Navon, R (1996) Company-level cash-flow management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 122(1), pp. 22-35. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The importance of cash-flow management, and thus the need for it, is a matter of consensus among researchers and practitioners alike. They all agree about the difficulties in generating automatic cashflow forecasts at the project level due to such problems as compatability - which is explained in this paper - or the lack of detailed data. At the company level it is even more difficult to forecast cash flow, due to the varying levels of data detail for different projects. The paper begins with a comprehensive background of cashflow management. It then describes the development of a cash-flow management model for the organizational level, followed by the detailed computer program written on this basis. The system presented here is unique because it manages the cash flow of the company as a whole, it is flexible - accepting projects with varying degrees of detailing levels, it requires no human involvement in cash-flow generation, it is accurate, and it is a typical management tool. The uses of such a tool are also discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | cash flow, practitioner, computer program |
| Subjects: | financial management, practitioner, software systems |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here