MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386052119 · doi:10.24912/v1i2.557-565

THE EFFECT OF WORKING CAPITAL MANAGEMENT ON COMPANY FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

2023· article· en· W4386052119 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Application on Economics and Business · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicWorking Capital and Financial Performance
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessWorking capitalStock exchangeProfitability indexCash conversion cycleFinanceFree cash flowPaymentCash flowInventory turnoverOperating cash flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of the company's efforts to manage working capital in improving the company financial performance. One way to operate the company's working capital properly, is by implementing the cash conversion cycle. Cash conversion cycle is a cycle of cash flow in the company which is measured by using the ratios of the Average Collection Period, Inventory Turnover, and Average Payment Period, and indirectly has an influence on the profitability of the company. The research subjects are retail companies listed on Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) between 2017-2020. Using double regression analysis with the EViews application, the result was obtained that the Average Collection Period (ACP) has a positive but not significant effect on financial performance. Different results were obtained from the variables of Average Payment Period (APP) and Inventory Collection Period (ICP), in which each of them has a significant and negative effect on financial performance of the company.

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.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.192 · 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