Managers’ Perception and Attitude toward Financial Risks Associated with SMEs: Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to identify financial and cash flow risks associated with SMEs and investigated how managers perceived these risks using the analytical hierarchical process (AHP). Accordingly, a three-level decision model was structured using two criteria, probability and consequences, and a list of six different types of risks as decision alternatives. Data were collected by a survey questionnaire from SME managers/owners and analyzed in accordance with the AHP method. The results show that the priority weight for risk criteria was 52% for probability and 48% for consequences. Further, with an average weight of 18.8%, the risk of an increase in bank charges ranked as the highest type of risk faced by SMEs. However, the risk of low or no profits was ranked as the lowest with an average weight of 13.4%. This study is one of the few, if not the first, to investigate SME managers’ perceptions using an AHP method and to provide insightful information on how SME managers/owners perceived various financial and cash flow risks. The study results may support the use of the AHP method in understanding managers’ perceptions and attitudes toward various types of risks associated with SMEs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".