Current assets, by accounting definition, are assets normally converted
into cash within one year. Working capital management usually is considered
to involve the administration of these assets—namely, cash and
marketable securities, receivables, and inventories—and the administration
of current liabilities. Administration of fixed assets (assets normally
not converted into cash within the year), on the other hand, is usually
considered to fall within the realm of capital budgeting, which we took
up in Part II. We noted there, however, that many capital-budgeting
projects involve investment in current assets. In our treatment, this
investment was considered in relation to the specific project under capital
budgeting and not under working capital management. In this part, we
are concerned with the investment in current assets as a whole and their
composition. By and large, investment in current assets is more divisible
than investment in fixed assets, a fact that has important implications for
flexibility in financing. Differences in divisibility as well as in durability
of economic life are the essential features that distinguish current from
fixed assets.
Determining the appropriate levels of current assets and current liabilities,
which determine the level of working capital, involves fundamental
decisions with respect to the firm’s liquidity and the maturity
composition of its debt.1 In turn, these decisions are influenced by a
tradeoff between profitability and risk. In a broad sense, the appropriate
decision variable to examine on the asset side of the balance sheet is the
maturity composition, or liquidity, of the firm’s assets—i.e., the turnover
of these assets into cash. Decisions that affect the asset liquidity of the
firm include: the management of cash and marketable securities; credit
policy and procedures; inventory management and control; and the administration
of fixed assets. For purposes of illustration, we hold constant
the last three factors; the efficiency in managing them is taken up elsewhere
in the book.2 We assume also that the cash and marketable securities
held by the firm (hereafter called liquid assets) yield a return lower
than the return on investment in other assets.
For current assets, then, the lower the proportion of liquid assets to
total assets, the greater the firm’s return on total investment. Profitability
with respect to the level of current liabilities relates to differences
in costs between various methods of financing and to the use of financing
during periods when it is not needed. To the extent that the explicit costs
of short-term financing are less than those of intermediate- and long-term
financing, the greater the proportion of short-term debt to total debt, the higher the profitability of the firm. Moreover, the use of short-term debt 385
as opposed to longer-term debt is likely to result in higher profits because CHAP I5
debt will be paid off on a seasonal basis during periods when it is not Working
needed. Capital
The profitability assumptions above suggest a low proportion of cur- Management
rent assets to total assets and a high proportion of current liabilities to
total liabilities. This strategy, of course, will result in a low level of working
capital, or, conceivably, even negative working capital. Offsetting the
profitability of this strategy is the risk to the firm. For our purposes, risk
is the probability of technical insolvency. In a legal sense, insolvency
occurs whenever the assets of a firm are less than its liabilities —negative
net worth. Technical insolvency, on the other hand, occurs whenever a
firm is unable to meet its cash obligations.3
The evaluation of risk necessarily involves analysis of the liquidity of
the firm. Liquidity may be defined as the ability to realize value in money,
the most liquid of assets. Liquidity has two dimensions: (1) the time
necessary to convert an asset into money; and (2 ) the certainty of the
conversion ratio, or price, realized for the asset. An investment in real
estate, for example, is generally a less liquid investment than an investment
in marketable securities. Not only does it usually take longer to
sell real estate than to sell securities, but the price realized is more uncertain.
The two dimensions are not independent. If an asset must be
converted into money in a short time, the price is likely to be more uncertain
than if the holder has a reasonable time in which to sell the asset.4
In this chapter, we study the extent to which possible adverse deviations
from expected net cash flows (cash inflows less cash outflows) are
protected by the liquid assets of the firm. The risk involved with various
levels of current assets and current liabilities must be evaluated in relation
to the profitability associated with those levels. The discussion that follows
concerns the financing of current assets and the level of those assets
that should be maintained from a broad theoretical standpoint.
It should not be implied, however, that the investment in a particular
asset is tied to a specific mix of financing. Rather, our focus is on the
enterprise as a whole. The firm should not obtain financing on a piecemeal,
project-by-project basis, but according to some integrated objective.
The supply of the capital funds provided, as well as the terms attached to
them, depend on the structure of existing financing and on the overall
asset structure of the firm.5 Consequently, we categorize the firm’s overall
financing into two sequential acts: ( 1) determining the proportion of short-
3 James E. Walter, “Determination of Technical Solvency,” Journal of Business, XXX
(January, 1957), 30-43.
4 James C. Van Home and David A. Bowers, “The Liquidity Impact of Debt Management,”
The Southern Economic Journal, XXXIV (April, 1968), 537.
5See Douglas Vickers, The Theory o f the Firm: Production, Capital, and Finance (New
York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1968), p. 81.