Of Capital: A
Correction. American Economic Review, 3(53), 433–443.
Moh’d., M. A., Perry, R. (1998). The Impact Of Ownership Structure On Corporate Debt Policy : A
Time Series Cross Sectional Analysis. Financial Review, 33.
Myers, S. C. (1984). The Capital Structure Puzzel. The Journal Of Finance, Xxxix(3).
Nadillah, D. Y. (2017). Pengaruh Struktur Modal Dan Pertumbuhan Perusahaan Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan Yang Dimediasi Kinerja Keuangan Dengan Pengungkapan Corporate Social
Responsibility Sebagai Variabel Pemoderasi Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur Di Bursa Efek
Indonesia Tahun 2010-2014. Jom Fekon, 4(1), 1–15.
Nassar, S. (2016). The Impact Of Capital Structure On Financial Performance Of The Firms : Evidence
From Borsa Istanbul. Journal Of Business And Financial Affairs, 5(2), 5–8.
Https://Doi.Org/10.4172/2167-0234.100017
Nawaz, A., Ali, R., & Naseem, M. A. (2011). Relationship Between Capital Structure And Firms
Performance : A Case Of Textile Sector In Pakistan. International Journal, 3(January), 270–275.
Prasetia, T. E., Tommy, P., & Saerang, I. S. (2018). Struktur Modal; Ukuran Perusahaan Dan Risiko
Perusahaan Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Emba, 2(2), 879–889.
Prastuti, N. K. R., & Sudiartha, I. G. M. (2016). Pengaruh Struktur Modal, Kebijakan Dividen, Dan
Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur. E-Jurnal
Manajemen Unud, 5(3), 1572–1598.
Pratiwi, N. P. D., & Mertha, M. (2017). Pengaruh Kebijakan Hutang Dan Profitabilitas Pada Nilai
Perusahaan Dengan Kebijakan Dividen Sebagai Variabel Pemoderasi. E-Jurnal Akuntansi

644
 Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97

Universitas Udayana, 2(20), 1446–1475.

Rachman, N. A. (2016). Sektor Industri Food And Beverages Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia (
Bei ) Pada Tahun 2011- 2015. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Ekonomi, 5(5), 405–416.
Rakhimsyah, L. A., & Gunawan, B. (2011). Pengaruh Keputusan Investasi, Keputusan Pendanaan,
Kebijakan Dividen Dan Tingkat Suku Bunga Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Investasi Juni,
7(1), 31–45.
Rizqia, D. A., Aisjah, S., & Sumiati. (2013). Effect Of Managerial Ownership, Financial Leverage,
Profitability, Firm Size, And Investment Opportunity On Dividend Policy And Firm Value.
Research Journal Of Finance And Accounting, 4(11), 120–130.
Salvatore, D. (2011). Ekonomi Manajerial Dalam Perekonomian Global. (S. Empat, Ed.). Jakarta.
Seetanah, B., Seetah, K., Appadu, K., & Padachi, K. (2014). Capital Structure And Firm Performance:
Evidence From An Emerging Economy. The Business & Management Review, 4(4), 168–179.
Seftiani, & Ratih, H. (2011). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Struktur Modal Pada Perusahaan
Publik Sektor Manufaktur. Jurnal Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 13(1), 39–56.
Sofyaningsih, S., & Hardiningsih, P. (2011). Akuntansi Manajemen Perencanaan Dan Pembuatan
Keputusan Jangka Pendek. Jurnal Dinamikan Keuangan Dan Perbankan, 3(1), 57–59.
Sualehkhattak, M., & Hussain, C. M. (2017). Do Growth Opportunities Influence The Relationship Of
Capital Structure, Dividend Policy And Ownership Structure With Firm Value: Empirical
Evidence Of Kse? Journal Of Accounting & Marketing, 6(1), 1–11. Https://Doi.Org/10.4172/2168-
9601.1000216
Sugiarto, M. (2011). Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan Dan Kebijakan Dividen Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan Dengan Kebijakan Hutang Sebagai Intervening. Jurnal Akuntansi Kontemporer, 3(I),
1–25.
Sujoko, U., & Soebiantoro. (2007). Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan Saham, Leverage, Faktor Intern
Dan Faktor Ekstern Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Manajemen Dan Kewirausahaan, 9(1), 41–
48.
Sukriyawati, N. (2016). Pengaruh Struktur Modal Dan Pertumbuhan Perusahaan Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan Dengan Good Corporate Governance Sebagai Variabel Moderating. Jurnal
Akuntansi Manajerial, 1(2), 71–82.
Syardiana, G., Rodoni, A., & Putri, Z. E. (2015). Pengaruh Investment Opportunity Set , Struktur
Modal , Pertumbuhan Perusahaan ,. Jurnal Akuntabilitas, Viii(1), 39–46.
Titman, S., J., A., Keown, J., & John, D. M. (2014). Financial Management: Principles And Applications
(Edition 12). Usa: Pearson Education.
Vintila, G., & Gherghina, C. (2014). The Impact Of Ownership Concentration On Firm Value .
Empirical Study Of The Bucharest Stock Exchange Listed Companies, 15(14), 271–279.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00500-0
Wardhani, T. S., Chandrarin, G., & Rahman, A. F. (2017). Pengaruh Kepemilikan Institusional
Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Dengan Keputusan Investasi, Keputusan Pendanaan Dan
Kebijakan Dividen Sebagai Variabel Moderasi. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Akuntansi Keuangan Publik,
1(2), 93–110.
Widyaningsih, D. (2018). Kepemilikan Manajerial , Kepemilikan Institusional , Komisaris Independen
, Serta Komite Audit Pada Nilai Perusahaan Dengan Pengungkapan Csr Sebagai Variabel
Moderating Dan Firm Size Sebagai Variabel Kontrol. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Pajak, 19(1), 38–52.
Xiong, J. (2016). Institutional Investors , Dividend Policy And Firm Value Evidence From China. Open
Journal Of Social Science, (August), 120–126.
Yando, A. D. (2018). Pengaruh Struktur Modal Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Dengan Pertumbuhan
Perusahaan Dan Profitabilitas Sebagai Variabel Moderating. Jim Upb, 6(1), 1–11.
Yuliyanti, L. (2014). Pengaruh Keputusan Keuangan Dan Struktur Kepemilikan Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan. Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta.
Yuniati, M., Kharis, R., & Oemar, A. (2016). Journal Of Accounting, Volume 2 No.2 Maret 2016. Journal
Of Accounting, 2(2).

645