MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1531527249 · doi:10.5709/ce.1897-9254.153

Factors Influencing Risk Management Decision of Small and Medium Scale Enterprises in Ghana

2014· article· en· W1531527249 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anselm Komla Abotsi, Gershon Yawo Dake, Richard Abankwa Agyepong

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Economics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRisk Management in Financial Firms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsStratified samplingRisk managementProbit modelBusinessScale (ratio)Sample (material)Simple random sampleGovernment (linguistics)ProbitOrdered probitActuarial scienceMarketingFinanceEconomicsEconometricsStatisticsGeographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research seeks to study the factors that enhance or preclude owners of SMEs in Ghana in making risk management decisions. The study was conducted with managers of SMEs in four regions in Ghana. The researchers adopted a quantitative approach and employed STATA 10 and SPSS version 20 in the analysis. Stratified and simple random sampling techniques were used to select the sample units. The probit model was used in the analysis of data. A total of 447 SMEs were sampled for the study, with at least 111 from each of the selected regions. The probit results show that the demographic factors indicate a positive influence on the likelihood that managers will take risk management decisions. All of the business related demographic factors are significant at various levels and positive, except for risk-loving. The economically related factors, such as the estimated amount at risk, the estimated cost of risk management and the estimated total monthly income after tax all have a positive influence on risk management decision making. However, government and tax policies are perceived to negatively influence risk management decisions by managers. We recommend that institutions working closely with SMEs acquire the expertise to train the managers of SMEs on risk management practices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary EconomicsSame topicRisk Management in Financial FirmsFrench-language works237,207