集团企业资金集中管理外文翻译

浙 江 工 商 大 学 财 务 与 会 计 学 院 本 科 毕 业 论 文.外文翻译编号：时间：2021年x月x日书山有路勤为径，学海无涯苦作舟页码：第1页 共1页外文翻译之一The focus of working capital managementin UK small firms（节选）Author：Carole Howorth，Paul WestheadNationality：Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK Derivation: Management Accounting Research NO.14,2003, PP.94111 Abstract Working 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 distinct 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 regard to 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 in