营运资金管理外文文献

公司营运资金管理问题研究的国内外文献综述1 国外研究现状20世纪末，国外已有大量学者对营运资金进行研究，并将理论知识与企业管理相结合，从不同视角研究营运资金的管理，逐步开始从整体视角寻求最优管理方案，以达到综合管理的效果。

斯特恩开创了渠道行为理论的研究先河。

他在1969年的文章中指出，渠道中每个成员的利益冲突与其他成员的依赖程度有关。

此后的学者在他研究的基础上对渠道行为理论继续进行探究。

布朗等学者认为冲突不是静态的分销渠道，而是一个动态过程，衡量显著冲突最有效的方法是观察争议频率和冲突强度。

在20世纪40年代初期，美国学者康弗斯和胡基对渠道结构进行了深入研究。

他们提出了渠道纵向一体化的概念，并阐述了采购和销售渠道的存货的确定性和一体化问题与营销费用的高低之间的关系。

进一步给关于渠道的学术研究带来了如何协调和管理的问题。

Sandip Dhole et al.（2023）指出拥有高效营运资本管理的公司今后不太可能在财务上受到限制，资金受限、营运资本管理效率高的公司估值较高。

[i] Wagner Enoc Vicente-Ramos et al.（2024）指出改善营运资本的管理能够提高效率、效力和竞争力，如果它能够有效地管理财政资源、公平的客户信贷政策、适当的库存管理以及供应商杠杆和短期的适当管理，就能做到这一点。

[ii] 2 国内研究现状直至1993年我国才开始实行与国际接轨的会计制度,在此之前国内甚至尚未对营运资金进行界定,在此阶段，国内的研究人员对于营运资金的研究成果明显落后于国外,但现如今有越来越多的学者投入到营运资金的研究中。

顾健（1995）指出如今国际市场逐渐呈现出趋势是消费和投资的多样化，多销售渠道的多样化在一定程度上也为企业带来潜在的经营风险，大致上可以分为两种：一种是经营目标的冲突，另一种是渠道内信息传递的失灵。

销售渠道管理的内容是庞杂且繁琐的,需要配以高度的技巧加以实施,管理的主要内容是对渠道内的各个成员的角色、功能、目标进行明确的规定,同时经常注意收集市场信息,了解分销商的各种需要,并努力满足分销商的要求,并建立起伙伴关系,并努力保持这种关系,认为销售渠道管理的中心内容是两个词:协调和控制。

1引言营运资金的健康管理是企业实现利润价值最大化的关键保障。

目前，国内外关于企业营运资金管理的相关研究，主要立足相关理论基础，着眼于供应链集成的优化研究。

2营运资金管理目标研究综述Hampton D.Hager强调在企业生产经营过程中，资金有效的循环使用有利于企业利润的快速沉淀[1]。

提出加快现金流转速度的措施，进一步充分肯定了营运资金管理在企业生产经营过程中举足轻重的地位。

毛付根认为国外企业普遍重视现金流量的变动，资金紧缺对于国内外的企业来讲，它都是一个共同存在的国际通病。

现金流量的不稳定性和非协调一致性，促使企业必须保持一个适量平衡的净营运资本水平。

国内外关于营运资金管理目标的早期研究，主要表现在营运资金能够为企业创造流动的资金价值，在企业的生产经营过程中，维持一个相对平衡的净营运资本水平，可以帮助企业实现较多利润价值最大化[2]。

3营运资金管理内容研究综述20世纪80年代以后，随着全球市场经济开放，企业经营活动范围向着多元化、国际化的方向扩展，国外对营运资金管理的研究内容，也着眼于企业发展的战略层次，学术界对营运资金开始进行系统化、全面化的研究。

Vickery S K研究企业与其供应链环节中战略合作伙伴之间的协同经营，研究发现供应链的集成效应并没有显著影响企业的经营利润，企业并未因此创造更多的资产报酬。

Das A提出企业应该优化供应链结构，而不应该过分注重供应链的集成效应，以期降低企业的经营风险，提高企业的经营业绩。

但这一阶段的研究缺少专门针对企业营运资金管理状况的实证调查，研究过程忽略了资金运动环节上，营运资金管理活动与企业内外部经营环境的协同反应，缺失了营运资金管理专项数据平台的支持，使得研究结论不能更好地解决企业经营活动中存在的现实问题。

杨雄胜、缪艳娟提出营运资金管理的理想状态是企业流动资产中的经常性资金与流动负债中的生产经营性负债的经常性资金平衡匹配，这样企业资本的流动成本很低，在此基础上，他对营运资金管理效率的评价指标划分时期指标和时点指标，提出平均应收账款周期和逾期率的概念。

An Analysis of Working Capital Management Results Across IndustriesGreg Filbeck. Schweser Study ProgramThomas M. Krueger. University of Wisconsin-La Crosse AbstractFirms are able to reduce financing costs and/or increase the funds available for expansion by minimizing the amount of funds tied up in current assets. We provide insights into the performance of surveyed firms across key components of working capital management by using the CFO magazine’s annual Working Capital Management Survey. We discover that significant differences exist between industries in working capital measures across time. In addition. we discover that these measures for working capital change significantly within industries across time.IntroductionThe importance of efficient working capital management is indisputable. Working capital is the difference between resources in cash or readily convertible into cash (Current Assets) and organizational commitments for which cash will soon be required (Current Liabilities). The objective of working capital management is to maintain the optimum balance of each of the working capital components. Business viability relies on the ability to effectively manage receivables. inventory. and payables. Firms are able to reduce financing costs and/or increase the funds available for expansion by minimizing the amount of funds tied up in current assets. Much managerial effort is expended in bringing non-optimal levels of current assets and liabilities back toward optimal levels. An optimal level would be one in which a balance is achieved between risk and efficiency.A recent example of business attempting to maximize working capital management is the recurrent attention being given to the application of Six Sigma® methodology. Six Sigma® methodologies help companies measure and ensure quality in all areas of the enterprise. When used to identify and rectify discrepancies. inefficiencies and erroneous transactions in the financial supply chain. Six Sigma® reduces Days Sales Outstanding (DSO). accelerates the payment cycle. improves customer satisfaction and reduces the necessary amount and cost of working capital needs. There appear to be many success stories. including Jennifer Towne’s (2002) r eport of a 15 percent decrease in days that sales are outstanding. resulting in an increased cash flow of approximately $2 million at Thibodaux Regional Medical Center. Furthermore. bad debts declined from $3.4 million to $600.000. However. Waxer’s (2003) study of multiple firms employing Six Sigma® finds that it is really a “get rich slow” technique with a rate of return hovering in the 1.2 – 4.5 percent range.Even in a business using Six Sigma® methodology. an “optimal” level of working capital management needs to be identified.Even in a business using Six Sigma® methodology. an “optimal” level of working capital management needs to be identified. Industry factors may impact firm credit policy. inventory management. and bill-paying activities. Some firms may be better suited to minimize receivables and inventory. while others maximize payables. Another aspect of “optimal” is the extent to which poor financial results can be tied to sub-optimal performance. Fortunately. these issues are testable with data published by CFO magazine. which claims to be the source of “tools and information for the financial executive.” and are the subject of this research.In addition to providing mean and variance values for the working capital measures and the overall metric. two issues will be addressed in this research. One research question is. “are firms within a particular industry clustered together at consistent levels of working capital measures?” For instance. are firms in one industry able to quickly transfer sales into cash. while firms from another industry tend to have high sales levels for the particular level of inventory . The other research question is. “does working capital management performance for firms within a given industry change from year-to-year?”The following section presents a brief literature review. Next. the research method is described. including some information about the annual Working Capital Management Survey published by CFO magazine. Findings are then presented and conclusions are drawn.Related LiteratureThe importance of working capital management is not new to the finance literature. Over twenty years ago. Largay and Stickney (1980) reported that the then-recent bankruptcy of W.T. Grant. a nationwide chain of department stores. should have been anticipated because the corporation had been running a deficit cash flow from operations for eight of the last ten years of its corporate life. As part of a study of the Fortune 500’s financial management practices. Gilbert and Reichert (1995) find that accounts receivable management models are used in 59 percent of these firms to improve working capital projects. while inventory management models were used in 60 percent of the companies. More recently. Farragher. Kleiman and Sahu (1999) find that 55 percent of firms in the S&P Industrial index complete some form of a cash flow assessment. but did not present insights regarding accounts receivable and inventory management. or the variations of any current asset accounts or liability accounts across industries. Thus. mixed evidence exists concerning the use of working capital management techniques.Theoretical determination of optimal trade credit limits are the subject of many articles over the years (e.g.. Schwartz 1974; Scherr 1996). with scant attention paid to actual accounts receivable management. Across a limitedsample. Weinraub and Visscher (1998) observe a tendency of firms with low levels of current ratios to also have low levels of current liabilities. Simultaneously investigating accounts receivable and payable issues. Hill. Sartoris. and Ferguson (1984) find differences in the way payment dates are defined. Payees define the date of payment as the date payment is received. while payors view payment as the postmark date. Additional WCM insight across firms. industries. and time can add to this body of research.Maness and Zietlow (2002. 51. 496) presents two models of value creation that incorporate effective short-term financial management activities. However. these models are generic models and do not consider unique firm or industry influences. Maness and Zietlow discuss industry influences in a short paragraph that includes the observation that. “An industry a company is located in may have more influence on that company’s fortun es than overall GNP” (2002. 507). In fact. a careful review of this 627-page textbook finds only sporadic information on actual firm levels of WCM dimensions. virtually nothing on industry factors except for some boxed items with titles such as. “Should a Retailer Offer an In-House Credit Card” (128) and nothing on WCM stability over time. This research will attempt to fill this void by investigating patterns related to working capital measures within industries and illustrate differences between industries across time.An extensive survey of library and Internet resources provided very few recent reports about working capital management. The most relevant set of articles was Weisel and Bradley’s (2003) article on cash flow management and one of inventory control as a result of effective supply chain management by Hadley (2004).Research MethodThe CFO RankingsThe first annual CFO Working Capital Survey. a joint project with REL Consultancy Group. was published in the June 1997 issue of CFO (Mintz and Lezere 1997). REL is a London. England-based management consulting firm specializing in working capital issues for its global list of clients. The original survey reports several working capital benchmarks for public companies using data for 1996. Each company is ranked against its peers and also against the entire field of 1.000 companies. REL continues to update the original information on an annual basis.REL uses the “cash flow from operations” value located on firm cash flow statements to estimate cash conversion efficiency (CCE). This value indicates how well a company transforms revenues into cash flow. A “days of working capital” (DWC) value is based on the dollar amount in each of the aggregate. equally-weighted receivables. inventory. and payables ac counts. The “days of working capital” (DNC) represents the time period between purchase of inventory on acccount from vendor until the sale to the customer. the collection of the receivables. and payment receipt. Thus. it reflects the company’s ability to finance its core operations with vendor credit. A detailedinvestigation of WCM is possible because CFO also provides firm and industry values for days sales outstanding (A/R). inventory turnover. and days payables outstanding (A/P).Research FindingsAverage and Annual Working Capital Management Performance Working capital management component definitions and average values for the entire 1996 – 2000 period . Across the nearly 1.000 firms in the survey. cash flow from operations. defined as cash flow from operations divided by sales and referred to as “cash conversion efficiency” (CCE). averages 9.0 percent. Incorporating a 95 percent confidence interval. CCE ranges from 5.6 percent to 12.4 percent. The days working capital (DWC). defined as the sum of receivables and inventories less payables divided by daily sales. averages 51.8 days and is very similar to the days that sales are outstanding (50.6). because the inventory turnover rate (once every 32.0 days) is similar to the number of days that payables are outstanding (32.4 days). In all instances. the standard deviation is relatively small. suggesting that these working capital management variables are consistent across CFO reports.Industry Rankings on Overall Working Capital Management PerformanceCFO magazine provides an overall working capital ranking for firms in its survey. using the following equation:Industry-based differences in overall working capital management are presented for the twenty-six industries that had at least eight companies included in the rankings each year. In the typical year. CFO magazine ranks 970 companies during this period. Industries are listed in order of the mean overall CFO ranking of working capital performance. Since the best average ranking possible for an eight-company industry is 4.5 (this assumes that the eight companies are ranked one through eight for the entire survey). it is quite obvious that all firms in the petroleum industry must have been receiving very high overall working capital management rankings. In fact. the petroleum industry is ranked first in CCE and third in DWC (as illustrated in Table 5 and discussed later in this paper). Furthermore. the petroleum industry had the lowest standard deviation of working capital rankings and range of working capital rankings. The only other industry with a mean overall ranking less than 100 was the Electric & Gas Utility industry. which ranked second in CCE and fourth in DWC. The two industries with the worst working capital rankings were Textiles and Apparel. Textiles rank twenty-second in CCE and twenty-sixth in DWC. The apparel industry ranks twenty-third and twenty-fourth in the two working capital measuresConclusionsThe research presented here is based on the annual ratings of working capital management published in CFO magazine. Our findings indicate a consistency in how industries “stack up” against each other over time with respect to the working capital measures. However. the working capitalmeasures themselves are not static (i.e.. averages of working capital measures across all firms change annually); our results indicate significant movements across our entire sample over time. Our findings are important because they provide insight to working capital performance across time. and on working capital management across industries. These changes may be in explained in part by macroeconomic factors. Changes in interest rates. rate of innovation. and competition are likely to impact working capital management. As interest rates rise. there would be less desire to make payments early. which would stretch accounts payable. accounts receivable. and cash accounts.The ramifications of this study include the finding of distinct levels of WCM measures for different industries. which tend to be stable over time. Many factors help to explain this discovery. The improving economy during the period of the study may have resulted in improved turnover in some industries. while slowing turnover may have been a signal of troubles ahead. Our results should be interpreted cautiously. Our study takes places over a short time frame during a generally improving market. In addition. the survey suffers from survivorship bias – only the top firms within each industry are ranked each year and the composition of those firms within the industry can change annually.Further research may take one of two lines. First. there could be a study of whether stock prices respond to CFO magazine’s publication of working capital management ratings. Second. there could be a study of which. if any. of the working capital management components relate to share price performance. Given our results. these studies need to take industry membership into consideration when estimating stock price reaction to working capital management performance.外文翻译:对整个行业中营运资金管理的研究格雷格Filbeck.Schweser学习计划托马斯M克鲁格.威斯康星大学拉克罗斯摘要:企业能够降低融资成本或者尽量减少绑定在流动资产上的成立基金数额来用于扩大现有的资金。

文献出处：Sunday K J. Effective Working Capital Management in Small and Medium Scale Enterprises (SMEs)[J]. International Journal of Business & Management, 2011, 6(9)：271-279.第一部分为译文，第二部分为原文。

默认格式：中文五号宋体，英文五号Times New Roma，行间距1.5倍。

中小企业有效的营运资金管理摘要：中小企业（SME）的主要有效流动资金管理的需求对中小企业的偿付能力和流动性仍然至关重要。

大多数中小企业不关心他们的流动资金状况，大多数人很少考虑到他们的流动资金状况，这些企业大多数都没有标准的信贷政策。

许多人不关心他们的财务状况，他们只是经营，他们主要关注现金收据和他们的银行账户。

本研究使用标准流动资金比率来衡量所选企业的流动资金的有效性，所选择的公司显示过度交易和流动性不足的迹象，关注的是利润最大化，而没有认识到债权人的支付，这些公司的债务回报率低于信贷支付。

建议中小企业在尼日利亚经济中生存下去，必须制定标准的信贷政策，确保良好的财务报告和管理制度，他们必须充分认识到营运资金的管理，以确保连续性，增长和偿付能力。

关键词：中小企业（SME），营运资金管理，流动资金，偿付能力引言中小企业业务仍然是一个国家经济增长和发展最有活力的力量和代理人。

中小企业至少占美国国内生产总值的60％（Ovia，2001年）尼日利亚的中小企业全部在我们周围，只有少数几个中小企业才能成为最受欢迎的企业。

中小企业是几个新兴行业的重大突破。

美国（IT）的大部分突破都是由中小企业推动的。

当时公司是一家小规模企业，由盖茨（Paul Gates）和保罗·艾伦（Paul Allen）于1980年开发的微软磁盘操作系统（MS Dos）在全球拥有约80％的运营成本。

文献信息：文献标题：Impact of Aggressive Working Capital Management Policy on Firms’ Profitability（激进的营运资本管理政策对企业盈利能力的影响）国外作者：Mian Sajid Nazir，Talat Afza文献出处：《The IUP Journal of Applied Finance》,2009,Vol.15,PP19-30 字数统计：英文2669单词，14456字符；中文4407汉字外文文献：Impact of Aggressive Working Capital Management Policyon Firms’ ProfitabilityIntroductionThe corporate finance literature has traditionally focused on the study of long-term financial decisions, particularly investments, capital structure, dividends or company valuation decisions. However, short-term assets and liabilities are important components of total assets and need to be carefully analyzed. Management of these short-term assets and liabilities warrants a careful investigation since the working capital m anagement plays an important role in a firm’s profitability and risk as well as its value (Smith, 1980). Efficient management of working capital is a fundamental part of the overall corporate strategy in creating the shareholders’ value. Firms try to keep an optimal level of working capital that maximizes their value (Deloof, 2003; Howorth and Westhead, 2003 and Afza and Nazir, 2007).In general, from the perspective of Chief Financial Officer (CFO), working capital management is a simple and straightforward concept of ensuring the ability of the organization to fund the difference between the short-term assets and short-term liabilities (Harris, 2005). However, a ‘Total’ approach is desired as it can cover all thecompany’s activities relating to vendor, cu stomer and product (Hall, 2002). In practice, working capital management has become one of the most important issues in the organizations where many financial executives are struggling to identify the basic working capital drivers and an appropriate level of working capital (Lamberson, 1995). Consequently, companies can minimize risk and improve the overall performance by understanding the role and drivers of working capital management.A firm may adopt an aggressive working capital management policy with a low level of current assets as a percentage of total assets, or it may also be used for the financing decisions of the firm in the form of high level of current liabilities as a percentage of total liabilities. Excessive levels of current assets may have a negative effect on the firm’s profitability, whereas a low level of current assets may lead to a lower level of liquidity and stockouts, resulting in difficulties in maintaining smooth operations (Van Horne and Wachowicz, 2004).The main objective of working capital management is to maintain an optimal balance between each of the working capital components. Business success heavily depends on the financial executives’ ability to effectively manage receivables, inventory, and payables (Filbeck and Krueger, 2005). Firms can reduce their financing costs and/or increase the funds available for expansion projects by minimizing the amount of investment tied up in current assets. Most of the financial managers’ time and efforts are allocated towards bringing non-optimal levels of current assets and liabilities back to optimal levels (Lamberson, 1995). An optimal level of working capital would be the one in which a balance is achieved between risk and efficiency. It requires continuous monitoring to maintain proper level in various components of working capital, i.e., cash receivables, inventory and payables, etc.In general, current assets are considered as one of the important components of total assets of a firm. A firm may be able to reduce the investment in fixed assets by renting or leasing plant and machinery, whereas the same policy cannot be followed for the components of working capital. The high level of current assets may reduce the risk of liquidity associated with the opportunity cost of funds that may have been invested in long-term assets. Though the impact of working capital policies onprofitability is highly important, only a few empirical studies have been carried out to examine this relationship. This study investigates the potential relationship of aggressive/conservative policies with the accounting and market measures of profitability of Pakistani firms using a panel data set for the period 1998-2005. The present study is expected to contribute to better understand these policies and their impact on profitability, especially in emerging markets like Pakistan.Research MethodologyVariables Used in the StudyThis study uses aggressive investment policy as used by Weinraub and Visscher (1998), who analyzed working capital policies of 126 industrial firms in the US market. Aggressive Investment Policy (AIP) results in minimal level of investment in current assets versus fixed assets. In contrast, a conservative investment policy places a greater proportion of capital in liquid assets with the opportunity cost of less profitability. If the level of current assets increases in proportion to the total assets of the firm, the management is said to be more conservative in managing the current assets of the firm. In order to measure the degree of aggressiveness of working capital investment policy, the following ratio was used:where a lower ratio means a relatively aggressive policy.On the other hand, an Aggressive Financing Policy (AFP) utilizes higher levels of current liabilities and less long-term debt. In contrast, a conservative financing policy uses more long-term debt and capital and less current liabilities. The firms are more aggressive in terms of current liabilities management if they are concentrating on the use of more current liabilities which put their liquidity on risk. The degree of aggressiveness of a financing policy adopted by a firm is measured by working capital financing policy, and the following ratio is used:where a higher ratio means a relatively aggressive policy.The impact of working capital policies on the profitability has been analyzed through accounting measures of profitability as well as market measures of profitability, i.e., Return on Assets (ROA) and Tobin’s q. These variables of return are calculated as:Tobin’s q compares the value of a company given by financial markets with the value of a company’s assets. A low q (between 0 and 1) means that the cost to replace a firm’s assets is greater than the value of its stock. This implies that the stock is undervalued. Conversely, a high q (greater than 1) implies that a firm’s stock is more expensive than the replacement cost of its assets, which implies that the stock is overvalued. It is calculated as:where Market Value of Firm (MVF) is the sum of book value of long plus short term and market value of equity. Market value of equity is calculated by multiplying the number of shares outstanding with the current market price of the stock in a particular year.Control VariablesIn working capital literature, various studies have used the control variables along with the main variables of working capital in order to have an apposite analysis of working capital management on the profitability of firms (Lamberson, 1995; Smith and Begemann, 1997; Deelof, 2003; Eljelly, 2004; Teruel and Solano, 2005 and Lazaridis and Tryfonidis, 2006). On the same lines, along with working capital variables, the present study has taken into consideration some control variables relating to firms such as the size of the firm, the growth in its sales, and its financial leverage. The size of the firm (SIZE) has been measured by the logarithm of its totalassets, as the original large value of total assets may disturb the analysis. The growth of firm (GROWTH) is measured by variation in its annual sales value with reference to previous year’s sales[(Sales t –Sales t –1)/Sales t –1]. Moreover, the financial leverage (LVRG) was taken as the debt to equity ratio of each firm for the whole sample period. Some studies, like Deloof (2003) in his study of large Belgian firms, also considered the ratio of fixed financial assets to total assets as a control variable; however, this variable cannot be included in the present study because of unavailability of data, as most of the firms do not disclose full information in their financial statements. Finally, since good economic conditions tend to be reflected in a firm’s profitability (Lamberson, 1995), this phenomenon has been controlled for the evolution of the economic cycle using the GDPGR variable, which measures the real annual GDP growth in Pakistan for each of the study year from 1998 to 2005.Statistical AnalysisThe impact of aggressive and conservative working capital policies on the profitability of the firms has been evaluated by applying the panel data regression analysis. The performance variables (ROA and Tobin’s q) as well as the TCA/TA and TCL/TA along with the control variables were regressed using the SPSS software. The following regression equations are run to estimate the impact of working capital policies on the profitability measures.where,TCA/TA=Total current assets to total assets ratioTCL/TA i=Total current liabilities to total assets ratioROA i=Return on assetsTobin’s q i=V alue of qSIZE i=Natural log of firm sizeGROWTH i=Growth of salesLVRG i=Financial leverage of firmsGDPGR i=Real Annual GDP growth rate of Pakistanα=Intercept; andε=Error term of the modelSample and DataThe sample of the study consists of all non-financial firms listed on the Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE). KSE has divided the non-financial firms into various industrial sectors based on their nature of business. In order to be included in the sample, a firm must be in business for the whole study period. Also, firms should neither have been delisted by the KSE nor merged with any other firm during the whole window period. New incumbents in the market during the study period have also not been included in the sample. Furthermore, firms must have complete data for the period 1998-2005. Firms with negative equity during the study period have also been excluded. Thus, the final sample consists of 204 non-financial firms from 17 various industrial sectors.This study used annual financial data of 204 non-financial firms for the period 1998-2005. The panel data set was developed for eight years and for the 204 sampled firms which produced 1,632 year-end observations. The required financial data for the purpose of the study was obtained from the respective companies’annual reports and publications of State Bank of Pakistan. The data regarding annual average market prices was collected from the daily quotations of KSE.AnalysisTable 1 presents the results of regression model in which the impact of working capital investment policy on the performance measurements has been examined. The F-values of regression models run are found statistically significant, whereas Durbin-Watson statistics of more than 1.8 indicate less correlation among the independent variables of the regressions models. The t-statistics of working capital investment policy is positive and statistically significant at 1% level for Return on Assets and Tobin’s q. The positive coefficient of TCA/TA indicates a negative relationship between the degree of aggressiveness of investment policy and return on assets. As the TCA/TA increases, the degree of aggressiveness decreases, and return on assets increases. Therefore, there is a negative relationship between the relative degree of aggressiveness of working capital investment policies of firms and both performance measures, i.e., ROA and Tobin’s q. This similarity in market and accounting returns confirms the notion that investors do not believe in the adoption of aggressive approach in the working capital management, hence, they do not give any additional weight to the firms on KSE.Table 2 reports regression results for working capital financing policy and the performance measures. The F-value of regression models and Durbin-Watson statistics indicate similar results as reported in Table 1. The negative value of coefficient for TCL/TA also points out the negative relationship between the aggressiveness of working capital financing policy and return on assets. The higher the TCL/TA ratio, the more aggressive the financing policy, that yields negative return on assets. However, surprisingly, the relationship between Tobin’s q and working capital financing policy has been established as positive and statistically significant. Investors were found giving more weight to the firms which are adopting an aggressive approach towards working capital financing policy and having higher levels of short-term and spontaneous financing on their balance sheets.The control variables used in the regression models are natural log of firm size, sales growth, real GDP growth and the average leverage. All the control variables have their impact on the performance of the firms. Firms’size causes the returns of the firms to be increased and it is found to be statistically significant. Moreover, GROWTH and LVRG are found to be significantly associated with the book-based returns on assets which confirm the notion that leverage and growth are strongly correlated with the book value-based performance measures (Deloof, 2003 and Eljelly,2004). Real GDP growth may not affect the returns based on book values; however, investors may react positively to a positive change in the level of economic activity which is in accordance with the findings of Lamberson (1995).The above results contradict the findings of Gardner et al. (1986), Deloof (2003), Eljelly (2004) and Teruel and Solano (2005); however, they are in accordance with Afza and Nazir (2007) and produced a negative relationship between the aggressiveness of working capital policies and accounting measures of profitability. Managers cannot create value if they adopt an aggressive approach towards working capital investment and working capital financing policy. However, if firms adopt aggressive approach in managing their short-term liabilities, investors give more value to those firms. The degree of aggressiveness of working capital policies adopted helps only in creating shareholders’wealth through increased market performance, whereas accounting performance cannot be increased by being aggressive in managing the working capital requirements. The results of this study are somewhat different from those conducted in the developed economies. Pakistan is one of the emerging economies and Pakistani markets are not fully transparent and efficient to fully absorb the impact of information. The study results confirm this state of Pakistani markets.ConclusionThe present study investigates the relationship between the aggressive/conservative working capital asset management and financing polices and its impact on profitability of 204 Pakistani firms divided into 16 industrial groups by KSE for the period 1998-2005. The impact of aggressive/conservative working capital investment and the financing policies has been examined using panel data regression models between working capital policies and profitability. The study finds a negative relationship between the profitability measures of firms and degree of aggressiveness of working capital investment and financing policies. The firms report negative returns if they follow an aggressive working capital policy. These results were furthervalidated by examining the impact of aggressive working capital policies on market measures of profitability, which was not tested before. The results of Tobin’s q were in line of the accounting measures of profitability and produced almost similar results for working capital investment policy. However, investors were found giving more value to those firms that are more aggressive in managing their current liabilities.The study used a new measure of profitability, i.e., Tobin’s q and panel data regression analysis, to investigate the relationship between working capital management and firm returns in Pakistan. The findings of the present study are expected to contribute significantly to finance literature. The results of the present study are in contradiction to those of some earlier studies on the issue. This phenomenon may be attributed to the inconsistent and volatile economic conditions of Pakistan. The reasons for this contradiction may further be explored in future researches.The study also suggests some policy implications for the managers and prospective investors in the emerging market of Pakistan. Firms with more aggressive policy towards working capital may not be able to generate more profit. So, as far as the book value performance is concerned, managers cannot generate more returns on assets by following aggressive approach towards short-term assets and liabilities. On the other hand, investors are found giving more value to the firms that adopt an aggressive approach towards working capital financing policies. The market value of firms using high level of current liabilities in their financing is more than the book value. The investors believe that firms with less equity and less long-term loans would be able to perform better than the others. However, there are various other factors like agency problem which may play a pivotal role in such cases, and so these factors may further be explored in future.中文译文：激进的营运资本管理政策对企业盈利能力的影响简介企业融资文章历来侧重于研究长期财务决策，特别是投资、资本结构、股利和公司估值决策。

营运资金管理中英双语文献营运资金是企业用于日常运营的资金，包括现金、存货、应收账款等。

良好的营运资金管理可以确保企业正常运转和资金充足，同时还能减少财务风险和成本。

以下是关于营运资金管理的中英双语文献：1. 《营运资金管理的重要性及其对企业运营的影响》(The Importance of Working Capital Management and Its Impact on Business Operations)本文介绍了营运资金管理的概念和重要性，探讨了如何优化营运资金管理以提高企业效率和盈利能力。

2. 《营运资金管理策略的选择与实施》(Selection and Implementation of Working Capital Management Strategies) 该文讨论了不同的营运资金管理策略，并提供了实施这些策略的具体步骤和技巧，以帮助企业实现资金最大化利用。

3. 《营运资金管理与企业绩效》(Working Capital Management and Firm Performance)该研究探讨了营运资金管理与企业绩效之间的关系，并证实了营运资金管理对企业绩效的重要性。

4. 《营运资金管理中的财务风险与控制》(Financial Risk and Control in Working Capital Management)该文描述了营运资金管理中的财务风险，并提出了相应的控制措施，以帮助企业降低财务风险并增强资金管理能力。

5. 《营运资金管理中的现金流预测与控制》(Cash Flow Forecasting and Control in Working Capital Management) 本文介绍了现金流预测在营运资金管理中的重要性，并提供了现金流预测的方法和技巧，以帮助企业更好地管理资金。

以上是关于营运资金管理的中英双语文献，这些文献可以帮助企业了解营运资金管理的重要性和实施方法，提高企业的资金使用效率和管理能力。

An Analysis of Working Capital Management Resultsacross IndustriesGreg Filbeck and Thomas M. KruegerAbstractFirms are able to reduce financing costs and/or increase the funds available for expansion by minimizing the amount of funds tied up in current assets. We provide insights into the performance of surveyed firms across key components of working capital management by using the CFO magazine’s annual Working Capital Management Survey. We discover that significant differences exist between industries in working capital measures across time. In addition, we discover that these measures for working capital change significantly within industries across time.IntroductionThe importance of efficient working capital management is indisputable. Working capital is the difference between resources in cash or readily convertible into cash (Current Assets) and organizational commitments for which cash will soon be required (Current Liabilities). The objective of working capital management is to maintain the optimum balance of each of the working capital components. Business viability relies on the ability to effectively manage receivables, inventory, and payables. Firms are able to reduce financing costs and/or increase the funds available for expansion by minimizing the amount of funds tied up in current assets. Much managerial effort is expended in bringing non-optimal levels of current assets and liabilities back toward optimal levels. An optimal level would be one in which a balance is achieved between risk and efficiency.A recent example of business attempting to maximize working capital management is the recurrent attention being given to the application of Six Sigma® methodology. Six Sigma® methodologies help companies measure and ensure quality in all areas of the enterprise. When used to identify and rectify discrepancies, inefficiencies and erroneous transactions in the financial supply chain. Six Sigma® reduces Days Sales Outstanding(DSO)，accelerates the payment cycle, improves customer satisfaction and reduces the necessary amount and cost of working capital needs. There appear to be many success stories, including Jennifer Towne’s (2002) report of a 15 percent decrease in days that sales are outstanding, resulting in an increased cash flow of approximately $2 million at Thibodaux Regional Medical Center. Furthermore, bad debts declined from $3.4 million to $600.000. However, Waxer’s (2003) study of multiple firms employing Six Sigma® find s that it is really a “get rich slow” technique with a rate of return hovering in the 1.2 – 4.5 percent range.Even in a business using Six Sigma® methodology, an “optimal” level of working capital management needs to be identified. Industry factors may impact firm credit policy, inventory management and bill-paying activities. Some firms may be better suited to minimize receivables and inventory, while others maximize payables. Another aspect of “optimal” is the extent to which poor financial results can be tied to sub-optimal performance. Fortunately, these issues are testable with data published by CFO magazine, which claims to be the source of “tools and information for the financial executive.” and are the subject of this research.In addition to providing mean and variance values for the working capital measures and the overall metric, two issues will be addressed in this research. One research question is “are firms within a particular industry clustered together at consistent levels of working capi tal measures?” For instance, are firms in one industry able to quickly transfer sales into cash, while firms from another industry tend to have high sales levels for the particular level of inventory. Th e other research question is “D oes working capital management performance for firms within a given industry change from year-to-year?”The following section presents a brief literature review. Next, the research method is described, including some information about the annual Working Capital Management Survey published by CFO magazine. Findings are then presented and conclusions are drawn.Related Literature第2页（共6页）The importance of working capital management is not new to the finance literature. Over twenty years ago, Largay and Stickney (1980) reported that the then-recent bankruptcy of W.T. Grant, a nationwide chain of department stores, should have been anticipated because the corporation had been running a deficit cash flow from operations for eight of the last ten years of its corporate life. As part of a stu dy of the Fortune 500’s financial management practices, Gilbert and Reichert (1995) find that accounts receivable management models are used in 59 percent of these firms to improve working capital projects, while inventory management models were used in 60 percent of the companies. More recently, Farragher, Kleiman and Sahu (1999) find that 55 percent of firms in the S&P Industrial index complete some form of a cash flow assessment, but did not present insights regarding accounts receivable and inventory management, or the variations of any current asset accounts or liability accounts across industries. Thus, mixed evidence exists concerning the use of working capital management techniques.Theoretical determination of optimal trade credit limits are the subject of many articles over the years (e.g. Schwartz 1974; Scherr 1996) with scant attention paid to actual accounts receivable management. Across a limited sample, Weinraub and Visscher (1998) observe a tendency of firms with low levels of current ratios to also have low levels of current liabilities. Simultaneously investigating accounts receivable and payable issues. Hill·Sartoris and Ferguson (1984) find differences in the way payment dates are defined. Payees define the date of payment as the date payment is received, while payors view payment as the postmark date. Additional WCM insight across firms, industries and time can add to this body of research.Maness and Zietlow (2002. 51. 496) presents two models of value creation that incorporate effective short-term financial management activities. However, these models are generic models and do not consider unique firm or industry influences. Maness and Zietlow discuss industry influences in a short paragraph that includes the observation that “An industry a company is located in may have more influence on that company’s fortunes than ov erall GNP” (2002. 507). In fact, a careful review of this 627-page textbook finds only sporadic information on actual firm levels of WCM dimensions, virtually nothing on第3页（共6页）industry factors except for some boxed items with titles such as “Should a Retailer Offer an In-House Credit Card” (128) and nothing on WCM stability over time. This researchwill attempt to fill this void by investigating patterns related to working capital measures within industries and illustrate differences between industries across time.An extensive survey of library and Internet resources provided very few recent reports about working capital management. The most relevant set of articles was Weisel and Bradley’s (2003) article on cash flow management and one of inventory control as a result of effective supply chain management by Hadley (2004).Research MethodThe first annual CFO Working Capital Survey, a joint project with REL Consultancy Group, was published in the June 1997 issue of CFO (Mintz and Lezere 1997). REL is a London, England-based management consulting firm specializing in working capital issues for its global list of clients. The original survey reports several working capital benchmarks for public companies using data for 1996. Each company is ranked against its peers and also against the entire field of 1000 companies. REL continues to update the original information on an annual basis.REL uses the “cash flow from operations” value l ocated on firm cash flow statements to estimate cash conversion efficiency (CCE). This value indicates how well a company transforms revenues into cash flow. A “days of working capital” (DWC) value is based on the dollar amount in each of the aggregate, equally-weighted receivables, inventory and payables accounts. T he “days of working capital” (D WC) represents the time period between purchases of inventory on account from vendor until the sale to the customer, the collection of the receivables and payment receipt. Thus, it reflects the company’s ability to finance its core operations with vendor credit. A detailed investigation of WCM is possible because CFO also provides firm and industry values for days sales outstanding (A/R), inventory turnover and days payables outstanding (A/P).Research Findings：Average and Annual Working Capital Management Performance Working capital management component definitions and average values for the entire 1996 – 2000 period. Across the nearly 1.000 firms in the survey, cash flow from operations,第4页（共6页）defined as cash flow from operations divided by sales and referred to as “ca sh conversion efficiency” (CCE). Averages 9.0 percent. Incorporating a 95 percent confidence interval, CCE ranges from 5.6 percent to 12.4 percent. The day’s working capital (DWC), defined as the sum of receivables and inventories less payables divided by daily sales, averages 51.8 days and is very similar to the days that sales are outstanding (50.6). Because the inventory turnover rate (once every 32.0 days) is similar to the number of days that payables are outstanding (32.4 days). In all instances, the standard deviation is relatively small, suggesting that these working capital management variables are consistent across CFO reports.Industry Rankings on Overall Working Capital Management Performance CFO magazine provides an overall working capital ranking for firms in its survey, using the following equation: Industry-based differences in overall working capital management are presented for the twenty-six industries that had at least eight companies included in the rankings each year. In the typical year, CFO magazine ranks 970 companies during this period. Industries are listed in order of the mean overall CFO ranking of working capital performance. Since the best average ranking possible for an eight-company industry is 4.5 (this assumes that the eight companies are ranked one through eight for the entire survey). It is quite obvious that all firms in the petroleum industry must have been receiving very high overall working capital management rankings. In fact, the petroleum industry is ranked first in CCE and third in DWC (as illustrated in Table 5 and discussed later in this paper). Furthermore, the petroleum industry had the lowest standard deviation of working capital rankings and range of working capital rankings. The only other industry with a mean overall ranking less than 100 was the Electric & Gas Utility industry, which ranked second in CCE and fourth in DWC. The two industries with the worst working capital rankings were Textiles and Apparel. Textiles rank twenty-second in CCE and twenty-sixth in DWC. The apparel industry ranks twenty-third and twenty-fourth in the two working capital measuresConclusions第5页（共6页）The research presented here is based on the annual ratings of working capital management published in CFO magazine. Our findings indicate a consistency in how industries “stack up” against each other over time with respect to the working capita l measures. However, the working capital measures themselves are not static (i.e. averages of working capital measures across all firms change annually); our results indicate significant movements across our entire sample over time. Our findings are important because they provide insight to working capital performance across time and on working capital management across industries. These changes may be in explained in part by macroeconomic factors. Changes in interest rates, rate of innovation and competition are likely to impact working capital management. As interest rates rise, there would be less desire to make payments early, which would stretch accounts payable, accounts receivable and cash accounts.The ramifications of this study include the finding of distinct levels of WCM measures for different industries, which tend to be stable over time. Many factors help to explain this discovery. The improving economy during the period of the study may have resulted in improved turnover in some industries, while slowing turnover may have been a signal of troubles ahead. Our results should be interpreted cautiously. Our study takes places over a short time frame during a generally improving market. In addition, the survey suffers from survivorship bias – only the top firms within each industry are ranked each year and the composition of those firms within the industry can change annually.Further research may take one of two lines. First, there could be a study of whether stock prices respond to CFO magazine’s publication of working cap ital management ratings. Second, there could be a study of which, if any, of the working capital management components relate to share price performance. Given our results, these studies need to take industry membership into consideration when estimating stock price reaction to working capital management performance.第6页（共6页）。

关于营运能力的外文参考文献以下是一些关于营运能力的外文参考文献："Operations Management: Sustainability and Supply Chain Management" by Jay Heizer and Barry Render. This book provides a comprehensive overview of operations management, including discussions on sustainability and supply chain management. It covers topics such as facility location, capacity planning, inventory management, and more."Introduction to Operations Research" by Frederick S. Hillier and Gerald J. Lieberman. This textbook introduces the fundamental concepts and techniques of operations research, which are essential for analyzing and improving the efficiency of operational systems. It covers a range of topics including linear programming, network models, simulation, and decision analysis."Operations Management: Processes and Supply Chains" by Lee J. Krajewski, Larry P. Ritzman, and Manoj K. Malhotra. This book offers a broad perspective on operations management, focusing on both manufacturing and service operations. It covers various topics such as process analysis, quality management, lean operations, and supply chain management."Managing Operations: A Focus on Excellence" by Nigel Slack, Alistair Brandon-Jones, and Robert Johnston. This textbook provides a practical guide to managing operations, emphasizing the importance of achieving excellence in all areas of the business. It covers topics such as strategy, process design, performance measurement, and continuous improvement."Operations Strategy" by Nigel Slack, Stuart Chambers, and Robert Johnston. This book explores the role of operations strategy in creating competitive advantage. It discusses how operations can be aligned with the overall business strategy and how to design and implement effective operations strategies."Supply Chain Management: A Logistics Perspective" by John J. Coyle, Edward J. Bardi, and C. John Langley Jr. This book provides a comprehensive introduction to supply chain management, focusing on the integration of logistics activities across the entire supply chain. It covers topics such as demand forecasting, inventory management, transportation, and warehousing."Operations and Supply Chain Management: The Core" by F. Robert Jacobs and Richard B. Chase. This textbook offers a concise and practical introduction to operations and supply chain management, covering the key concepts and techniques necessary for managing and improving operational performance."Service Operations Management: Improving Service Delivery" by John A. Fitzsimmons and Mona J. Fitzsimmons. This book focuses on the unique challenges and opportunities of managing service operations, providing a practical guide to improving service delivery and enhancing customer satisfaction. It covers topics such as service design, capacity planning, queueing theory, and service recovery."Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation" by James P. Womackand Daniel T. Jones. This book introduces the concept of lean thinking, which aims to maximize value and minimize waste in all aspects of business operations. It provides practical guidance on how to implement lean principles and tools to improve operational efficiency and profitability."The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement" by Eliyahu M. Goldratt and Jeff Cox. This novel-style business book introduces the Theory of Constraints (TOC), a methodology for identifying and addressing the most significant constraints to achieving a desired goal in an organization. It provides insights into how to improve operational performance by focusing on the key constraints that limit the flow of value through the system.这些书籍涵盖了营运能力的不同方面，包括供应链管理、服务运营管理、精益思维等，可以为您提供更全面的了解和参考。

企业营运资金管理国内外研究文献综述企业的营运资金管理是企业财务管理的一个重要方面，它涉及到企业短期债务的支付和短期资产的融资问题，直接影响到企业的经营活动和盈利能力。

本文将综述国内外关于企业营运资金管理的研究文献，并分析其研究方法和主要结论。

国内的研究文献多集中在分析企业营运资金管理的现状和影响因素上。

《我国中小企业营运资金流动性研究》一文通过对中小企业的案例研究，发现资金流动性是影响中小企业营运资金管理的关键因素之一，而中小企业的营运资金管理存在着流动性不足的问题。

《基于盈利能力的大企业和中小企业营运资金管理比较研究》则通过对大企业和中小企业的数据分析，发现大企业和中小企业在盈利能力、资产负债率和资金周转率等方面存在显著差异，从而导致了两者在营运资金管理上的差异。

在国外的研究中，营运资金管理多从企业价值和风险管理角度进行研究。

《Working capital management and firm value》一文通过分析美国上市公司的数据，研究发现企业优化营运资金管理能够提高企业的价值。

而《Trade credit, cash flow, and risk management》则研究了企业的供应链融资行为对企业风险管理的影响，发现企业通过使用供应链融资来降低财务风险，提高盈利能力。

综合国内外的研究文献，可以得出以下几点结论。

营运资金管理对企业的经营活动和盈利能力具有重要影响，优化营运资金管理可以提高企业的价值和盈利能力。

企业的规模、行业特征和盈利能力等因素都会影响到企业的营运资金管理策略。

流动性和风险管理是企业营运资金管理的重要考虑因素，企业需要根据自身情况确定最适合的管理策略。

目前的研究还存在一些不足之处。

尽管有一些文献从企业规模、行业特征和财务指标等方面探讨了影响营运资金管理的因素，但对于这些因素的具体影响机制和路径还需要进一步研究。

对于不同行业和企业类型的营运资金管理策略的研究还比较有限，需要进一步扩大研究的范围。

营运资金管理国外文献综述摘要营运资金管理在企业财务管理中一直占据重要地位,营运资金管理水平的高低,直接影响业资金的流动性,进而影响成本与效益。

随着现代社会经济的高速发展,营运资金管理的重要性显得尤为突出。

本文首先对营运资金进行简要概述,在此基础上提出了我国企业营运资金管理中存在的问题并提出一些对策,以期对企业营运资金管理有积极的意义。

关键词营运资金流动资产管理一、营运资金概述营运资金又称为营运资本,有广义和狭义之分,广义的营运资金又称为毛营运资金是指一个企业的生产经营活动中流动资产占用的资金,具体包括现金、有价证券、应收账款、存货等占用的资金;狭义的营运资金又称为净营运资金,是指企业流动资产减去流动负债后的余额。

不论是广义还是狭义,营运资金从财务角度看应该是流动资产与流动负债关系的总和,在这里“总和”不是单纯数额的加总,而是关系的反映。

营运资金管理,是企业从管理获效益的重要手段。

为了有效地管理企业营运资金,必须研究企业营运资金的特点,以便有针对性地进行管理。

企业营运资金一般具有如下特点:第一,周转时间短。

根据这一特点,说明营运资金可以通过短期筹资方式加以解决。

第二,非现金形态的营运资金如存货、应收账款、短期有价证券等容易变现,这一点对企业应付临时性的资金需求有重要意义。

第三,数量具有波动性。

流动资产或流动负债容易受内外条件的影响,数量的波动往往很大。

第四,来源具有多样性。

营运资金的需求问题既可通过长期筹资方式解决,也可通过短期筹资方式解决。

二、我国企业营运资金管理存在的主要问题***一***融资困难,周转资金严重不足现在,我国一些企业初步建立了较为独立、渠道多元的融资体系。

地方各级***也为一些中小型企业提供财政支援;中国人民银行也鼓励各商业银行加大对中小企业的信贷支援。

这些措施改善了一部分企业融资难的困境。

但是,各金融机构在改进金融服务、开发适合中小企业发展的金融产品、调整信贷等方面还有缺陷。

文献出处:Enqvist, Julius, Michael Graham, and Jussi Nikkinen. "The impact of working capital management on firm profitability in different business cycles: evidence from Finland." Research in International Business and Finance 32 (2014): 36-49.原文The impact of working capital management on firm profitability in different business cycles: Evidence from Finland1. IntroductionThis paper investigates the effect of the business cycle on the link between working capital, the difference between current assets and current liabilities, and corporate performance. Efficient working capital management is recognized as an important aspect of financial management practices in all organizational forms. In acknowledgement of this importance, the CFO Magazine publishes an annual study of corporate working capital management performance in many countries. The extensive literature indicates that it impacts directly on corporate liquidity ( Kim et al., 1998 and Opler et al., 1999), profitability (e.g., Shin and Soenen, 1998, Deloof, 2003, Lazaridis and Tryfonidis, 2006 and Ukaegbu, 2014), and solvency (e.g.,Berryman, 1983 and Peel and Wilson, 1994).It is reasonable to assume that economy-wide fluctuations exogenous to the operations of the firm play an important role in the demand for firms’ products and any financing decision. Korajczyk and Levy (2003), for instance, suggest that firms time debt issuance based on economic conditions. Also, given that retained earnings are a significant component of working capital, business cycles can be said to affect all enterprises financing source through its effect on economic growth and sales. For example, when company sales weaken it engenders earning declines, thereby, affecting an important source of working capital. The recent global economic downturn with crimping consumer demand is an excellent example of this. The crisis,characterized by plummeting sales, put a squeeze on corporate revenues and profit margins, and subsequently, working capital requirements. This has brought renewed focus on working capital management at companies all over the world.The literature on working capital, however, only includes a handful of studies examining the impact of the business cycle on working capital. An early study by Merville and Tavis (1973) examined the relationship between firm working capital policies and business cycle. More recent studies have investigated the degree to which firms’ reliance on bank borrowing to finance working capital is cyclical (Einarsson and Marquis, 2001), the significance of firms’ external dependence for financing needs on the link between industry growth and business the cycle in the short term (Braun and Larrain, 2005), and the influence of business indicators on the determinants of working capital management (Chiou et al., 2006). These studies have independently linked working capital to corporate profitability and the business cycle. No study, to the best of our knowledge, has examined the simultaneous working capital–profitability and business cycle effects. There is therefore a substantial gap in the literature which this paper seeks to fill. Firms may have an optimal level of working capital that maximizes their value. However, optimal levels may change to reflect business conditions. Consequently, we contribute to the literature by re-examining the relationship between working capital management and corporate profitability by investigating the role business cycle plays in this relationship.We investigate this important relationship using a sample of firms listed on the Helsinki Stock Exchange and an extended study period of 18 years, between 1990 and 2008. Finnish firms tend to react strongly to changes in the business cycle, a characteristic that can be observed from the volatility of the Nasdaq OMX Helsinki stock index. The index usually declines quickly in poor economic states, but also makes fast recoveries. Finland, therefore, presents an excellent representative example of how the working capital–profitability relationship may change in different economic states. The choice of Finland is also significant as it also offers a representative Nordic perspective of this important working capital–profitability relationship. Hitherto no academic study has examined the workingcapital–profitability relationship in the Nordic region, to the best of our knowledge. Surveys on working capital management in the Nordic region carried out by Danske Bank and Ernst & Young in 2009 show, however, that many companies rated their working capital management performance as average, with a growing focus on optimizing working capital in the future. The surveys are, however, silent on how this average performance affected profitability. This gives further impetus for our study.Our results point to a number of interesting findings. First, we find that firms can enhance their profitability by increasing working capital efficiency. This is a significant result because many Nordic firms find it hard to turn good policy intentions on working capital management into reality (Ernst and Young, 2009). Economically, firms may gain by paying increasing attention to efficient working capital practices. Our empirical finding, therefore, should motivate firms to implement new work processes as a matter of necessity. We also found that working capital management is relatively more important in low economic states than in the economic boom state, implying working capital management should be included in firms’ financial planning. This finding corroborates evidence from the survey results in the Nordic region. Specifically, the survey results by Ernst and Young (2009) indicate that the largest potential for improvement in working capital could be found within the optimization of internal processes. This suggests that this area is not prioritized in times of business growth which is typical of the general economic expansion periods and is exposed in economic downturns.The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents a brief review of the literature presents the hypotheses for empirical testing. Sections 3 and 4 discuss data and models to be estimated. The empirical results are presented in Section 5 and Section 6 concludes.2. Related literature and hypotheses2.1. Literature reviewMany firms have invested significant amounts in working capital and a number of studies have examined the determinants of this investment. For example Kim et al. (1998) and Opler et al. (1999), Chiou et al. (2006) and D’Mello et al. (2008) find thatthe availability of external financing is a determinant of liquidity. Thus restricted access to capital markets requires firms to hold larger cash reserves. Other studies show that firms with weaker corporate governance structures hold smaller cash reserves (Harford et al., 2008). Furthermore firms with excess cash holding as well as weak shareholder rights undertake more acquisitions. However there is a higher likelihood of value-decreasing acquisitions (Harford, 1999). Kieschnick and Laplante (2012) provide evidence linking working capital management to shareholder wealth. They find that the incremental dollar invested in net operating capital is less valuable than the incremental dollar held in cash for the average firm. The findings reported in the paper further suggest that the valuation of the incremental dollar invested in net operating working is significantly influenced by a firm's future sales expectations, its debt load, its financial constraints, and its bankruptcy risk. Further the value of the incremental dollar extended in credit to one's customers has a greater effect on shareholder wealth than the incremental dollar invested in inventories for the average firm. Taken together the results indicate the significance of working capital management to the firm's residual claimants, and how financing impacts these effects.A thin thread of the literature links business cycles to working capital. In a theoretical model, Merville and Tavis (1973) posit that investment and financing decisions relating to working capital should be made in chorus as components of each impact on the optimal policies of the others. The optimal working capital policy of the firm is, therefore, made within a systems context, components of which are related spatially over time in a chance-constrained format. Uncertainty in the wider business environment directly affects the system. For example, short run demand fluctuations disrupt anticipated incoming cash flows, and the collection of receivables faces increased uncertainty. The model provides a structure enabling corporate managers to solve complex inventory and credit policies for short term financial planning.In an empirical study, Einarsson and Marquis (2001) find that the degree to which companies rely on bank financing to cover their working capital requirements in the U.S. is countercyclical; it increases as the state of the economy weakens. Furthermore, Braun and Larrain (2005) find that high working capital requirementsar e a key determinant of a business’ dependence on external financing. They show that firms that are highly dependent on external financing are more affected by recessions, and should take more precautions in preparing for declines in the economic environment, including ensuring a secure level of working capital reserves during times of crisis. Additionally, Chiou et al. (2006) recognize the importance of the state of the economy and includes business indicators in their study of working capital determinants. They find a positive relationship between business indicator and working capital requirements.The relationship between profitability and working capital management in various markets has also attracted intense interest. In a comprehensive study, Shin and Soenen (1998) document a strong inverse relationship between working capital efficiency and profitability across U.S. industries. This inverse relationship is supported by Deloof (2003), Lazaridis and Tryfonidis (2006), and Garcia-Teruel and Martinez-Solano (2007)for Belgian non-financial firms, Greek listed firms, and Spanish small and medium size enterprises (SME), respectively. There are, however, significant divergences in the results relating to the effect of the various components of working capital on profitability. For example, whereas Deloof (2003) find a negative and statistically significant relationship between account payable and profitability, Garcia-Teruel and Martinez-Solano (2007) find no such measurable influences in a sample of Spanish SMEs.2.2. Hypotheses developmentThe cash conversion cycle (CCC), a useful and comprehensive measure of working capital management, has been widely used in the literature (see for example Deloof, 2003 and Gill et al., 2010). The CCC, measured in days, is the length of time between a company's expenditure for the procurement of raw materials and the collection of sales of finished goods. We adopt this as our measure of working capital management in this study. Previous studies have established a link between profitability and the CCC in different countries and market segments.Efficient working capital management practices aims to shorten the CCC to optimize to levels that best suites the requirements of the specific company (Hager,1976). A short CCC indicates quick collection of receivables and delays in payments to suppliers. This is associated with profitability given that it improves corporate efficiency in its use of working capital. Deloof (2003), however, posits that low inventory levels, tight trade credit policies and utilizing obtained trade credit as a means of financing can increase risks of inventory stock-outs, decrease sales stimulants and increase accounts payable costs by forgoing given cash discounts. Managers must, therefore, always consider the tradeoff between liquidity and profitability when managing working capital. A faster rise in the cost of higher investment in working capital relative to the benefits of holding more inventories and/or granting trade credit to customers may lead to decrease in corporate profitability. Deloof (2003), Wang (2002), Lazaridis and Tryfonidis (2006), and Gill et al. (2010) all propose a negative relationship between the cash conversion cycle and corporate profitability. Following this, we propose a general hypothesis stating the expected negative relationship between the cash conversion cycle and corporate profitability:6. ConclusionsWorking capital, the difference between current assets and current liabilities, is used to fund a business’ daily operations due to t he time lag between buying raw materials for production and receiving funds from the sale of the final product. With vast amounts invested in working capital, it can be expected that the management of these assets would significantly affect the profitability of a company. Consequently, companies strive to achieve optimize levels of working capital by paying bills as late as possible, turning over inventories quickly, and collecting on account receivables quickly. The optimal level, though, may vary to reflect business conditions. This study examines the role business cycle plays in the working capital-corporate profitability relationship using a sample of Finnish listed companies from years 1990 to 2008.We utilize the cash conversion cycle (CCC), defined as the length of time between a company's expenditure for the procurement of raw materials and the collection of sales of finished goods, as our measure of working capital. We further make use of 2 measures of profitability, return on assets and gross operating income.We document a negative relationship between cash conversion cycle and corporate profitability. Our results also show that companies can achieve higher profitability levels by managing inventories efficiently and lowering accounts receivable collection times. Furthermore shorter account payable cycles enhance corporate profitability. These results, which largely mirror findings from other countries, indicate effective management of firm's total working capital as well as its individual components has a significant effect on corporate profitability levels.Our results also show that economic conditions exhibit measurable influences on the working capital-profitability relationship. The low economic state is generally found to have negative effects on corporate profitability. In particular, we find that the impact of efficient working capital (CCC) on operational profitability increases in economic downturns. We also find that the impact of efficient inventory management and accounts receivables conversion periods, subsets of CCC, on profitability increase in economic downturns.Overall the results indicate that investing in working capital processes and incorporating working capital efficiency into everyday routines is essential for corporate profitability. As a result, firms should include working capital management in their financial planning processes. Additionally, firms generate income and employment. The reduced demand in economic downturns depletes working capital of firms and threatens their stability and, implicitly, their important function as generators of employment and income. National economic policy aimed at boosting cash flows of firms may increase business ability to finance working capital internally, especially during economic down turns.译文营运资金管理对不同商业周期公司盈利能力的影响：证据来自芬兰1.引言本文研究商业周期与营运资本两者之间的联系,流动资产和流动负债之间的区别,以及公司业绩问题。

中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Effects Of Working Capital Management On Sme ProfitabilityThe corporate finance literature has traditionally focused on the study of long-term financial decisions. Researchers have particularly offered studies analyzing investments, capital structure, dividends or company valuation, among other topics. But the investment that firms make in short-term assets, and the resources used with maturities of under one year, represent the main share of items on a firm’s balance sheet. In fact, in our sample the current assets of small and medium-sized Spanish firms represent 69.48 percent of their assets, and at the same time their current liabilities represent more than 52.82 percent of their liabilities.Working capital management is important because of its effects on the firm’s profitability and risk, and consequently its value (Smith, 1980). On the one hand, maintaining high inventory levels reduces the cost of possible interruptions in the production process, or of loss of business due to the scarcity of products, reducessupply costs, and protects against price fluctuations, among other advantages (Blinder and Manccini, 1991). On the other, granting trade credit favors the firm’s sales in various ways. Trade credit can act as an effective price cut (Brennan, Maksimovic and Zechner,1988; Petersen and Rajan, 1997), incentivizes customers to acquire merchandise at times of low demand (Emery, 1987), allows customers to check that the merchandise they receive is as agreed (quantity and quality) and to ensure that the services contracted are carried out (Smith, 1987), and helps firms to strengthen long-term relationships with their customers (Ng, Smith and Smith, 1999). However, firms that invest heavily in inventory and trade credit can suffer reduced profitability. Thus,the greater the investment in current assets, the lower the risk, but also the lower the profitability obtained.On the other hand, trade credit is a spontaneous source of financing that reduces the amount required to finance the sums tied up in the inventory and customer accounts. But we should bear in mind that financing from suppliers can have a very high implicit cost if early payment discounts are available. In fact the opportunity cost may exceed 20 percent, depending on the discount percentage and the discount period granted (Wilner,2000; Ng, Smith and Smith, 1999). In this respect, previous studies have analyzed the high cost of trade credit, and find that firms finance themselves with seller credit when they do not have other more economic sources of financing available (Petersen and Rajan, 1994 and 1997).Decisions about how much to invest in the customer and inventory accounts, and how much credit to accept from suppliers, are reflected in the firm’s cash conve rsion cycle, which represents the average number of days between the date when the firm must start paying its suppliers and the date when it begins to collect payments from its customers. Some previous studies have used this measure to analyze whether shortening the cash conversion cycle has positive or negative effects on the firm’s profitability.Specifically, Shin and Soenen (1998) analyze the relation between the cash conversion cycle and profitability for a sample of firms listed on the US stock exchange during the period 1974-1994. Their results show that reducing the cash conversion cycle to a reasonable extent increases firms’ profitability. More recently,Deloof (2003) analyzes a sample of large Belgian firms during the period 1992-1996. His results confirm that Belgian firms can improve their profitability by reducing the number of days accounts receivable are outstanding and reducing inventories. Moreover, he finds that less profitable firms wait longer to pay their bills.These previous studies have focused their analysis on larger firms. However, the management of current assets and liabilities is particularly important in the case of small and medium-sized companies. Most of these companies’ assets are in the form of current assets. Also, current liabilities are one of their main sources of external finance in view of their difficulties in obtaining funding in the long-term capital markets(Petersen and Rajan, 1997) and the financing constraints that they face (Whited, 1992; Fazzari and Petersen, 1993). In this respect, Elliehausen and Woken (1993), Petersen and Rajan (1997) and Danielson and Scott (2000) show that small and medium-sized US firms use vendor financing when they have run out of debt. Thus, efficient working capital management is particularly important for smaller companies (Peel and Wilson,1996).In this context, the objective of the current work is to provide empirical evidence about the effects of working capital management on profitability for a panel made up of 8,872 SMEs during the period 1996-2002. This work contributes to the literature in two ways. First, no previous such evidence exists for the case of SMEs. We use a sample of Spanish SMEs that operate within the so-called continental model, which is characterized by its less developed capital markets (La Porta, López-de-Silanes, Shleifer, and Vishny, 1997), and by the fact that most resources are channeled through financial intermediaries (Pampillón, 2000). All this suggests that Spanish SMEs have fewer alternative sources of external finance available, which makes them more dependent on short-term finance in general, and on trade credit in particular. As Demirguc-Kunt and Maksimovic (2002) suggest, firms operating in countries with more developed banking systems grant more trade credit to their customers, and at the same time they receive more finance from their own suppliers. The second contribution is that, unlike the previous studies by Shin and Soenen (1998) and Deloof (2003), in the current work we have conducted tests robust to the possible presence ofendogeneity problems. The aim is to ensure that the relationships found in the analysis carried out are due to the effects of the cash conversion cycle on corporate profitability and not vice versa.Our findings suggest that managers can create value by reducing their firm’s number of days accounts receivable and inventories. Similarly, shortening the cash conversion cycle also improves the firm’s profitability.We obtained the data used in this study from the AMADEUS database. This database was developed by Bureau van Dijk, and contains financial and economic data on European companies.The sample comprises small and medium-sized firms from Spain. The selection of SMEs was carried out according to the requirements established by the European Commission’s recommendation 96/280/CE of 3 April, 1996, on the definition of small and medium-sized firms. Specifically, we selected those firms meeting the following criteria for at least three years: a) have fewer than 250 employees; b) turn over less than €40 million; and c) possess less than €27 million of total assets.In addition to the application of those selection criteria, we applied a series of filters. Thus, we eliminated the observations of firms with anomalies in their accounts, such as negative values in their assets, current assets, fixed assets, liabilities, current liabilities, capital, depreciation, or interest paid. We removed observations of entry items from the balance sheet and profit and loss account exhibiting signs that were contrary to reasonable expectations. Finally, we eliminated 1 percent of the extreme values presented by several variables. As a result of applying these filters, we ended up with a sample of 38,464 observations.In order to introduce the effect of the economic cycle on the levels invested in working capital, we obtained information about the annual GDP growth in Spain from Eurostat.In order to analyze the effects of working capital management on the firm’s profitability, we used the return on assets (ROA) as the dependent variable. We defined this variable as the ratio of earnings before interest and tax to assets.With regards to the independent variables, we measured working capitalmanagement by using the number of days accounts receivable, number of days of inventory and number of days accounts payable. In this respect, number of days accounts receivable (AR) is calculated as 365 ×[accounts receivable/sales]. This variable represents the average number of days that the firm takes to collect payments from its customers. The higher the value, the higher its investment in accounts receivable.We calculated the number of days of inventory (INV) as 365 ×[inventories/purchases]. This variable reflects the average number of days of stock held by the firm. Longer storage times represent a greater investment in inventory for a particular level of operations.The number of days accounts payable (AP) reflects the average time it takes firms to pay their suppliers. We calculated this as 365 × [accounts payable/purchases]. The higher the value, the longer firms take to settle their payment commitments to their suppliers.Considering these three periods jointly, we estimated the cash conversion cycle(CCC). This variable is calculated as the number of days accounts receivable plus thenumber of days of inventory minus the number of days accounts payable. The longerthe cash conversion cycle, the greater the net investment in current assets, and hence the greater the need for financing of current assets.Together with these variables, we introduced as control variables the size of the firm, the growth in its sales, and its leverage. We measured the size (SIZE) as the logarithm of assets, the sales growth (SGROW) as (Sales1 –Sales0)/Sales0, the leverage(DEBT) as the ratio of debt to liabilities. Dellof (2003) in his study of large Belgian firms also considered the ratio of fixed financial assets to total assets as a control variable. For some firms in his study such assets are a significant part of total assets.However our study focuses on SMEs whose fixed financial assets are less important. In fact, companies in our sample invest little in fixed financial assets (a mean of 3.92 percent, but a median of 0.05 percent). Nevertheless, the results remain unaltered whenwe include this variable.Furthermore, and since good economic conditions tend to be reflected in a firm’sprofitability, we controlled for the evolution of the economic cycle using the variable GDPGR, which measures the annual GDP growth.Current assets and liabilities have a series of distinct characteristics according to the sector of activity in which the firm operates. Thus, Table I reports the return on assets and number of days accounts receivable, days of inventory, and days accounts payable by sector of activity. The mining industry and services sector are the two sectors with the highest return on their assets, with a value of 10 percent. Firms that are dedicated to agriculture, trade (wholesale or retail), transport and public services, are some way behind at 7 percent.With regard to the average periods by sector, we find, as we would expect, that the firms dedicated to the retail trade, with an average period of 38 days, take least time to collect payments from their customers. Construction sector firms grant their customers the longest period in which to pay –more than 145 days. Next, we find mining sector firms, with a number of days accounts receivable of 116 days. We also find that inventory is stored longest in agriculture, while stocks are stored least in the transport and public services sector. In relation to the number of days accounts payable, retailers (56 days) followed by wholesalers (77 days) pay their suppliers earliest. Firms are much slower in the construction and mining sectors, taking more than 140 days on average to pay their suppliers. However, as we have mentioned, these firms also grant their own customers the most time to pay them. Considering all the average periods together, we note that the cash conversion cycle is negative in only one sector – that of transport and public services. This is explained by the short storage times habitual in this sector. In this respect, agricultural and manufacturing firms take the longest time to generate cash (95 and 96 days, respectively), and hence need the most resources to finance their operational funding requirements.Table II offers descriptive statistics about the variables used for the sample as a whole. These are generally small firms, with mean assets of more than €6 milli on; their return on assets is around 8 percent; their number of days accounts receivable is around 96 days; and their number of days accounts payable is very similar: around 97 days. Together with this, the sample firms have seen their sales grow by almost 13percent annually on average, and 24.74 percent of their liabilities is taken up by debt. In the period analyzed (1996-2002) the GDP has grown at an average rate of 3.66 percent in Spain.Source: Pedro Juan García-Teruel and Pedro Martínez-Solano ,2006.“Effects of Working Capital Management on SME Profitability” .International Journal of Managerial Finance ,vol. 3, issue 2, April,pages 164-167.译文：营运资金管理对中小企业的盈利能力的影响公司理财著作历来把注意力集中在了长期财务决策研究，研究者详细的提供了投资决策分析、资本结构、股利分配或公司估值等主题的研究，但是企业投资形成的短期资产和以一年内到期方式使用的资源，表现为公司资产负债表的有关下昂目的主要部分。

文献信息：文献标题：Impact of Aggressive Working Capital Management Policy on Firms’ Profitability（激进的营运资本管理政策对企业盈利能力的影响）国外作者：Mian Sajid Nazir，Talat Afza文献出处：《The IUP Journal of Applied Finance》,2009,Vol.15,PP19-30 字数统计：英文2669单词，14456字符；中文4407汉字外文文献：Impact of Aggressive Working Capital Management Policyon Firms’ ProfitabilityIntroductionThe corporate finance literature has traditionally focused on the study of long-term financial decisions, particularly investments, capital structure, dividends or company valuation decisions. However, short-term assets and liabilities are important components of total assets and need to be carefully analyzed. Management of these short-term assets and liabilities warrants a careful investigation since the working capital m anagement plays an important role in a firm’s profitability and risk as well as its value (Smith, 1980). Efficient management of working capital is a fundamental part of the overall corporate strategy in creating the shareholders’ value. Firms try to keep an optimal level of working capital that maximizes their value (Deloof, 2003; Howorth and Westhead, 2003 and Afza and Nazir, 2007).In general, from the perspective of Chief Financial Officer (CFO), working capital management is a simple and straightforward concept of ensuring the ability of the organization to fund the difference between the short-term assets and short-term liabilities (Harris, 2005). However, a ‘Total’ approach is desired as it can cover all thecompany’s activities relating to vendor, cu stomer and product (Hall, 2002). In practice, working capital management has become one of the most important issues in the organizations where many financial executives are struggling to identify the basic working capital drivers and an appropriate level of working capital (Lamberson, 1995). Consequently, companies can minimize risk and improve the overall performance by understanding the role and drivers of working capital management.A firm may adopt an aggressive working capital management policy with a low level of current assets as a percentage of total assets, or it may also be used for the financing decisions of the firm in the form of high level of current liabilities as a percentage of total liabilities. Excessive levels of current assets may have a negative effect on the firm’s profitability, whereas a low level of current assets may lead to a lower level of liquidity and stockouts, resulting in difficulties in maintaining smooth operations (Van Horne and Wachowicz, 2004).The main objective of working capital management is to maintain an optimal balance between each of the working capital components. Business success heavily depends on the financial executives’ ability to effectively manage receivables, inventory, and payables (Filbeck and Krueger, 2005). Firms can reduce their financing costs and/or increase the funds available for expansion projects by minimizing the amount of investment tied up in current assets. Most of the financial managers’ time and efforts are allocated towards bringing non-optimal levels of current assets and liabilities back to optimal levels (Lamberson, 1995). An optimal level of working capital would be the one in which a balance is achieved between risk and efficiency. It requires continuous monitoring to maintain proper level in various components of working capital, i.e., cash receivables, inventory and payables, etc.In general, current assets are considered as one of the important components of total assets of a firm. A firm may be able to reduce the investment in fixed assets by renting or leasing plant and machinery, whereas the same policy cannot be followed for the components of working capital. The high level of current assets may reduce the risk of liquidity associated with the opportunity cost of funds that may have been invested in long-term assets. Though the impact of working capital policies onprofitability is highly important, only a few empirical studies have been carried out to examine this relationship. This study investigates the potential relationship of aggressive/conservative policies with the accounting and market measures of profitability of Pakistani firms using a panel data set for the period 1998-2005. The present study is expected to contribute to better understand these policies and their impact on profitability, especially in emerging markets like Pakistan.Research MethodologyVariables Used in the StudyThis study uses aggressive investment policy as used by Weinraub and Visscher (1998), who analyzed working capital policies of 126 industrial firms in the US market. Aggressive Investment Policy (AIP) results in minimal level of investment in current assets versus fixed assets. In contrast, a conservative investment policy places a greater proportion of capital in liquid assets with the opportunity cost of less profitability. If the level of current assets increases in proportion to the total assets of the firm, the management is said to be more conservative in managing the current assets of the firm. In order to measure the degree of aggressiveness of working capital investment policy, the following ratio was used:where a lower ratio means a relatively aggressive policy.On the other hand, an Aggressive Financing Policy (AFP) utilizes higher levels of current liabilities and less long-term debt. In contrast, a conservative financing policy uses more long-term debt and capital and less current liabilities. The firms are more aggressive in terms of current liabilities management if they are concentrating on the use of more current liabilities which put their liquidity on risk. The degree of aggressiveness of a financing policy adopted by a firm is measured by working capital financing policy, and the following ratio is used:where a higher ratio means a relatively aggressive policy.The impact of working capital policies on the profitability has been analyzed through accounting measures of profitability as well as market measures of profitability, i.e., Return on Assets (ROA) and Tobin’s q. These variables of return are calculated as:Tobin’s q compares the value of a company given by financial markets with the value of a company’s assets. A low q (between 0 and 1) means that the cost to replace a firm’s assets is greater than the value of its stock. This implies that the stock is undervalued. Conversely, a high q (greater than 1) implies that a firm’s stock is more expensive than the replacement cost of its assets, which implies that the stock is overvalued. It is calculated as:where Market Value of Firm (MVF) is the sum of book value of long plus short term and market value of equity. Market value of equity is calculated by multiplying the number of shares outstanding with the current market price of the stock in a particular year.Control VariablesIn working capital literature, various studies have used the control variables along with the main variables of working capital in order to have an apposite analysis of working capital management on the profitability of firms (Lamberson, 1995; Smith and Begemann, 1997; Deelof, 2003; Eljelly, 2004; Teruel and Solano, 2005 and Lazaridis and Tryfonidis, 2006). On the same lines, along with working capital variables, the present study has taken into consideration some control variables relating to firms such as the size of the firm, the growth in its sales, and its financial leverage. The size of the firm (SIZE) has been measured by the logarithm of its totalassets, as the original large value of total assets may disturb the analysis. The growth of firm (GROWTH) is measured by variation in its annual sales value with reference to previous year’s sales[(Sales t –Sales t –1)/Sales t –1]. Moreover, the financial leverage (LVRG) was taken as the debt to equity ratio of each firm for the whole sample period. Some studies, like Deloof (2003) in his study of large Belgian firms, also considered the ratio of fixed financial assets to total assets as a control variable; however, this variable cannot be included in the present study because of unavailability of data, as most of the firms do not disclose full information in their financial statements. Finally, since good economic conditions tend to be reflected in a firm’s profitability (Lamberson, 1995), this phenomenon has been controlled for the evolution of the economic cycle using the GDPGR variable, which measures the real annual GDP growth in Pakistan for each of the study year from 1998 to 2005.Statistical AnalysisThe impact of aggressive and conservative working capital policies on the profitability of the firms has been evaluated by applying the panel data regression analysis. The performance variables (ROA and Tobin’s q) as well as the TCA/TA and TCL/TA along with the control variables were regressed using the SPSS software. The following regression equations are run to estimate the impact of working capital policies on the profitability measures.where,TCA/TA=Total current assets to total assets ratioTCL/TA i=Total current liabilities to total assets ratioROA i=Return on assetsTobin’s q i=V alue of qSIZE i=Natural log of firm sizeGROWTH i=Growth of salesLVRG i=Financial leverage of firmsGDPGR i=Real Annual GDP growth rate of Pakistanα=Intercept; andε=Error term of the modelSample and DataThe sample of the study consists of all non-financial firms listed on the Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE). KSE has divided the non-financial firms into various industrial sectors based on their nature of business. In order to be included in the sample, a firm must be in business for the whole study period. Also, firms should neither have been delisted by the KSE nor merged with any other firm during the whole window period. New incumbents in the market during the study period have also not been included in the sample. Furthermore, firms must have complete data for the period 1998-2005. Firms with negative equity during the study period have also been excluded. Thus, the final sample consists of 204 non-financial firms from 17 various industrial sectors.This study used annual financial data of 204 non-financial firms for the period 1998-2005. The panel data set was developed for eight years and for the 204 sampled firms which produced 1,632 year-end observations. The required financial data for the purpose of the study was obtained from the respective companies’annual reports and publications of State Bank of Pakistan. The data regarding annual average market prices was collected from the daily quotations of KSE.AnalysisTable 1 presents the results of regression model in which the impact of working capital investment policy on the performance measurements has been examined. The F-values of regression models run are found statistically significant, whereas Durbin-Watson statistics of more than 1.8 indicate less correlation among the independent variables of the regressions models. The t-statistics of working capital investment policy is positive and statistically significant at 1% level for Return on Assets and Tobin’s q. The positive coefficient of TCA/TA indicates a negative relationship between the degree of aggressiveness of investment policy and return on assets. As the TCA/TA increases, the degree of aggressiveness decreases, and return on assets increases. Therefore, there is a negative relationship between the relative degree of aggressiveness of working capital investment policies of firms and both performance measures, i.e., ROA and Tobin’s q. This similarity in market and accounting returns confirms the notion that investors do not believe in the adoption of aggressive approach in the working capital management, hence, they do not give any additional weight to the firms on KSE.Table 2 reports regression results for working capital financing policy and the performance measures. The F-value of regression models and Durbin-Watson statistics indicate similar results as reported in Table 1. The negative value of coefficient for TCL/TA also points out the negative relationship between the aggressiveness of working capital financing policy and return on assets. The higher the TCL/TA ratio, the more aggressive the financing policy, that yields negative return on assets. However, surprisingly, the relationship between Tobin’s q and working capital financing policy has been established as positive and statistically significant. Investors were found giving more weight to the firms which are adopting an aggressive approach towards working capital financing policy and having higher levels of short-term and spontaneous financing on their balance sheets.The control variables used in the regression models are natural log of firm size, sales growth, real GDP growth and the average leverage. All the control variables have their impact on the performance of the firms. Firms’size causes the returns of the firms to be increased and it is found to be statistically significant. Moreover, GROWTH and LVRG are found to be significantly associated with the book-based returns on assets which confirm the notion that leverage and growth are strongly correlated with the book value-based performance measures (Deloof, 2003 and Eljelly,2004). Real GDP growth may not affect the returns based on book values; however, investors may react positively to a positive change in the level of economic activity which is in accordance with the findings of Lamberson (1995).The above results contradict the findings of Gardner et al. (1986), Deloof (2003), Eljelly (2004) and Teruel and Solano (2005); however, they are in accordance with Afza and Nazir (2007) and produced a negative relationship between the aggressiveness of working capital policies and accounting measures of profitability. Managers cannot create value if they adopt an aggressive approach towards working capital investment and working capital financing policy. However, if firms adopt aggressive approach in managing their short-term liabilities, investors give more value to those firms. The degree of aggressiveness of working capital policies adopted helps only in creating shareholders’wealth through increased market performance, whereas accounting performance cannot be increased by being aggressive in managing the working capital requirements. The results of this study are somewhat different from those conducted in the developed economies. Pakistan is one of the emerging economies and Pakistani markets are not fully transparent and efficient to fully absorb the impact of information. The study results confirm this state of Pakistani markets.ConclusionThe present study investigates the relationship between the aggressive/conservative working capital asset management and financing polices and its impact on profitability of 204 Pakistani firms divided into 16 industrial groups by KSE for the period 1998-2005. The impact of aggressive/conservative working capital investment and the financing policies has been examined using panel data regression models between working capital policies and profitability. The study finds a negative relationship between the profitability measures of firms and degree of aggressiveness of working capital investment and financing policies. The firms report negative returns if they follow an aggressive working capital policy. These results were furthervalidated by examining the impact of aggressive working capital policies on market measures of profitability, which was not tested before. The results of Tobin’s q were in line of the accounting measures of profitability and produced almost similar results for working capital investment policy. However, investors were found giving more value to those firms that are more aggressive in managing their current liabilities.The study used a new measure of profitability, i.e., Tobin’s q and panel data regression analysis, to investigate the relationship between working capital management and firm returns in Pakistan. The findings of the present study are expected to contribute significantly to finance literature. The results of the present study are in contradiction to those of some earlier studies on the issue. This phenomenon may be attributed to the inconsistent and volatile economic conditions of Pakistan. The reasons for this contradiction may further be explored in future researches.The study also suggests some policy implications for the managers and prospective investors in the emerging market of Pakistan. Firms with more aggressive policy towards working capital may not be able to generate more profit. So, as far as the book value performance is concerned, managers cannot generate more returns on assets by following aggressive approach towards short-term assets and liabilities. On the other hand, investors are found giving more value to the firms that adopt an aggressive approach towards working capital financing policies. The market value of firms using high level of current liabilities in their financing is more than the book value. The investors believe that firms with less equity and less long-term loans would be able to perform better than the others. However, there are various other factors like agency problem which may play a pivotal role in such cases, and so these factors may further be explored in future.中文译文：激进的营运资本管理政策对企业盈利能力的影响简介企业融资文章历来侧重于研究长期财务决策，特别是投资、资本结构、股利和公司估值决策。

营运资金管理国外文献综述一、本文概述随着全球经济的日益融合和市场竞争的加剧，营运资金管理已成为企业财务管理的核心环节，对于企业的生存和发展具有至关重要的意义。

本文旨在通过综述国外营运资金管理领域的文献，系统梳理该领域的研究现状和发展趋势，以期为我国的营运资金管理理论和实践提供有益的借鉴和启示。

在综述过程中，我们将重点关注国外营运资金管理的研究方法和研究内容，包括营运资金的概念界定、管理策略、影响因素、优化模型等方面。

我们还将关注国外学者在营运资金管理领域取得的最新研究成果和进展，以及这些研究成果对于实践的指导意义和应用价值。

通过本文的综述，我们期望能够深入理解营运资金管理的内在规律和运作机制，为企业制定更加科学合理的营运资金管理策略提供理论支持和实践指导。

我们也希望通过对国外文献的梳理和评价，为我国的营运资金管理研究提供新的视角和思路，推动该领域的理论创新和实践发展。

二、营运资金管理的基本理论营运资金管理是企业财务管理的重要组成部分，其基本理论涉及多个方面，包括营运资金的定义、构成、管理目标以及管理策略等。

营运资金，通常被定义为企业在日常运营中所需要的流动资金，包括现金、存货、应收账款和应付账款等。

这些资金是企业正常运营的基础，对企业的生存和发展具有重要意义。

营运资金的构成复杂且多样，包括现金、存货、应收账款等流动资产，以及应付账款、短期借款等流动负债。

这些要素在企业运营中起着不同的作用，共同维持企业的正常运营。

营运资金的管理目标是在确保企业正常运营的前提下，通过优化资金配置，降低资金成本，提高资金使用效率，从而实现企业价值的最大化。

在营运资金管理策略方面，主要包括流动性管理、信用政策管理、存货管理等。

流动性管理关注的是企业现金流的流入和流出，通过预测和管理现金流，确保企业有足够的资金应对日常运营和突发事件。

信用政策管理则涉及到应收账款的回收和信用控制，通过制定合理的信用政策，优化应收账款的回收速度和风险。

外文翻译The focus of working capital managementin UK small firms（节选）Author：Carole Howorth，Paul WestheadNationality：Nottingham NG8 1BB, UKDerivation: Management Accounting Research NO.14,2003, PP.94–111 AbstractWorking capital management routines of a large random sample of small companies in the UK are examined. Considerable variability in the take-up of 11 working capital management routines was detected. Principal components analysis and cluster analysis confirm the identification of four di stinct ‘types’ of companies with regard to patterns of working capital management. The first three ‘types’ of companies focused upon cash management, stock or debtors routines respectively, whilst the fourth ‘type’ were less likely to take-up any working capital management routines. Influences on the amount and focus of working capital management are discussed. Multinomial logistic regression analysis suggests that the selected independent variables successfully discriminated between the four ‘types’ of companies. The results suggest that small companies focus only on areas of working capital management where they expect to improve marginal returns. The difficulties of establishing causality are highlighted and implications for academics, policy-makers and practitioners are reported.Conclusions and implicationsThe aim of this study has been to encourage additional research, rather than to provide an exhaustive review of all the factors associated with the take-up of working capital management routines by small companies. Three theories guided the selection of the independent variables explored in this study. The RBV highlighted that small firms have idiosyncratic bundles of resources associated with the take-up of working capital management routines. Agency theory identified the influence of external stakeholders as well as differences between small and large firms. Transactions costs theory indicated that small firms might invest resources in specific areas of working capital management if they perceive them to offer the highest marginal return.The results consistently highlighted, across a variety of statistical tests, that small firms are not a homogenous group with regard to working capital management routines. Considerable variability was detected in the take-up of 11 working capital management routines by a large random sample of small companies in the UK. Evidence from the PCA and the cluster analysis confirmed the identification of four distinct ‘types’ of companies with regardto the take-up of working capital management routines. Moreover, evidence from the multinomial logistic regression analysis suggests that the selected independent variables successfully discriminated between the four ‘types’ of companies. Twelve out of the 18 hypotheses were supported. A further two hypotheses showed the anticipated relationship but were not significant discriminators between the ‘types’ of companies.Evidence that the majority of small companies focus their efforts on one area of working capital management indicates that resources for working capital management are limited. However, a striking finding from the regression analysis was the detection that firms which utilize fewer working capital management routines were not necessarily smaller companies. We can infer here that resource constraints per se may not be the major barrier to the utilization of working capital management routines by smaller companies. Instead, the results provide an indication that the perceived marginal return on committing resources may be a major influence on the extent and focus of working capital management.However, we acknowledge that a cross-sectional study such as this one cannot establish causality and can only provide an indication of associations that warrant further investigation. Additional studies could usefully explore the stimuli leading to the utilisation of working capital management routines and the barriers to their take-up. The dynamics of working capital management are complex and the links with performance are bidirectional and difficult to unravel. Small companies may invest resources into managing a particular area of working capital where they are performing badly because the returns from controlling the problem area are perceived to be high. If the direction of causality is not understood, an overly simplistic conclusion in this instance could be that investment of more resources into an area leads to worse performance. The complexity of causality makes it difficult to establish the effect of working capital management routines on the performance of the firm. We can infer that firms with a lower propensity to undertake working capital management routines are not significantly associated with increased cash flow problems, nor reduced profitability. There is some indication that these may be ‘lifestyle’ firms but additional research is required before firm conclusions can be drawn. Currently, it is not clear whether these laggard working capital firms are underperforming or have untapped potential for growth.In a similar way, the direction of causality is not clear with regard to the link between the take-up of working capital management routines and the level of financial skills in a firm. This study employed a simple proxy measure of financial sophistication. Further research is warranted to investigate the direction and the strength of the links between the take-up of working capital management routines and financial management skills and training, education and prior experience. Additional multivariate statistical studies are also required in a variety of national, cultural and industrial contexts toidentify the combination of internal and external environmental factors associated with the take-up of working capital management routines by different employment size bands of private firms (i.e. micro, small, medium and large).Qualitative studies and longitudinal research will provide fresh insights into the processes and dynamics of working capital management, as well as the complex strands of causality (Scapens, 1990).Policy-makers and practitioners seeking to increase the stock of professionally managed firms, might need to target their assistance towards owners of small firms who face attitudinal, resource and operational barriers to the utilization of working capital management routines. Presented evidence suggests that small companies should not be viewed as a homo generous entity with regard to their working capital management routines.Policy-makers and practitioners need to appreciate this diversity and they may use the presented evidence to tailor assistance to the needs of particular ‘types’ of companies, rather than providing ‘blanket” support to all firms irrespective of aspirations or resources.Policy-makers and practitioners need to appreciate the management time constraint faced by many small firms. Time constraints not only limit the amount of time for working capital management , but also the amount of time available to assess whether changes to current working capital management policy would be worthwhile. Moreover, we might expect improved skills to lead to more efficient use of time but small firm managers will require powerful evidence to convince them of the benefits of investing time in financial skills training. The take-up of routines (and financial skills training) could be increased if it was conclusively confirmed that firms significantly improve their performance after introducing appropriate working capital management routines. Additional longitudinal, qualitative and multivariate statistical evidence is warranted that explores whether the take-up of working capital management routines by small firms is subsequently associated with superior levels of performance. Best business practice evidence, from case studies, could also be utilised by policy-makers and practitioners to convince more owners of small firms of how specific working capital management routines can be used proactively to address constraints on business development. There is clearly a need for a great deal more research in this area before the dynamics of working capital management are well understood.英国小企业运营资金管理重点（节选）作者：Carole Howorth，Paul Westhead国籍：Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK原文出处: Management Accounting Research NO.14,2003,PP.94–111摘要从英国小公司中大量的随机抽样，并检查它们的运营资金管理模式。

中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)译文：跨行业的营运资金管理问题研究摘要企业可以通过降低融资成本或者减少资金在流动资产上的占用等方式来扩大自身现有的资金。

我们在调查过程中，通过运用《首席财务官》杂志的年度营运资金调查报告提供了此报告中的关键组成部分。

我们发现，行业间的跨时资金措施存在着明显的差异。

此外，这些措施在企业营运资金管理中实施后有了显著改变。

引言高效率的营运资金管理的重要性是不容置疑的。

营运资金是现金或者是随时可以兑换为现金（流动资产）的资产和即将成为现金需要的负债（流动负债）之间的差额。

营运资金管理的目标是维持流动资产与流动负债周转的最佳平衡。

商业可行性依赖于应收账款、存货、应付账款的有效管理。

企业可以通过降低融资成本，减少资金占用，以此来增加自有对外资金。

在日常工作中，管理人员将太多的管理精力都放在把当前的资产和负债的周转由非最佳水平成长为最佳水平上。

即实现效率和风险之间的平衡。

最近的一个实例是企业运用六西格玛方法试图最大限度地加强营运资金管理。

六西格玛方法涉及企业所有经营范围，能帮助企业衡量和确保自身在各个领域中的质量。

当前这个方法的运用是用来识别和纠正错误的交易效率差异及低效的财务供应链。

六西格玛方法的运用原理是通过降低销售回款周期、加速支付周期来降低成本、减少流动资金需求、提高顾客满意度。

似乎有许多成功的案例，包括珍妮弗（2002）的关于销售天数减少了百分之十五的优秀的销售报告。

从而使蒂博多万区域医疗中心产生的现金流量增加了大约200万美元。

同时，坏帐从340万美元下降到60万美元。

但六西格玛方法并不是十分完美的，外克瑟(2003)调查多个公司运用六西格玛方法的有效性，研究显示：六西格玛方法确实是一个“缓慢致富”的技术，其回报率一直徘徊在1.2%-4.5%的范围内。

即使在使用六西格玛方法的业务中，也需要对营运资金管理的“最佳”水平进行识别和确认。

行业因素可能会影响企业的信贷政策、库存管理和账单支付活动。