MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407364032 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v8n6p49

The Impact of Working Capital Management on Profitability of Petroleum Retail Firms: Empirical Evidence from Ghana

2016· article· en· W2407364032 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joseph Mbawuni, Mercy Hawa Mbawuni, Simon Gyasi Nimako

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicWorking Capital and Financial Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccounts payableWorking capitalProfitability indexCash conversion cycleAccounts receivableBusinessReturn on assetsReturn on capitalReturn on capital employedAgricultural scienceCashFinanceEconomicsEconomic growthHuman capitalCapital formationPaymentOperating cash flowFinancial capital

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined the impact of working capital management (WCM) on the profitability of petroleum retail firms (PRFs) in Ghana over a six year period (2008-2013). Audited annual reports from a sample of five selected petroleum retail firms in Ghana are employed in the study. Using, descriptive analysis, correlation and regression analysis, the results indicate that, in the PRFs in Ghana, there is favourable net working capital for the firms and a favourable networking capital to total assets ratio. The most important WCM component that drives the firm’s profitability, measured in return on assets (ROA), is average days payable (ADP). The rest of WCM components, cash conversion cycle (CCC), average days inventory (ADI) and average days receivables (ADR) did not have significant relationship with profitability. The study further found that WCM practices among the five selected PRFs support the conservative strategy of WCM, rather than an aggressive WCM strategy. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicWorking Capital and Financial PerformanceFrench-language works237,207