The value of a company is measured by the stock market value index, which is heavily influenced by investment opportunities and provides investors with a view of a company. This value provides investors with a view of the company and is usually related to the stock price; the higher the stock price, the higher the value of the company, which will provide prosperity to shareholders.

One factor that is considered to be able to influence the value of the company is manager ownership, which is measured by the percentage of shares owned by managers. Because of their focus on reducing risk, managers tend to do things that benefit themselves. If the risk is greater than the benefit, management will not try [1].

In addition to the managerial ownership factor, the company's value can also be influenced by institutional ownership. Investors believe that institutional ownership can help managers make decisions, because they have a large investment value in the capital market that allows them to function as a monitoring agent, and effective monitoring will benefit investors.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is part of its business strategy, to support the company's value in the future. Accountability can be met and information asymmetry can be reduced if the company reports and discloses its CSR activities to stakeholders. With CSR reporting and disclosure, stakeholders will be able to evaluate how CSR is implemented and provide awards/sanctions to the company according to their evaluation.

This study is about manufacturing companies listed on the IDX that have experienced an increase in the impact of tight competition in improving their company performance. All manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) will be the subject of research from 2020 to 2024. The selection of manufacturing companies as the population in this study is based on the fact that manufacturing companies are more easily affected by economic conditions. This is because, compared to other business industries, the manufacturing industry occupies the majority position. Due to the rapid growth of the manufacturing industry, increasing stock prices, and stock trading activities on the IDX, manufacturing companies have a high investor value compared to non-manufacturing industries.

Based on the 2024 Indonesian Manufacturing Sector Growth Data, it fell to 50.7 in June 2024,  from 52.1 in May 2024. Although it has remained in the expansion zone for 34 consecutive months, this figure is the lowest since May 2023 and is the third consecutive decline. This decline was mainly due to a significant increase in raw material costs, which was exacerbated by the weakening of the rupiah exchange rate by 5.9% against the US dollar throughout this year. On the other hand, product prices only increased slightly due to slowing demand. The obstacles in the development of the national manufacturing sector must be overcome immediately so that the performance of the national manufacturing sector remains optimal and the value of national manufacturing sector companies also remains stable by considering managerial ownership, institutional ownership, and CSR of manufacturing companies. Managerial ownership is often associated with efforts to increase company value because managers, in addition to being management and also owners of the company, will feel the direct impact of the right decisions. Institutional ownership is believed to be able to monitor managerial actions better than individual investors.

Agency Theory

According to Mecklin and Jensen, an agency relationship is a contract in which one or more people (principals) order another person (agent) to perform a service on behalf of the principal and delegate authority to the agent to make decisions [2].

Signal Theory

Signaling Theory was first proposed by Spence [3]. Spence [3] said that by giving a signal, the owner of the information tries to provide information that can be used by the recipient of the information. Furthermore, the recipient will adjust their behavior according to their understanding of the signal.

Managerial Ownership

The number of shares held by management who actively participate in decision making is known as the managerial ownership structure. It is measured based on the percentage of management shares at the end of the year. 

Institutional Ownership

Institutional Ownership is the ownership of shares in a company by institutions or agencies such as insurance companies, banks, investment companies and other institutional ownership. 

Company Values

The market price of a stock compared to its book value is known as the price to book value ratio. PBV is very important for capital market investment strategies because it allows investors to predict whether a stock is overpriced or underpriced based on the book value of the stock price [4]. 

Corporate Social Responsibilty (CSR)

According to Awuy et al. [5], Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a company's commitment to improving community welfare through policies in business practices and contributing company resources [6].

Hypothesis

If the manager's ownership of the company's shares is less than one hundred percent, the manager will act only in their own interests and no longer consider value in making funding decisions. The management (managers, directors, or commissioners) who actively participate in company decision-making and have the opportunity to own company shares are also known as managerial ownership. Managerial ownership is often associated with efforts to increase the value of the company because managers are not only managers but also direct owners of the company.

Research Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and Hutapea [8], Neni  and Puspita [9], Putri et al. [10], Spanyolia and Ulum [1] states that managerial ownership has an effect on company value. So the following hypothesis can be formulated:

• H1: Managerial Ownership Influences Company Value

Institutional investors are often referred to as "sophisticated investors" or "broker investors" because they have the skills and experience necessary to value companies so that they can provide appropriate prices for the shares being traded. In their role as managers of the company, they will seek to improve performance through decision-making that will increase the value of the company. Institutional investors are considered to have a better ability than individual investors to monitor the actions of managers [1].

Research Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and Hutapea [8], Neni  and Puspita [9], Putri et al. [10], Spanyolia and Ulum [1] states that institutional ownership has an effect on company value. So the following hypothesis can be formulated:

• H2: Institutional Ownership Influences Company Value

The proportion of share ownership is only part of the company, making managers tend to act for personal interests and not to maximize the company. This is what will eventually cause agency costs. Because it is almost impossible for a company to have zero agency costs in order to guarantee that managers will take optimal decisions from the shareholder's perspective because of differences [9].

Research Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and Hutapea [8], Neni  and Puspita [9], Putri et al. [10], Spanyolia and Ulum [1]  states that managerial ownership influences company value through CSR. So the following hypothesis can be formulated:

• H3: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) moderates the effect of managerial ownership on firm value

Management is a party contracted by shareholders to work for the interests of shareholders. Because they are elected, management must be accountable for all work to shareholders. Potential agency problems occur when the company's share ownership is less than one hundred percent [8]. 

Research Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and Hutapea [8], Neni  and Puspita [9], Putri et al. [10], Spanyolia and Ulum [1] states that institutional ownership influences company value through CSR. So the following hypothesis can be formulated:

• H4: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) moderates the effect of institutional ownership on firm value

The population in this study is the annual report of manufacturing companies listed on the IDX and the website of the related manufacturing companies as secondary data sources. Using purposive sampling technique for sample selection from manufacturing companies listed on the IDX. The data analysis method used is Mozerated Regression Analysis (MRA).

Based on the analysis results in Table 1, it can be seen that the Managerial Ownership variable (X1) shows an average value (mean) of 0.63. The lowest value of the Managerial Ownership variable (X1) is 0.34 and the highest value is 1. The standard deviation is 0.12. This means that the standard deviation value is close to the average value (mean) and the size of the data distribution is getting smaller. 

Based on the analysis results in Table 1, it can be seen that the variable Institutional Ownership (X2) shows an average value (mean) of 0.36. The lowest value of the variable Institutional Ownership (X2) is 0.01 and the highest value is 0.66. The standard deviation is 0.12. This means that the standard deviation value is approaching the average value (mean) and the size of the data distribution is getting smaller.

Based on the analysis results in Table 1, it can be seen that for the CSR variable (Z) shows an average value (mean) of 0.18. The lowest value of the CSR variable (Z) is 0.09 and the highest value is 0.37. The standard deviation is 0.05. This means that the standard deviation value is approaching the average value (mean) and the size of the data distribution is getting smaller. 

Based on the analysis results in Table 1, it can be seen that the Company Value (Y) variable shows an average value (mean) of 1.94. The lowest value of the Company Value (Y) variable is 0.11 and the highest value is 8.50. The standard deviation is 1.71. This means that the standard deviation value is approaching the average value (mean) and the size of the data distribution is getting smaller.

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics Results

Source: Processed data, 2025

Table 2: Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Results

Source: Processed data, 2025

This study uses multiple regression with Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA). Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA) or interaction test is a special application of multiple linear regression where the regression equation     contains       an      element        of     interaction (multiplication of two or more independent variables). This test is carried out to see the significance of the individual influence of the independent variables in the model on the dependent variable (Ghozali, 2021). The results of the multiple linear regression analysis of the research hypothesis can be seen in Table 2 as follows: 

The regression equation obtained from the test is:

Y = 0,074 + 0,553X₁ + 0,261X₂ + 0,206Z - 0,062X_1Z - 0,018X_2Z + e

From the multiple linear regression equation, it can be explained as follows:

• The constant in the regression equation is 0.074. This means that if other variables have a value of 0, then the Company Value (Y) is 0.074

• The regression coefficient value of the Managerial Ownership variable (X1) is 0.553. This means that if there is an increase in the Managerial Ownership variable (X1), then the value of the Company Value variable (Y) will increase by 0.553

• The regression coefficient value of the Institutional Ownership variable (X2) is 0.261. This means that if there is an increase in the Institutional Ownership variable (X2), then the value of the Company Value variable (Y) will increase by 0.261

• The regression coefficient value of the CSR variable (Z) is 0.206. This means that if there is an increase in the CSR variable (Z3), then the value of the Company Value variable (Y) will increase by 0.206

• The regression coefficient value of the Managerial Ownership variable (X1) is -0.062. This means that if there is an increase in the Managerial Ownership variable (X1), then the value of the Company Value variable (Y) will not change

• The regression coefficient value of the Institutional Ownership variable (X2) is -0.018. This means that if there is an increase in the Institutional Ownership variable (X2), then the value of the Company Value variable (Y) will not change

Table 3: t-Test Results

Sumber: Appendix 4

In this study, the level of significance used is 5% (0.05). Thus, if the level of significance is more than 0.05 and the calculated t value is greater than the table, then H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted, which indicates that there is a significant influence between the independent variable and its dependent variable. Conversely, if the level of significance is less than 0.05 and the calculated t value is less than tt, then H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted. The results of the t test are as follows:

Based on the Table 3, the magnitude of the influence of each independent variable on the dependent variable can be seen as follows:

• The influence of the Managerial Ownership variable (X1) on the Company Value variable (Y)

• Based on Table 3, it can be seen that the probability level (α) is 0.000. This means that Managerial Ownership has an effect on Company Value (Y). Because the significant value of the Managerial Ownership variable <0.05, it is proven to be true (H1 is accepted)

• The influence of the Institutional Ownership variable (X2) on the Company Value variable (Y)

• Based on Table 3, it can be seen that the probability level (α) is 0.000. This means that Institutional Ownership has an effect on Company Value (Y). Because the significant value of the Institutional Ownership variable is <0.05, it is proven to be true (H2 is accepted)

• The influence of the Managerial Ownership variable (X1) on the Company Value variable (Y) through CSR (Z)

• Based on Table 3, it can be seen that the probability level (α) is 0.236. This means that CSR does not moderate the effect of Managerial Ownership on Company Value (Y) through CSR (Z) (H3 is rejected).

• The influence of the Institutional Ownership variable (X2) on the Company Value variable (Y) through CSR (Z)

• Based on Table 3, it can be seen that the probability level (α) is 0.741. This means that CSR does not moderate the influence of Institutional Ownership on Company Value (Y) through CSR (Z) (H4 is rejected)

The Influence of Managerial Ownership on Company Value 

The results of the multiple linear regression analysis on the t-test against the first hypothesis (H1) can be seen in Table 3 that Managerial Ownership has an effect on Company Value by looking at the significance level which is 0.000 and the regression coefficient is positive, meaning that the higher the Managerial Ownership, the higher the Company Value (H1 is accepted).

If the manager's ownership of the company's shares is less than one hundred percent, the manager will act only in their own interests and no longer consider value in making funding decisions. The management (managers, directors, or commissioners) who actively participate in company decision-making and have the opportunity to own company shares are also known as managerial ownership. Managerial ownership is often associated with efforts to increase the value of the company because managers are not only managers but also direct owners of the company [10]. 

The results of this study are in line with previous research conducted by Research Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and Hutapea [8], Neni  and Puspita [9], Putri et al. [10], Spanyolia and Ulum [1] states that managerial ownership influences company value.

The Influence of Institutional Ownership on Company Value

The results of the multiple linear regression analysis on the t-test on the second hypothesis (H2) can be seen in Table 3 that Institutional Ownership has an effect on Company Value by looking at the significance level which is 0.000 and the regression coefficient is positive, meaning that the higher the Institutional Ownership, the higher the Company Value (H2 is accepted). 

Institutional investors are often referred to as "sophisticated investors" or "broker investors" because they have the skills and experience necessary to value companies so that they can provide appropriate prices for the shares being traded. In their role as managers of the company, they will seek to improve performance through decision-making that will increase the value of the company. Institutional investors are considered to have a better ability than individual investors to monitor the actions of managers [1].

The results of this study are in line with previous research conducted by Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and Hutapea [8], Neni  and Puspita [9], Putri et al. [10], Spanyolia and Ulum [1] states that institutional ownership influences company value.

The Effect of Managerial Ownership on Firm Value Moderated by CSR

The results of the multiple linear regression analysis on the t-test on the third hypothesis (H3) can be seen in Table 3 that CSR does not moderate the influence of Managerial Ownership on Company Value by looking at the significance level, which is 0.236 (H3 is rejected).

CSR is not strong enough or relevant enough to influence market perceptions of the role of management. Investors or stakeholders focus more on fundamental aspects such as profit, risk, or growth, rather than on the company's social activities. CSR only functions as a symbol (window dressing) and does not provide a real impact on the value of the company in the context of managerial ownership. The results of the analysis show that CSR does not act as a moderating variable in the relationship between managerial ownership and company value. This indicates that CSR activities carried out by the company do not strengthen or weaken the influence of managerial ownership on increasing company value.

The results of this study are not in line with previous research conducted by Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and Hutapea [8], Neni  and Puspita [9], Putri et al. [10], Spanyolia and Ulum [1] states that managerial ownership influences company value through CSR.

The Effect of Institutional Ownership on Firm Value Moderated by CSR

The results of the multiple linear regression analysis on the t-test on the fourth hypothesis (H4) can be seen in Table 3 that CSR does not moderate the influence of Institutional Ownership on Company Value by looking at the significance level, which is 0.236 (H4 is rejected).

Institutional investors already value companies based on key financial indicators, so CSR activities do not add value to them. CSR is not yet strategic or integrated enough into business processes so that it does not influence institutional perceptions of company value. The market does not yet value CSR as a determinant of value, especially if CSR is symbolic and does not have a real impact. The research findings show that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) does not moderate the relationship between institutional ownership and company value. This indicates that institutional involvement as shareholders is not influenced by corporate social responsibility activities in determining company value. Thus, CSR has not been able to function as a strategic factor that strengthens the relationship between institutional control and increased company value.

The results of this study are not in line with previous research conducted by Putra, Altania and Tanno [7], Doloksaribu and  Hutapea  [8],  Neni  and  Puspita  [9], Putri et al. [10] and Spanyolia and Ulum [1] states that institutional ownership influences company value through CSR.

• The test results on the influence of Managerial Ownership on Company Value show a significant positive influence. This proves that the higher the Managerial Ownership, the higher the Company Value. 

• The test results on the influence of Institutional Ownership on Company Value show a significant positive influence. This proves that the higher the Institutional Ownership, the higher the Company Value.

• The test results show that CSR does not moderate the influence of Managerial Ownership on Company Value.

• The test results show that CSR does not moderate the influence of Institutional Ownership on Company Value. 

Suggestion

• For further researchers, it is better to use other variables such as Foreign Ownership, Independent Commissioners, Audit Committee, etc.

• For further researchers, it is hoped that they can use samples of Service Companies in Indonesia and increase the number of observation periods to 10 years.

1. Spanyolia Agassi, D., and Ulum, A. S. U. "Determination of a firm value with CSR as a moderation variable." Jurnal Manajemen Dan Keuangan, vol. 12, no. 1, 2023, https://doi.org/10.33059/jmk.v12i1.4484.

2. Aryawati, N. P. A. Manajemen Keuangan. 2022.

3. Spence, Michael. "Job market signaling." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 87, no. 3, Aug. 1973, pp. 355–374.

4. Hsu, C. C. "The role of the core competence and core resource features of a sharing economy on the achievement of SDGs 2030." Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, vol. 8, no. 1, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100283.

5. Awuy et al. "Pengaruh pengungkapan corporate social responsibility (CSR) terhadap earnings response coefficient (ERC): Suatu studi empiris pada perusahaan pertambangan yang terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia pada tahun 2010-2013." Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan, vol. 18, no. 1, 2016.

6. Dianty, A. "The effect of applying green accounting on firm value and financial performance as an intervening variable." Jurnal Ekbis Analisis, Prediksi, Dan Informasi, vol. 23, no. 2, 2022, pp. 369–382.

7. Altania, S., and Tanno, A. "The effect of managerial ownership and institutional ownership on company financial performance." Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen, Ekonomi, & Akuntansi (MEA), vol. 7, no. 1, 2023, https://doi.org/10.31955/mea.v7i1.2924.

8. Doloksaribu, E. A., and Hutapea, J. Y. "The effect of managerial ownership, institutional ownership, independent commissioners, and audit committee on company value (IDX 30 2018-2020)." JIIP - Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan, vol. 5, no. 9, 2022, https://doi.org/10.54371/jiip.v5i9.969.

9. Neni Meidawati, and Puspita, O. D. "Determinants of firm value with CSR as moderating variables." International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy, vol. 5, no. 2, 2023, https://doi.org/10.36096/ijbes.v5i2.408.

10. Putri, K. et al. "Determinants of firm value: With corporate social responsibility (CSR) as moderation (Case study of mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for the 2019-2021 period)." East Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, vol. 2, no. 10, 2023, https://doi.org/10.55927/eajmr.v2i10.6407.