majhi_ghosh_cementindustry

8/8/2019 Majhi_Ghosh_CementIndustry

1/10

Working capital management efficiency : A

study on the Indian cement industry

Dr. Santanu Kr. Ghosh Santi Gopal Maji

Head, Department of Commerce, The

University of Burdwan.

Research Scholar, Department of

Commerce, The University of Burdwan.

This paper makes an attempt to examine the efficiency of working capital

management of the Indian cement companies during 1992-93 to 2001 -2002.

For measuring the efficiency of working capital management three index val-

ues -performance index, utilisation index and overall efficiency index are cal-

culated, instead of using some common working capital management ratios.

Using industry norm as target -efficiency level of the individual firms, this

paper also tests the speed of achieving that target level of efficiency by an

individual firm during the period of study. Finding of the study indicates that

the Indian Cement Industry as a whole did not perform remarkably well dur-

ing this period.

Efficient management of

working Capital is one of thepre-conditions for the success

of an enterprise. Efficient

management of working capital

means management of various

components of working capital in

such a way that an adequate amount

of working capital is maintained for

smooth running of a firm and for

fulfilment of twin objectives of

liquidity and profitability. While

inadequate amount of working

capital impairs the firm's liquidity,

holding of excess working capital

results in the reduction of the

profitability. But the proper

estimation of working capital

actually required, is a difficult task

for the management because the

amount of working capital varies

across firms over the periods

depending upon the nature of

business, scale of operation,production cycle, credit policy,

availability of raw materials, etc. For

this significant amount of funds is

necessary to invest permanently in

the form of various current assets.

For instance, due to time lag between

sale of goods and their actual

realisation in cash, adequate amount

of working capital is always required

to be made available for maintaining

the desired level of sales. Empirical

results show that ineffective

management of working capital isone of the important factors causing

industrial sickness (Yadav, 1986).

Modern Financial management aims

at reducing the level of current assets

without ignoring the risk of stock

outs (Bhattacharya, 1997). Efficient

management of working capital is,

thus, an important indicator of sound

health of an organisation which

requires reduction of unnecessary

blocking of capital in order to bring

down the cost of financing.

In the light of the above, an

attempt is made in this study to lookinto the working capital management

of some selected firms in cement

industry. The specific purposes of the

study are:

(a) To examine the efficiency of

working capital management

practices of the selected firms in

cement industry.

(b) To test how fast the sample firms

have been able to improve their

respective level of efficiency in

working capital managementwith respect to a target level

(industry average).

The rest of this paper is

organised as follows:

In section II, we briefly review

some literature on the management of

working capital. Section III covers the

database and methodology adopted in

this study; the empirical analyses are

presented in section IV and

conclusions are reported in section V.


2/10

SECTION -II

Review of Literature

A significant portion of financialresearch is concerned with the

management of working capital. This

issue has been extensively

investigated at both conceptual and

empirical levels. Prasad (2001)

conducted a research study on the

working capital management in paper

industry. His sample consisted of 21

paper mills from large, medium and

small scale for a period of 10 years.

He reported that the chief executives

properly recognised the role ofefficient use of working capital in

liquidity and profitability, but in

practice they could not achieve it.

The study also revealed that fifty

percent of the executives followed

budgetary method in planning

working capital and working capital

management was inefficient due to

sub-optimum utilisation of working

capital. Sarvanan (2001) made a

study on working capital manage-

ment in ten selected non-banking

financial companies. For this he

employed several statistical tools on

different ratios to examine the

effective management of working

capital. He concluded that the sample

firms had placed more importance

upon the liquidity aspect compared

to that of the profitability. Dulta

(2001) observed that the various

components of working capital of

HPMC had not been used efficiently

and net working capital position had

worsened continuously during theperiod of study (1991 to 1998).

Chundawat & Bhanawat (2000)

analysed the working capital

management practices in IDBI

assisted tube and tyre companies for

the period 1994- 1998 by using some

relevant ratios and concluded that the

working capital management of IDBI

assisted companies was more

effective than the industry as a whole.

Srivastav & Yadav (1986) developed

a multiple discriminant model in

determining the effectiveness of

working capital management using

four ratios and a sample test of 40

textile companies, of which 20 'not

effective' (sick) and 20 'effective'

(healthy), they empirically found that

their model correctly classified 95

percent of the companies in the

sample.

Though accounting ratios played

a very important role in most of the

above studies, but a choice of ratios

or group of ratios is often a difficult

task due to the absence of a proper

theory of ratio analysis

(Bhattacharya, 1997). To overcome

this problem Bhattacharya (1997)

developed an alternative ratio model

for the measurement and monitoring

the efficiency of working Capital

Management.

SECTION -III

Database and Methodology

adopted in this study

The present study is based on a

sample of 20 large cement companies

operating in India. These companies,(among the indigenous firms),

constitute a large part of the cement

industry in terms of market sharing

within the country. The relevant

secondary data have been collected

from the 'Capitaline' database for a

period of 10 years from 1992-93 to

2001 -2002. Of the total companies

available in the 'Capitaline' database,

only those companies have been

selected for which data for this study

period are available.

For measuring the overall

efficiency of working capital

management (WCM), first the

'Performance Index of Working

Capital Management' (PIWC M

) ,

suggested by Bhattacharya (1997),

has been calculated by applying the

following model :

Wi (t1)

Is

Wit

PIWCM

= ..... (i)

N

Where,

Is = Sales index defined as :

Wi = Individual group of currentassets.

N = Number of current assets

group.

and i = 1,2,3, .............. N.

In this study total current assets

have been divided into eight

components: Raw materials inventory,

work-in-progress inventory, Finished

goods inventory, stores & spares

inventory, Debtors, cash, Loans &

advances and other current assets.

Next, calculations of the

'Working Capital Utilisation Index'

(UIWCM

) have been done with the help

of following model:

At1

UIWCM

= ...........(II)

At

Where, A = current assets/sales.

And finally, the 'Efficiency Index

of Working Capital Management'

(EIWC M

) has been calculated by

multiplying the overall performanceindex of working capital manage-

ment with the working capital

utilisation index.

Thus, EIWCM

= PIWCM

UIWCM

.....(III)

In order to measure the firm's

efficiency in achieving the targeted

level of efficiency during the study

period following OLS model has

been used:

Yi = a + X

i+ e

i......... (iv)

Where, Yi= Z

t Z

t1and X

i= Z*

tZ

t1.

Zt= Index at time 't' for the firm and

Z*t

= Average index of the

industry at t1.

The estimated beta value ()represents the speed of the individual

firm in improving its efficiency in

achieving the industry norms in this

regard, = 1 for a firm indicates thatthe degree of firms efficiency in the

matter of managing working capital

is equal to the average efficiency

n

i=1

St

St1


3/10

level of the industry as a whole.

Similarly, < 1, speaks for the needof further improvements by the firms

in this regards.

Following Robert Morris

Associates' Annual statement studies

(1975) and Dun & Brodstreet's Key

Business Ratio (1975) calculations,

medium value has been taken as the

target industry norms for the present

purpose. Equal-weighted mean or

value-weighted mean could also be

used in place of median. However,

these have not been considered in the

present study.

SECTION -IV

Empirical Analysis

Performance Index of WCM

Performance index of WCM

represents average performance

index of the various components of

current assets. A firm may be said to

have managed its working capital

efficiently if the proportionate rise in

sales is more than the proportionate

rise in current assets during a

particular period. Numericallyoverall performance index more than

1 indicates efficient management of

working capital. Average performance

index of the industry as a whole

(Table-3) shows that performance

index was more than 1 in 8 periods

out of 10. Thus, the performance of

the industry as whole was mostly

efficient during the period of study.

A year, wise comparison reveals that

the number of efficient firms varied

between 9 to 20 during the period ofstudy (Table-2). During the year

1993-94, all the 20 firms, as per their

average index of performance, had

managed their current assets

efficiently. Among the other years,

during 1997 -98, 1998-99 and 2001-

2002 respectively, 17, 15 and 15

firms performed well. 1992-93 and

1996-97 appeared to be the most

unsuccessful years during which only

9 firms could maintain their average

overall performance well in the

matter of managing various

components of current assets.

In fact, the year 1996-97 provedto be the worst year for the Indian

Cement Industry as a whole. From

table-3, it is clear that in this year the

Industry average index values of all

the three measures were least and less

than 1. Table -2 also reveals almost

the same picture. The least number

of successful firms (i.e., firms having

index value > 1) for all the three

measures are found in the year 1992-

93. On the other hand, maximum

number of successful firms for these

three measures are found in the year

1993- 94.

Firm specific analysis reveals that

the performance index varied

between 29.54 to .59 (Gujarat

Ambuja Cement). The reason behind

such a vary high value of perfor-

mance index was that compared to

the other years the company has been

able to enhance its sales during this

year using a very negligible amount

as loans & advances. This may be

viewed as an indication that if theavailable scopes were utilised

properly, the firm could improve its

overall performance significantly.

However, during the remaining part

of the study period, the company

showed a very satisfactory

performance in this matter, (not

reported here). In this connection,

mention may be made about the

overall performance of Andhra

Cement (10.67 in 1992- 93) and

Himadri Cement (21.15 in 2000-2001). The reasons behind such

surprisingly extreme values for

performance index of both the

companies lie in the sudden

improvement of efficiency in

managing their respective

inventories during the concerned

years only. These values again

indicate that adequate attention to the

management of inventory could be of

much help for the firms belonging to

this industry in achieving a very high

level of efficiency in current assets

management.

Utilisation IndexWhile performance index

represents the average overall

performance in managing the

components of current assets,

utilisation index indicates the ability

of the firm in utilising its current

assets as a whole for the purpose of

generating sales. If an increase in

total current assets is coupled with

more than proportionate rise in sales,

the degree of utilisation of these

assets with respect to sales is said tohave improved and vice versa. This

ultimately reflects the operating

cycle of the firm. This can be

shortened by means of increasing the

degree of utilisation. Thus, a value

of utilisation index grater than one

is desired. A cursory look into the

table -3 reveals that the Cement

industry as a whole did not

performed well. Because, of the ten

years, the industry average for five

years only were greater than one.

1996-97 appeared to be the worstyear as before and 1993 -94 proved

to be the most successful year as per

table -3.

This index values varied between

3.95 (Andhra Cement in 1995-96)

and 0.10 (Himadry Cement in 2000-

2001). Though compared to the

performance index the range is short,

the large gap between the two

extreme values clearly points out the

inefficiency of the firms belonging

to this industry in the matter ofutilisation of current assets. In fact,

excepting the extreme value of 3.95,

the degree of utilisation (maximum

values) varried between 1.87

(Narmada Cement in 1999-2000) and

1.15 (Priyadarshini Cement in 1994-

95). This indicates that all the firms

included in the sample possess the

ability to utilise the current assets

properly. But the range of minimum

values (from .86 to .10), particularly

the lower point, clearly brings out the


4/10

extent of inefficiency on the part of

these Indian Companies in this

matter. Compared to the lowestindustry average of .90, at least seven

firms performed very badly

(UIWCM


5/10

generating increased sales revenue is

found. A careful attention to this

would help the firms in enhancingtheir efficiency in working capital

Management. In the context of the

present highly competitive market

situation, these scopes should be

properly utilised.

SECTION -V

Conclusion

An attempt has been made in the

present study to investigate the

efficiency of the Indian cement

companies in the matter of manage-

ment of working capital during1992-93 to 2001-2002. Instead of

using the common method of

analysing different working capital

management ratios, three index

values representing the average

performance of the components of

current assets, the degree of

utilisation of the total current assets

in relation to sales and the efficiency

in managing the working capital,

have been computed for the selectedfirms over the ten- year study period.

Using industry norm as target

efficiency level of the individual

firms, an evaluation has been made

with regard to the speed of achieving

that target level of efficiency by an

individual firm during the study

period.

From the present study it is

observed that the Indian Cement

industry did not perform remarkably

well during this period. Industry

average for efficiency index was

greater than one in 6 years out of 10

years study period. Though some of

the sample firms had successfully

improved efficiency during these

years, the existence of a very high

degree of inconsistency in this matter

clearly points out the need for

adopting sound working capital

management policies by these firms.

In the matter of achieving thetarget level (industry norm) of

efficiency by the firms, Associated

Cement and Dalmia were the most

successful firm followed by Decan,

Kanoria & Madras. In view of the

observed values, once again it maynot be unwise to conclude that firms

under study should take necessary

steps in order to improve efficiency

in this regard. This is, in particular,

important in the context of the

present competitive situation of the

market.

Present study also suggests that

a further study may be helpful for

identifying the forces that govern this

chronic nature of inefficiency present

in the Indian cement companies in

the matter of working capital

management.

Table- 1 : Maximum and Minimum values of respective index :

1992 -93 to 2001 -2002.

Sl. Name of companies Performance Index Utilisation Index Efficiency Index

No.

Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum

1 Associated Cement 1.29 .85 1.25 .86 1.61 .72

Companies Ltd. (94-95) (92-93) (95-96) (92-93) (94-95) (95-96)

2 Birla Corporation. 1.53 .78 1.23 .73 1.87 .57

(2001-02) (92-93) (94-95) (92-93) (2001-02) (92-93)

3 Narmoda Cement 1.75 .75 1.87 .69 2.45 .47

Co. Ltd. (93-94) (92-93) (99-2000) (98-99) (93-94) (98-99)

4 Gujarat Sidhee Cement 3.00 .93 1.44 .85 3.52 .79

Ltd. (2000-02) (94-95) (95-96) (94-95) (2001-02) (94-95)

5 Dalmia Cement 1.68 .88 1.33 .86 2.24 .77

(Bharat) Ltd. (94-95) (95-96) (94-95) (93-94) (94-95) (95-96)

6 KCP Ltd. 2.02 .83 1.28 .80 3.86 .70

(98-99) (99-2000) (92-93) (96-97) (98-99) (99-2000)

7 Madras Cement Ltd. 1.57 .86 1.35 .81 2.11 .77

(98-99) (96-97) (98-99) (99-2000) (98-00) (97-98)

8 India Cement Ltd. 1.30 .84 1.19 .58 1.54 .54

(98-99) (96-97) (98-99) (97-98) (98-99) (97-98)


6/10

9 Andra Cement Ltd. 10.67 .98 3.95 .25 10.38 .90

(92-93) (97-98) (95-96) (93-94) (95-96) (98-99)

10 Himadri Cement Ltd. 21.15 .97 1.33 .10 15.00 .97

(2000-01) (94-95) (93-94) (2000-01) (93-94) (94-95)

11 Kakatiya Cements 1.50 .66 1.40 .51 1.68 .36

Sugar & Industries (93-94) (92-93) (99-2000) (94-95) (93-94) (94-95)

12 Panyam Cement & 1.49 .90 1.24 .73 1.53 .68

Minerals Industries (97-98) (95-96) (94-95) (99-2000) (97-98) (2000-01)

13 Kanoria Industries Ltd. 1.72 .74 1.42 .55 2.45 .68

(94-95) (92-93) (94-95) (99-2000) (94-95) (92.93)

14 Chettinad Cement 1.14 .78 1.19 .67 1.22 .52

Corporation Ltd. (99-2000) (2000-01) (94-95) (2000-01) (97-98) (2000-01)

15 Priyadarsani 1.33 .74 1.15 .82 1.36 .61

Cement Ltd. (2001-02) (98-99) (94-95) (98-99) (2001-02) (98-99)

16 Sagar Cement Ltd. 1.39 .79 1.22 .77 1.96 .50

(95-96) (99-2000) (2000-01) (92-93) (95-96) (92-93)

17 Decan Cement Ltd. 1.60 .61 1.47 .58 1.89 .35

(94-95) (92-93) (93-94) (92-93) (93-94) (92-93)

18 Gujarat Ambuja 29.54 .59 1.37 .50 32.30 .29

Cement Ltd. (2000-01) (92-93) (99-2000) (92-93) (2000-01) (92-93)

19 Ambuja Cement 1.48 .69 1.39 .78 2.05 .53

Eastern Ltd. (99-2000) (97-98) (99-2000) (97-98) (99-2000) (97-98)

20 NCL Industries Ltd. 1.97 .74 1.59 .67 3.13 .49

(96-97) (97-98) (96-97) (97-98) (96-97) (97-98)

Table 2: No. of Efficient Firms (Index Value >1)

Index 1992 1993- 1994- 1995- 1996 - 1997- 1998- 1999- 2000 - 2001 -

-93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 01 02

Performance Index 9 20 14 10 9 12 17 15 14 15

Utilisation Index 5 15 12 9 7 7 11 9 12 14

Efficiency Index 8 17 15 8 9 10 13 12 11 14

Table -3: Industry Average: 1992-93 to 2001-2002

Index 1992 1993- 1994- 1995 - 1996 - 1997 - 1998- 1999 - 2000 - 2001 -

-93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 01 02

Performance

Index of WCM 0.97 1.22 1.13 1.01 0.96 1.01 1.13 1.07 1.15 1.07

Utilisation

Index of WCM 0.91 1.13 1.07 0.99 0.90 0.95 1.01 0.99 1.02 1.03

Efficiency

Index of WCM 0.90 1.30 1.13 0.94 0.89 0.98 1.06 1.01 1.20 1.06


7/10

Table- 4: Regression Results. (Performance index)

Sl. No. Name of the Company Constant Beta ( ) R2

1 Associated Cement 0.044 .899* .810

Companies Ltd. (.949) (5.461)

2 Birla Corporation Ltd. 0.074 .592 .351

(1.093) (1.945)

3 Normada Cement .144 .834* .695

Company Ltd. (.899) (3.995)

4 Gujarat Sidhee .375 .538 .289

Cement Ltd. (1.422) (1.687)

5 Dalmia Cement .037 .819* .670

(Bharat) Ltd. (.522) (3.773)

6 KCP Ltd. .094 .727** .529

(.571) (2.803)

7 Madras Cement Ltd. .030 .851* .724

(.394) (4.280)

8 India Cement Ltd. .053 .822* .676

(1.024) (3.822)

9 Andhra Cement Ltd. .028 .827* .684

(.047) (3.606)

10 Himadry Cements Ltd. 4.770 .593 .352

(1.579) (1.804)

11 Kakatiya Cements .004 .787** .619

Sugar & Industries (.034) (3.121)

12 Panyam Cements .079 .721** .520

& minerals Industries (.782) (2.551)

13 Kanoria Industries Ltd. .168 .843* .711

(1.463) (3.846)

14 Chettinad Cement .053 .291 .085

Corporation Ltd. (-.758) (.806)

15 Priyadarshini Cement Ltd. .028 .496 .246

(.309) (1.511)

16 Sagar Cements Ltd. .072 .877* .770

(1.072) (4.837)17 Decan Cements Ltd. .057 .767* .588

(.735) (3.161)

18 Gujarat Ambuja 3.663 .750* .563

Cement Ltd. (1.030) (3.005)

19 Ambuja Cement .088 .897* .804

Eastern Ltd. (1.414) (5.357)

20 NCL Industries Ltd. .086 .839* .705

(.668) (4.093)

( t -values are shown in parentheses )

* Significant at 1% level, ** Significant at 5% level.


8/10

Table- 5: Regression Results (Utilisation Index)



Companies Ltd. (2.838) (6.494)

2 Birla Corporation Ltd. 0.082 .846* .716

(2.124) (4.198)


Company Ltd. (.328) (3.228)

4 Gujarat Sidhee .057 .856* .773

Cement Ltd. (.973) (4.386)

5 Dalmia Cement .004 .936* .876

(Bharat) Ltd. (.137) (7.037)

6 KCP Ltd. .018 .695* .484

(.138) (2.560)


(.296) (3.509)


(2.886) (5.193)

9 Andhra Cement Ltd. .347 .715* .512

(.837) (2.507)

10 Himadry Cements Ltd. .048 .276 .076

(.250) (703)

11 Kakatiya Cements -0.060 .726** .527Sugar & Industries (-.522) (2.588)

12 Panyam Cements -.034 .139 .019

& minerals industries (-.644) (.344)


(.096) (3.580)

14 Chettinad Cement -.024 .604 .365

Corporation Ltd. (-.397) (2.067)

15 Priyadarshini Cement Ltd. .019 .778* .605

(.573) (3.277)


(1.042) (4.134)17 Decan Cements Ltd. .046 .961* .923

(.925) (9.171)

18 Gujarat Ambuja .131 .868.* .754

Cement Ltd. (2.481) (4.636)

19 Ambuja Cement .039 .636 .405

Eastern Ltd. (.632) (2.181)

20 NCL industries Ltd. .059 .874* .764

(784) (4.766)




9/10

Table- 6: Regression Results (Efficiency Index)



Companies Ltd. (3.209) (7.370)

2 Birla Corporation Ltd. .244 .849* .721

(2.696) (4.252)


Company Ltd. (1.007) (3.431)

4 Gujarat Sidhee .531 .596 .355

Cement Ltd. (1.619) (1.964)

5 Dalmia Cement .119 .902* .813

(Bharat) Ltd. (1.113) (5.518)

6 KCP Ltd. .255 .748** .559

(.663) (2.983)


(1.011) (4.413)


(1.517) (4.350)

9 Andhra Cement Ltd. 1.643 .752** .565

(1.179) (2.794)

10 Himadry Cements Ltd. .2.552 .763** .582

(1.267) (2.887)

11 Kakatiya Cements .037 .772** .596

Sugar&lndustries (.167) (2.975)

12 Panyam Cements .073 .613 .376

& minerals industries (.504) (1.900)


(1.402) (4.251)

14 Chettinad Cement .077 .524 .275

Corporation Ltd. (.700) (1.630)

15 Priyadarshini Cement Ltd. .005 .577 .334

(.052) (1.873)


(.630) (4.179)

17 Decan Cements Ltd. .168 .896* .802

(1.496) (5.328)

18 Gujarat Ambuja 4.204 .748** .560

Cement Ltd. (1.075) (2.986)

19 Ambuja Cement .179 .756* .571

Eastern Ltd. (1.172) (3.052)

20 NCL Ltd. .279 .824* .679

(1.013) (3.853)




10/10

Table- 7: Rank of companies according to Beta ( ) value

Sl. Name of the Company Performance Index Utilisation Efficiency

No. Index Index

1 Associated Cement 1 3 1

Companies Ltd.

2 Birla Corporation Ltd. 17 8 7

3 Normada Cement 7 13 10

Company Ltd.

4 Gujarat Sidhee 18 7 18

Cement Ltd.

5 Dalmia Cement 10 2 2

(Bharat) Ltd.

6 KCP Ltd. 14 16 16

7 Madras Cement Ltd. 4 11 5

8 India Cement Ltd. 9 4 6

9 Andhra Cement Ltd. 8 15 14

10 Himadry Cements Ltd. 16 19 12

11 Kakatiya Cements 11 14 11

Sugar & Industries

12 Panyam Cements 15 20 17

& minerals Industries

13 Kanoria Industries Ltd. 5 10 4

14 Chettinad.Cement 20 18 20Corporation Ltd.

15 Priyadarshini Cement Ltd. 19 12 19

16 Sagar Cements Ltd. 3 9 8

17 Decan Cements Ltd. 12 1 3

18 Gujarat Ambuja 13 6 15

Cement Ltd.

19 Ambuja Cement 2 17 13

Eastern Ltd.

20 NCL Industries Ltd. 6 5 9

References :

1. Bhattacharya, H., Total Management By

Ratios, New Delhi, Sage Publication In-

dia Pvt. Ltd., 1997.

2. Bhattacharya, H., "Towards a Comprehen-

sive theory of working capital: A Techno-

Financial Approach", Economic and Po-

litical Weekly, August 29, 1987, Pp. M-

101 -M-110.

3. Chundawat , D.S. & Bhanawat , S.S. ,

"Working Capital Management Practices

in IDBI assisted tube and tyre companies",

The Management Accountant, Vol. 35,

No.2, February 2000, Pp. 99 -102.

4. Dun & Bradstreet, Key Business Ratios,

Dun & Bradstreet, New York, 1975.

5. Dulta, J.5. "Working Capital Management

of Horticulture Industry in H.P. -A case

study of HPMC" , Finance India, Vol. XV

, No.2, June, 2001, pp 644- 657.

6. Prasad, R.5., "Working Capital Manage-

ment in Paper Industry", Finance India,

Vol. XV. No.1, March 2001. Pp.185 -188.

7. Robert Morris Associates, Annual State-

ment Studies, 1975, Robert Morris Asso-

ciates, Philadelphia,1976

8. Sarvanan, P., "A Study on working Capi-

tal Management in Non- banking Finance

Companies", Finance India, Vol. XV ,

No.3, September, 2001 Pp. 987 -994.

9. Srivastava, S.S. & Yadav, R.A., Manage-

ment and Monitoring of Industrial Sick-

ness, New Delhi, Concept Publishing

Company, 1986.

10. Yadav, R.A., "Working Capital Manage-

ment- A Parametric Approach", The Char-

tered Accountant , May, 1986, p. 952.

majhi_ghosh_cementindustry

Documents