Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T18:48:05.782Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Simulation Analysis of Causal Relationships within the Cash Flow Process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Norman L. Chervany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Based upon the ubiquitous nature of cash flow projections in the decision-making process, it would be desirable to be able to find answers to questions of the following form:

(1) How does the level of variability in demand affect the cash outflows for payment of accounts payable liabilities?

(2) Does the method used in planning production influence the firm's cash flow patterns?

Analysis of existing attempts to model the cause and effect relationships within the cash flow process reveals that the ability to answer questions similar to the ones posed above does not exist. The research accomplished to date can be characterized as being definitional and hypothetical; cash flows have been defined, lists of factors that may influence cash flow patterns have been postulated, and simple examples of what may happen to cash flow patterns have been constructed. Although these preliminary steps are necessary, they are not sufficient for a thorough understanding of the cash flow process. Analysis must be undertaken to establish the cash flow consequences of various combinations of environmental and organizational factors.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 5 , Issue 4-5 , December 1970 , pp. 445 - 467
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Beranek, William, Analysis for Financial Decisions (Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1963).Google Scholar
[2]Beranek, William, “Financial Implications of Lot-Size Inventory Models,” Management Science, XIII (April 1967), pp. 401–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Bonini, Charles P., Simulation of Information and Decision Systems in the Firm (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962).Google Scholar
[4]Chervany, Norman L., “A Model for Cash Flow Analysis,” Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of the Social Sciences (West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University, October 12–13, 1967).Google Scholar
[5]Chervany, Norman L., A Simulation Analysis of Cash Flow Patterns within a Manufacturing Firm (D.B.A. dis. Graduate School of Business, Indiana University 1968).Google Scholar
[6]Conway, R. W., Johnson, B. M., and Maxwell, W. L., “Some Problems of Digital Systems Simulation,” Management Science, VI (October 1959), pp. 92–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Croxton, Fredrick E., Cowden, Dudley J., and Klein, Sidney, Applied General Statistics, 3rd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963).Google Scholar
[8]Duncan, Acheson J., Quality Control and Industrial Statistics, Revised ed. (Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1959).Google Scholar
[9]Galbraith, Jay R., “Solving Production Smoothing Problems,” Management Science, XV (August 1969), pp. B665–B674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Hanssman, Fred, and Hess, Sidney W., “A Linear Programming Approach to Production and Employment Scheduling,” Management Technology, I (January 1960), pp. 46–51.Google Scholar
[11]Holt, Charles C., et al. , Planning Production, Inventories, and Work Force (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960).Google Scholar
[12]Latané, Henry A., “Portfolio Balance— The Demand for Money, Bonds, and Stock,” The Southern Economic Journal, XXIX (October 1962), pp. 71–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]National Association of Accountants, Cash Flow Analysis for Managerial Control, National Association of Accountants Research Report No. 38 (New York: National Association of Accountants, 1961).Google Scholar
[14]Naylor, Thomas H., et al. , Computer Simulation Techniques (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966).Google Scholar
[15]Naylor, Thomas H., and Finger, J. M., “Verification of Computer Simulation Models,” Management Science, XIV (September 1967), pp. 92–101.Google Scholar
[16]Naylor, Thomas H, Wirtz, Kenneth, and Wonnacott, Thomas, “Some Methods for Analyzing Data Generated by Computer Simulation Experiments,”Paper presented at the National meeting of The Institute of Management Science(Boston:April 5–7, 1967).Google Scholar
[17]Otteson, Schuyler F., Panschar, William G., and Patterson, James M., Marketing: The Firm's Viewpoint (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1963).Google Scholar
[18]Siegel, Sidney, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1956).Google Scholar
[19]Spadaro, Louis M., “The Heuristic Value of Simulation in Economic and Business Research,”Proceedings on Simulation in Business and Public Health, First Annual Conference of the American Statistical Association (New York Chapter) and the Public Health Association of New York City (New York: March 2–3, 1966).Google Scholar
[20]Starr, Martin K., and Miller, David W., Inventory Control: Theory and Practice (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962).Google Scholar
[21]U. S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, Fractional Factorial Experimental Designs for Factors at Two Levels, Applied Mathematics Series No. 48 (Washington D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, April 15, 1957).Google Scholar