Sadia Irum & Muhammad Subayyal

Sadia Irum & Muhammad Subayyal Implication of Working Capital Management Policy, Firm s size and Financial Leverage on Financial Performance An empirical evidence from Non-Financial sector Pakistan Abstract This paper was conducted to empirically test the relationship between the working capital management policies, financial leverage and the firm s size with the firm s performance of the Non-financial sector listed at the Karachi stock exchange. We use panel data of 317 extracted from the financial reports of the firms listed at KSE for the period of six years starting from 2006 to 2011. We use three alternative measures of the firm s performance as proxies i.e. net income, return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE) while two measuring variables of working capital management policies i.e. aggressive investing policy (AIP) and aggressive financing policy (AFP) while debt ratio (DR)was used as a measuring variable for the financial leverage and ln for sales was used as a proxy for firm s size. The total number of observations collected per variable was 1902 while total number of observations is 13,314 for 7 variables collected for 317 firms. Pearson s correlation, Variance Inflation factor, Whites test and weighted least square are used for the analysis. The results of whites test indicates presence of heteroskedasticity in the variables therefore the weighted least square test was used instead of the ordinary least square to remove the heteroskedasticity. We found significant relationship of AIP and size of the firm with the performance of the firm while we found statistically significant negative relationship between the AFP and the performance. However we found no significant relationship of the debt ratio with the performance of the firm. The findings of our study also conclude that the firms that adopts the conservative investing policy (higher proportion of current assets to fixed assets) and less aggressive financing policy have better profitability.

Keywords: Working capital management, financial leverage, size, profitability, Karachi Stock Exchange. 1. Introduction Working capital management is an exceptionally critical part of corporate finance in light of the fact that it specifically influences liquidity and the benefit of organization. It manages current assets and liabilities. WCM is essential because of numerous explanations. For one thing, the current assets of a regular production firm records for approx. 50% of its T assets. For distribution organization, they represent significantly high. Moreover firms with excessively less current assets might have a trouble in looking after smooth operations Wachowicz (2000). Effective WCM includes arranging, regulating current assets along with liabilities the way in which it reduces the danger of failure to accomplish short term obligations from a perspective along with high investment level in these assets Eljelly(2004). Analysts have focused on the long term financial decision making specially dividend capital structure investments and company s evaluations. On the other hand, short term assets and liabilities are imperative segments of total assets. Managing of these short term assets and 1

liabilities warrants a cautious examination since the WCMplays a critical part for company s profitability and risk Smith (1980). However well management of WC is a major a piece of the generally corporate method to make shareholders' value. Many studies have demonstrated that managers spend respectable time on everyday issues that include working capital choices. One explanation behind it is that short term assets are short live assets that are being modified over into different asset types Rao (1989). With the current liabilities, the firm is answerable for reimburse these commitments on time to time. For the ongoing firm liquidity is not dependent on the liquidation worth of its assets, yet rather on the operating cash flow produced by those assets Soenen (1993). Taken together, choices on the level of diverse working capital components become frequent and time consuming. WCM is an exceptionally crucial region in the financial management. Current assets include all the assets which in every day of the business generates return within a year and such fugitive investment canbe easily changed over into cash. Just like WCM is the Financial Leverage management. As per Brigham and Gapenski (1997) "The degree to which a firm uses obligation financing, or money related power, has three paramount suggestions: (1) by raising funds through obligation, stockholders can control a firm with a restricted investment. (2) Creditors look to the equity or funds supplied by owners, to give an edge of wellbeing, so if the stockholders have furnished just a little extent of the sum financing, the dangers of the venture are borne mainly by its creditors. (3) If the firm procures more on investments with acquired debt than it pays in investment, the rate of profit for managers' capital is amplified, or leveraged". Preferably, the company's funds requirements ought to be internally generated. The aftereffect of business operations might as well generate the assets it ought to need. However, chances for development require a greater number of assets than what a firm can at present provide. In most occurrences, firms resort to debt. Evidently, the degree firms make utilization of budgetary influence is an alternate viewpoint that may enhance the performance. 2

1.1 Objective of the study This paper explores the relationship of the Aggressive/conservative WCM strategies, financial leverage and the firm s size with the company's financial performance. This paper is relied upon to help better understand the working capital management policies and their effect on profitability in particularly rising markets like Pakistan. 1.2 Scheme of the Study This study starts with chapter 1 as introduction which gives detail about the topic. Chapter 2 named as Literature review discussed all the previous work done in the relevant area. Chapter 3 discusses the research methodology, sampling, data and the key variables. Chapter 4 shows the hypothesis of the study while the data were analyzed in the chapter 5. Chapter 6 includes the conclusions while chapter 7 gives a conclusive paragraph and chapter 8 covers the future recommendations. 2. Literature Review Consequence of Working capital is not unfamiliar tofinance and the studies of numerous researches uncovers that here exists a significant affiliation between performance and WCM by utilizing different variables. The following ones were very interested and useful for this research: Herbert J. (1998) study the relationship between aggressive working capital and conservative working capitalpolicies of different industries. The researcher used quarterly data of current assets, current liabilities and total assets for companies in 10 different sectorsfrom the year 1984 to 1993. The regression analysis, ANOVA and Tukeys HSD test were used for the analysis. The researcher found highly significant and inverse relationship between the industry s investment i.e. assets and financing policies i.e. liability. This indicates that an industry pursuing aggressive investment policy on the other hand pursue conservative financing policy and vice versa. Binti Mohammad and Binti M. Saad (2010) found a negative relationship between current ratio and financial performance of 172 recorded Malaysian firms. Their study underscored the 3

significance of proper management of working capital as it influences company's market quality and profitability. They additionally proposed that working capital management ought to be a piece of the organization's key and operational procedures keeping in order to stay effective in the market. Syed Hammad Ul Hassan and Wajahat Ali (2010) investigated 37 recorded organizations in the OMX Stockholm Stock Exchange demonstrated no significant affiliation between profitability and WCM approach when combined as aggressive, protective or conservative measured as cash conversion cycle. The ratio of current assets to total assets was used as an alternate substitute variable for WCM, yet the information failed the tests of normality. Due to this limitation, dummy variables were used rather to catch the impact of WCM arrangement on profitability. Pedro Juan García-Teruel & Pedro Martínez-Solano (2003) empirically analyze the relationship of WCM, Size, Sales growth and debt on profitability of Spanish Small and Medium Enterprise. The sample consist of 8872 small and medium enterprise from the period starting from 1996 to 2002. The profitability is taken as dependent and is calculated by Return on assets (ROA) while on the other hand the WCM is taken as independent variable and is calculated by days receivables (AR), days AccountPayable (AP) and the days of inventory and the Cash Conversion Cycle (CCC). Regression Analysis is performed for the empirical analysis. Empirical analysis shows that the profitability has positive relationship with the size and similarly sales growth however the relationship between the small and medium enterprise s profitability and the days accounts receivable and days of inventory are negative while number of days accounts payable loss significance showing endogeneity Problem. Amarjit, G., et.al (2010) researched the relationship between the WCM and profitability of American companies. The sample consist of 88 firms from the manufacturing sector listed in NY stock exchange and the data were collected from period of 2005-2007. Cash conversion cycle (CCC) and average days of account receivables (AR) were used as a Proxy for WCM while the Gross profit is used as a proxy for Profitability. Pearson rank correlation and Weighted Least square regression analysis are used for the empirical analysis for the analysis. 4

Empirical analysis shows that the CCC is positively related to gross operating profit while the AR are negatively related to the profitability. This implies that low accounts receivables is correlated with low profitability while higher the cash conversion cycle shows positive relationship with the firm s profitability. Amarjit, G., et.al (2009) conducted the research about the determinants of capital structure. The researcher identified the determinants of capital structure that are collateralize assets,wage charge, non-obligation duty shield, profitability, firm size and development chances are the determinants of the capital structure.the sample consist of service industry sector of the US. The data was gathered from financial statements of these companies during the period of January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2005. The variables consist of Collateral assets and were calculated as the ratio of FA to total assets, ROA was utilized as a substitute for firm's profitability, devaluation and amortization overheads were scaled by total assets, firm size was calculated by log of sales, Growth opportunities (GTA) was measured by percentage change in total assets and Leverage (MTL) was measured by avg. total liabilities by total assets. Result of the empirical analysis shows that the leverage (Debt) have inverse relationship to the proportion of F.A. to the T.A. of the firm increases, the profitability while the firm size and the Non-Debt tax shield have positive relationship with the leverage. However, the result Non-Debt tax shield and Growth opportunities were found to be insignificant. This implies that the Growth opportunities and the Non-Debt tax shield are not the determinant of the capital structure. Sabri, T. B. (2012) investigates assuming that there is a difference between the Profitability of Jordanian organizations from industrial organization which have a low CCC and the Profitability of those which have a high CCC. The researcher examined a sample of 45 Jordanian firms from industrial sector listed at Amman Stock Exchange from the time of 2000-2007. Their results indicates that there is a significant differencebetween the organizations that have a high CCC and those and those with low CCC. Eight results of performance differed between organizations with high CCC and organizations with low CCC. Similarly, some of the research done in the Pakistani context are the following. 5

Afza and Nazir (2007) researched the relationship between aggressive working capital policy and conservative working capital policies for a sample of 205 companiesfrom 17 different sectors listed on KSE between the period from 1998-2005. The variables used for WCP are Aggressive Investment Policy (AIP) and Aggressive Financing Policy (AFP) and the variables used profitability are Return on Assets (ROA) and Return on Equity (ROE). The relationship between WCP and profitability were measured using Regression analysis. They researcher found a negative relationship between the degree of aggressiveness of working capital investment policies and financing policies and the profitability measures of firms. Asghar Ali & Syed Atif Ali (2012) study the relationship between working capital and total assets on profitability and WCP and Total Assets of 15 Pakistani companies. Data of six years from 2003 to 2008 taken from balance sheets of 15 companies from the balance sheet analysis report of State Bank of Pakistan. The model used for the analysis was regression analysis. Their results showed positive relation of working capital and Total assets on profitability of the firms while the relationship between WCP and total assets are also positively related. Shahid Ali (2011) studies the relationship between WCM of textile firms of Pakistan. The data consist of 160 textile firms for the period 2000 to 2005 was analyzed and the model used for the analysis are OLS model and a fixed effect model. The working capital management policies are calculated by variables that are: cash conversion efficiency (CCE), Days operating cycle (DOC) and days of working capital. Return of assets (ROA), Return on equity (ROE), profit margin on sales and economic value added (EVA) are used as proxies for the performance of the firms. ROA is negatively related to Days receivables (DR) and positively related to average days payable CCC, which would prescribe that a longer CCC is more beneficial in the textile business. The results indicate that avg. days in stock, avg. days receivable and avg. days payable have a significant effect on ROA. However, overall there is a weak positive relationship between WCM and Profitability of the textile firms. SohailAmjed (2007) investigates the relationship between capital structure and the financial performance of firms from textile sector Listed in Karachi Stock Exchange. The sample consist of 100 textile firms from the period of 1999-2004. 6

ROE was used as a proxy for profitability while the leverage ratios include Short term debt (SDA), Long Term debt (LDA) and Total debt (TA). Empirical analysis shows that SDA have significant positive relationship with the firm s profitability while the LDA have inverse significant relationship with the profitability but the researcher s analysis show no relationship between the TA and the profitability. Qazi, H., et.al (2011) analyze correlation between working capital and profitability of two sector: auto and oil and gas area for the time period from 2004 to 2009. Selected variables are NWC, turnover in days, avg. account receivable and financial assets for total assets (FATA) are taken as independent variables. The results shows positive relationship of WCM on firm's profitability. Raheman, A., & Nasr, M. (2007) researched the effect of WCM and its effect on liquidity on Pakistani firms recorded on KSE for a time period of 6 years from 1999 2004. The researcher hadinvestigated the impact of diverse variables of WCMsubsuming the Avg. collection period, Inventory turnover in days, Avg. payment period, CCC and Current ratio on the operatingprofitability of Pakistani firms. Debt ratio, size of the firm and financial assets to total assets ratio are used as control variables. Tests like Pearson's rank correlation, and relapse examination (Pooled OLS and general least square with cross section weight models) are utilized for dissection. The exact investigation demonstrates that there is an in number negative relationship between variables of the working capital management andprofitability of the firm. Raheman, A., et.al (2010) analyzes the impact of WCM on performance Pakistani firms from the period 1998 to 2007. The researcher used the panel data of 204 firms from manufacturing sector listed on KSE. The empirical results shown that the CCC, net trade cycle and inventory turnover in days are significantly affecting the firm s performance. The manufacturing firms are in general facing problems with their collection and payment policies. Moreover, the financial leverage, sales growth and size also have significant effect on the firm s profitability. Their study showed positive relation of working capital with profitability. 7

Moreover, previous studies have also shown the importance of the firm size when analyzing the financial ratios. The research of Wajahat (2010) revealed that the size of the firm has negativerelationship with profitability and the research of Raheman (2010) found a significant relationship between the firm s size and its performance while on the other hand the study of Amarjit G., et.al (2010) and Ajilore (2009) found no significant relationship between the size of the firm and their profitability. 2.1 Significance Previous researchers had studied WCM from different variables and in different country region. This research will contribute in a very important aspect of finance known as working capital management policies and the financial leverage. 2.2 Problem Statement The problem that was analyzed in this study is: Does working capital management affect the firm s performance of Pakistan? 3. Research Data and Methodology 3.1 Sampling In order to conduct a comprehensive research, the sample we chose was thenon- Financial sector of Pakistan. Therefore the Non-financial sector companies listed in the KSE are chosen for accomplishing the objective more appropriately. In the Non-Financial sector, there are total 317 companies listed in KSE and all the companies were included in the sample. 3.2 Data Collection All the data were collected through secondary sources. The source through which the data was acquired from the website of the State Bank of Pakistan. 8

3.2.1 Data Type For better satisfying the objective under consideration, the panel data has been used because the comparison of multiple companies was made over the period of six years. However, to track the latest impact on the sector chosen as the sample, the selected period was comprised of 6 years starting from 2006 to 2011. In order to make the calculations, the data was collected on yearly basis. The data included in this study was extracted from the balance sheet analysis derived from the State Bank of Pakistan website during the period of our study. The number of observation per variable were 1902 firm year observations while the total number of variables were 13,314. 3.3 Model NIit (In) ROEit ROAit Where = β0 +β1drit + β2aipit+ β3afpit+ β4sizeit + µit = β0 +β1drit + β2aipit+ β3afpit+ β4sizeit + µit = β0 +β1drit + β2aipit+ β3afpit+ β4sizeit + µit NI (In) = natural logarithm of net income ROE = Return on Equity ROA = Return on Asset DR = Debt Ratio (Financial Leverage) AIP = Aggressive Investing policy AFP = Aggressive Financing policy SIZE = Firm Size 3.4 Variables 3.4.1 Financial Performance Garcia T. &Marinez S. (2007), Falope & Ajilore (2009), Binti Mohamad and Binti M. Saad (2010) and Afza, T. and MS Nasir (2007) used return on assets (ROA) as Financial Performance. ROA = Net Income Total Assets 9

Aquino (2010) used the ratio of net income to the total owner s equity (ROE) as Financial Performance Net Income ROE = Total Owner s Equity Net income was used as a variable for the Profitability. 3.4.2 Working Capital Management Afza and Nazir (2007) used the AIP and AFP as WCM policies. Aggressive Investment Policy (AIP) means the minimum level of current assets to the fixed assets while in the conservative investment policy, the company put a larger portion as current assets by fixed assets. AIP = Total Current Assets Total Assets Where lower the ratio, the more Aggressive is the investment policy. However, in the aggressive financing policy (AFP), the company uses high amount of current liabilities while in conservative financing policy, the firm uses low amount of current liabilities. AFP = Total Current Liabilities Total Assets 3.4.3 Financial Leverage Dr. KhalaafTani (2012) use Debt ratio as a measuring variable of financial leverage. Debt Ratio (DR) = 3.4.4 Firm Size Total Liabilities Total Assets Amarjit, G., et.al (2010) and Raheman, A., & Nasr, M. (2007) use the Natural log (ln) of sales as a measuring variable of size of the firm. 10

Firm Size = Ln (Sales) 4. Hypothesis 4.1 Null Hypothesis H01: There is no relationship between the performance and WCM. H02: There is no relationship between the performance and financial leverage. H03: There is no relationship between the performance and the firm s size. 4.2 Alternative hypothesis H11: There is a significant relationship between the performance and WCM. H12: There is a significant relationship between the performance and financial leverage. H13:There is a significant relationship between the performance and firm s size. 5. Data Analysis Table 1: Descriptive statistics Descriptive Statistics (N = 1902) Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Dev. Size 0.00000 20.525 14.261 2.4673 AIP 0.00000 1.0000 0.46170 0.23740 AFP 0.00000 9.1335 0.54428 0.38782 DR 0.00000 17.593 0.69223 0.78404 ROA -3.8503 2.7029 0.035381 0.22814 ROE -57.086 188.20 0.19730 5.4792 NI 39988 65426 499.92 4027.5 N = Number of observations 11

Table 1 shows descriptive stats for 317 companies for a total time period of 6 years from 2006 to 2011 and for a total 1902 number ofobservations for a variable while the total number of observations are 13,314. Table 2: Correlation Matrix SIZE AIP AFP DR ROA ROE NI SIZE 1 0.0875-0.0395-0.0405 0.1343 0.0675 0.1775 AIP 1 0.0446-0.0431 0.0323-0.0277 0.0445 AFP 1 0.5438-0.0168-0.0225-0.0821 DR 1 0.0202-0.0002-0.0523 ROA 1 0.1179 0.1994 ROE 1-0.0606 NI 1 Correlation Coefficients, using the observations 1:1-317:6 5% critical value (two-tailed) = 0.0449 for n = 1902 Table 2 shows the correlation between the dependent and independent variables. The test on the size shows linear positive relationship with the ROA, ROE and the net income. The Aggressive investment policy shows weak positive relationship with the ROA and the net income while it shows a weak negative relation with the ROE. The Aggressive financing policies shows a weak negative relationship with the profitability of the firms and the Debt ratio shows weak positive relationship with the ROA and negative relationship with the ROE and the net income. However the relationship between the independent variables is less than 0.60 which indicates that there is no colinearity between the independent variables. Table 3: Variance Inflation Factor Variance Inflation Factors SIZE 1.010 AIP 1.016 AFP 1.431 12

DR 1.430 Minimum possible value = 1.0 Values > 10.0 may indicate a collinearity problem Another test for multi-colinearity that is VIF is performed for all variables. The VIF test shows that the values are less than 10 means there is no multi colinearity between the variables. 5.1 Test for heteroskedasticity White's test: Null hypothesis: heteroskedasticity not present Test statistic: LM = 138.404 With p-value = P(Chi-Square(14) > 138.404) = 1.47278e 22 The White s test shows that the data is heteroskedastic because the p-value is significant for the Alternative hypothesis therefore the null hypothesis is rejected i.e. Null Hypothesis: There is no Heteroskedasticity. In order to counter the problem of heteroskedasticity, we used the weighted least square instead of the pooled ordinary least square because in the pooled OLS, there was a problem of heteroskedasticity. Table 4: WLS estimates, Dependent variable: ROA Coefficient Std. Error t-ratio p-value const -0.121109 0.0111189-10.8922 <0.00001 *** AIP 0.0489929 0.00711795 6.8830 <0.00001 *** AFP -0.0572328 0.00624508-9.1645 <0.00001 *** DR 0.00431754 0.00385376 1.1203 0.26271 SIZE 0.0108985 0.00071145 15.3188 <0.00001 *** R-squared 0.167881 Adjusted R-squared 0.166127 F(4, 1897) 95.68071 P-value(F) 3.17e-74 *** Stands for 1% significant level (2 tailed) Table 4 shows that the aggressive investment policy and the firm s size has a significant positive relationship with the ROA while the aggressive financing policy show negative relationship with 13

the ROA.Furthermore, if the ratio of AIP increases by one unit will increase the performance i.e. ROA by 4 percent. The increase in the ratio of the AIP indicates investment in the current assets increases. In contrast to the AIP is the AFP. As the current liabilities increases, the degree of aggressiveness increases in the same way the ratio of AFP increases so it will have adverse effect on the performance as the result indicates, by increasing one unit of AFP, the performance decreases by 5 percent. The result of both the WCM policies and the size are significant at 1 percent. Table 5: WLS estimates, Dependent variable: ROE Coefficient Std. Error t-ratio p-value const -0.481338 0.0563994-8.5345 <0.00001 *** AIP 0.0188606 0.030606 0.6162 0.53781 AFP -0.093488 0.026752-3.4946 0.00049 *** DR 0.0222204 0.0154478 1.4384 0.15048 SIZE 0.0428735 0.00375039 11.4317 <0.00001 *** R-squared 0.074030 Adjusted R-squared 0.072077 F(4, 1897) 37.91536 P-value(F) 1.48e-30 *** Stands for 1% significant level (2 tailed) Table 5 shows significant result aggressive financing policy and the firm s size with the profitability of the firms measured by proxy variable return on equity (ROE). The AFP shows a weak negative relationship so by increasing one unit of AFP will decrease the by 9 percent while the firm s size have a positive significant relationship with the firm s profitability. Therefore by increasing the firm size by one unit will increase the performance of the firm by 4 percent. However the p-value of AFP and the size of the firm shows significant results at 1%. Table 6: WLS estimates, Dependent variable: NI Coefficient Std. Error t-ratio p-value const -2286.81 120.872-18.9192 <0.00001 *** AIP 219.075 59.9312 3.6554 0.00026 *** AFP -306.215 53.359-5.7388 <0.00001 *** DR 5.25171 28.1631 0.1865 0.85209 14

SIZE 181.038 8.07282 22.4257 <0.00001 *** R-squared 0.234854 Adjusted R-squared 0.233240 F(4, 1897) 145.5661 P-value(F) 1.2e-108 *** Stands for 1% significant level (2 tailed) Table 6 shows positive significant relationship between the net Income with the aggressive investment policy and the size of the firm while the aggressive financing policy has a negative significant relationship with the firm s net income. The results shows that by increasing one unit of AIP will increase the net income by 219 units. In the same way increasing the size of the firm size by one unit will benefit the firm s net income by 181 units while in contrast to the AIP and the size, by increasing the AFP by one unit will decrease the net income by 306 units. 6. Conclusion This study examined the relationship between the WCM policies, financial leverage and firm s size with the firm s profitability of 317 companies from the Non-Financialsector listed in the Karachi Stock Exchange. Result of the research indicate that the Firm s WCM and the size of the firm has significant relationship with the performance of the firm. The aggressive investment policy and the firm size have the positive relationship with the firm s profitability while the aggressive investment policy has negative relationship with the firm s financial performance. However, based on the R-squared, the model of the net income shows the highest R-squared as compared to the other two models that are the ROA and ROE. The aggressive investment policy shows positive significant relationship with the ROA and net income. The aggressive investment reflected in low level of current assets with fixed assets, the more aggressive will be the firm investment policy, the lower will be the firm s profitability. This implies that the investment in current assets will have a positive impact on the firm s profitability. The more investment in the current assets, the more conservative will be the investment policy.these results are according with the work of Afza and Nazir (2007) who pointed out that the degree of aggressiveness is negatively related to the firm s profitability while the result of the study are not consistent with the Wajahat Ali and Syed H. Ul Hassan (2010)because they found no relationship between the working capital management and the performance of the firm. 15

In contrast to the aggressive investment policy is the aggressive financing policy. AFP reflect higher level of current liabilities with respect to the Total Assets. However, the results shows that a significant negative relationship of AFP with the Net Income, ROA and ROE. This means that the more aggressive is the firm s financing policy, the more it will adversely affect the firm s financial performance. These result are consistent with the Afza and Nazir (2007) who concluded that the degree of aggressiveness are negatively related to the firm s performance. The findings of our study also showed that the size of the firm has a significant positive relationship with the firm s performance. These results are not according to the results ofwajahat Ali and Syed H. Ul Hassan (2010) who found negative relationship of the firm size with the performance of the firm and Amarjit, G., et.al (2010) who found no significant relationship of the firm s size with the financial performance. 7. Conclusive Paragraph The purpose of this study is to find the impact of working capital management, financial leverage and firm s size with the firm s performance of the non-financial sector listed at KSE. The result of this study shows significant positive relationship of AIP and size with the firm s performance while AFP shows negative significant relationship with the performance however we were unable to find significant relationship of financial leverage with the performance of the firm. 8. Future research Further research can be conducted on this field of working capital management policies beyond the non-financial sector. However the scope of the future research may be further increased to working capital management other variables like Days account receivables, days account payables, number of days inventory and cash conversion cycle. References 1. Abuzar M.A. Eljelly. 2004. Liquidity - profitability tradeoff: An empirical investigation in anemerging market, International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 14 Iss: 2, pp.48 61 16

2. Afza, T. and MS Nasir. 2007. Is it better to be aggressive or conservative in managing working capital? Journal of Quality and Technology Management, Vol 3, No. 2, pp 11-21 (ISSN: 1011-002x) 3. Ali, A., & Ali, S. A. (2012). Working Capital Management: Is It Really Affects the Profitability? Evidence from Pakistan. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 12(17). 4. Ali, S. (2011). Working Capital Management and the Profitability of the Manufacturing Sector: A Case Study of Pakistan s Textile Industry Shahid Ali.Lahore Journal of Economics, 16(2), 141-178. 5. Amjed, S. (2007). The impact of financial structure on profitability: Study of Pakistan s Textile Sector. 6. Falope, O. I., & Ajilore, O. T. (2009). Asikhia OU. Research journal of business management, 3(3), 73-84. 7. García-Teruel, P. J., &Martínez-Solano, P. (2007). Effects of working capital management on SME profitability. International Journal of Managerial Finance,3(2), 164-177. 8. Gill, A., Biger, N., Pai, C., &Bhutani, S. (2009). The determinants of capital structure in the service industry: evidence from United States. The Open Business journal, 2, 48-53. 9. Gill, A., Biger, N., &Mathur, N. (2010). The relationship between working capital management and profitability: evidence from The United States.Business and Economics Journal, 10, 1-9. 10. Kaddumi, T. A., & Ramadan, I. Z. (2012). Profitability and Working Capital Management: The Jordanian Case. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 4(4), p217. 17

11. Lazaridis, I., &Tryfonidis, D. (2006). Relationship between working capital management and profitability of listed companies in the Athens stock exchange. Journal of financial management and analysis, 19(1). 12. Mohamad, N. E. A. B., & Saad, N. B. M. (2010). Working capital management: The effect of market valuation and profitability in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(11), p140. 13. Pedro Juan Garcia-Teruel, Pedro Martinez-Solano. 2007. "Effects of working capital management on SME profitability", International Journal of Managerial Finance, Vol. 3 Iss: 2, pp.164 177 14. Qazi, H. A., Shah, S. M. A., Abbas, Z., &Nadeem, T. (2011). Impact of working capital on firms profitability. African Journal of Business Management,5(27), 11005-11010. 15. Raheman, A., & Nasr, M. (2007). Working capital management and profitability case of Pakistani firms. International Review of Business Research Papers, 3(1), 279-300. 16. Raheman, A., Afza, T., Qayyum, A., &Bodla, M. A. (2010). Working capital management and corporate performance of manufacturing sector in Pakistan. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 47(1), 156-169. 17. Sabri, T. B. (2012). Different Working Capital Polices and the Profitability of a Firm. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(15), p50. 18. State Bank of Pakistan (2013). Balance Sheet Analysis, [online] Available from http://www.sbp.org.pk/departments/stats/bsa.pdf [Accessed 7 th September, 2013]. 19. Wajahat A., & Hammad ul Hassan (2010).Relationship between the profitability and working capital policy of Swedish companies (Doctoral dissertation, Umeå University). 18

20. Weinraub, H. J., &Visscher, S. (1998). Industry practice relating to aggressive conservative working capital policies. Journal of Financial and Strategic Decision, 11(2), 11-18. 19