Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify the interplay between a firm’s financial situation and its inventory ownership in a single-firm and a two-firm perspective.

The analysis uses different secondary data sources to quantify the effect of both financial constraints and cost of capital on inventory holdings of public US firms. The authors first adopt a single-firm perspective and analyze whether financial constraints and cost of capital do generally affect the amount of inventory held. Next, the authors adopt a two-firm perspective and analyze the inventory ownership in customer-supplier relationships.

Inventory levels are affected by financial constraints and cost of capital. Results indicate that higher costs of capital are weakly associated with lower inventories. However, contrary to the authors’ expectations, firms that are less financially constrained hold less inventories than firms that are more financially constrained. Finally, the authors find that customers hold the larger fraction of supply chain inventory in supplier-customer dyads.

The authors’ results indicate that financial considerations generally play a role in inventory management. However, inventory holdings seem to be influenced only slightly by financing costs and inventory holdings between supplier and customer seem to be less than optimal from a financial perspective. Considering those financial aspects can lead to relevant financial advantages.

In contrast to other recent research, the authors study how the financial situation of a firm affects its inventory levels (not vice versa) and also consider inventories from a two-firm perspective.

This study aims to investigate the interaction effect between offering supply chain finance (SCF) programmes and sustainability ratings on the liquidity performance of buyers and suppliers.

The study uses a unique sample of buyers that each have an SCF programme. The sample is complemented with financial information and sustainability scores. The data is analysed through a random effects model.

Aligning with recent advances in SCF literature, the results confirm a tendency for SCF programmes to favour buyers over suppliers. However, the relationship between SCF programme adoption and liquidity performance for buyers and suppliers is positively moderated by the strong sustainability performance of both parties.

Buyers and suppliers are advised to implement and adopt effective SCF programmes that are beneficial for both parties. For buyers, the authors suggest leveraging on SCF programmes as incentives to foster sustainable behaviour among suppliers. For suppliers, the authors recommend caution before joining programmes offered by buyers that do not perform well on sustainability.

Enhancing sustainability within global supply chains and fostering favourable payment practices towards suppliers are crucial for policy development and regulation. The findings clarify the connection between both components, offering valuable insights for policymakers in this domain.

The study is built on a manually picked, unique database of buyers offering SCF programmes to their suppliers. This allows, across a large sample, an evaluation of the differences between buyers that offer SCF programmes and those that do not.