Search results

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

Managers may be motivated to invest abroad for a variety of reasons. They may feel “compelled” to make such investments because of lack of opportunities in the domestic market, or because competitors have set up manufacture abroad, thereby making exports less competitive. Alternatively, it may be the logical progression of a growing business. How should managers approach foreign investment decisions? Are they very different from domestic investments? What are the additional hazards to consider? This article sets out to discuss these problems and provides a framework for the evaluation of foreign investments.

Managers may be motivated to invest abroad for a variety of reasons. They may feel “compelled” to make such investments because of lack of opportunities in the domestic market, or because competitors have set up manufacture abroad, thereby making exports less competitive. Alternatively, it may be the logical progression of a growing business. How should managers approach foreign investment decisions? Are they very different from domestic investments? What are the additional hazards to consider? This article sets out to discuss these problems and provides a framework for the evaluation of foreign investments.

The corporate manager could easily be forgiven for assuming that capital budgeting is primarily concerned with the selection of an appropriate evaluation technique. Most texts on the subject are devoted almost entirely to such topics as comparisons of evaluation techniques, determining hurdle rates of return and incorporating risk into the equations. Only a few writers have suggested that this emphasis is misplaced. This article places evaluation within the whole capital investment process from the conception of an investment opportunity to its completion. It also considers the total investment programme and how it relates to organisational planning and control systems.

Firms should borrow a lot to finance their investment schedules, because interest payable on borrowings is tax deductible. However, firms should not borrow beyond the point where bankruptcy becomes a distinct possibility. When a firm's investment schedule collapses by failing to generate adequate cash to make compulsory interest payments, shareholders may be forced to suffer the costs and delays of liquidation. To ensure the survival of the firm, corporate managers should have a strategy for financial emergencies.

A survey of investment in new production technology and specific AMT techniques in larger UK firms are described. Though the majority of the responding firms were in the manufacturing sector, some were not. Interestingly, some of these considered that they had invested substantially in new production technology. Companies were also questioned about which factors they considered most important in making investment decisions. These showed an unexpected emphasis on the importance of “intangible” factors. Responses were analysed separately for manufacturing companies belonging to process industries and those classified as belonging to “general manufacturing”. As might have been expected, companies in the latter category had invested more heavily in AMT techniques. However, process industry companies had also invested significantly. Around two‐thirds of companies in the general manufacturing category reported difficulties in assessing the benefits of AMT investment. About a quarter of process industries companies had experienced similar difficulties. However, few companies appeared to have altered their investment appraisal systems to treat AMT investments any differently to ordinary ones, despite the literature that suggests that this may be necessary.

Capital budgeting is, perhaps, best defined as the art of finding assets that are worth more than they cost. Nothing is easier in concept or harder in practical application. An apparently endless supply of textbooks, journal articles and research papers discuss and develop the concepts with the tacit assumption that their adoption will improve performance. When we consider the practical application of capital budgeting, however, we see firms making investment decisions faced with unprecedentedly high levels of inflation, financing costs, and other major economic difficulties. Capital budgeting has never been more difficult. It would not then appear unreasonable that those firms which applied advanced techniques and had sophisticated capital budgeting systems should have survived the buffeting of the seventies better than firms using little or no formalised investment system. The research being conducted is intended to determine whether in fact this is the case.

Economic recessions have severely stretched the financial resources of many businesses. One result has been to focus attention on the management of working capital in companies that have often had to remain solvent by shrinking.

Though of fairly recent origin, the capital‐asset pricing model (CAPM) is becoming a dominant influence in the analysis of financial and investment decisions. While continuing to undergo stringent theoretical and empirical examination, the demonstrable explanatory and predictive ability of the CAPM have led to its widespread recognition as the foundation of modern financial management. Though usually attributed to Sharpe, Lintner and Mossin, the origins of the CAPM can be traced back to the celebrated work of Harry Markowitz on portfolio selection.

Of vital importance to the long‐term profitability and level of investment in a company or indeed an economy is the determination of reliable hurdle rates, or minimum required rates of returns, for investment projects. Hurdle rates set too high lead to missed opportunities for profit and growth. Understating hurdle rate levels give rise to uneconomic investment decisions and fall in market values. As every financial manager faced with the problem of determining these rates of return is aware there are many different approaches, each of which, if followed mechanically, could produce very different solutions. The main reasons for such variances rest in the assumptions underlying the various approaches. This article concentrates on the application of one of the more recent approaches based on the capital asset pricing model (CAPM). Its positive orientation and intuitively appealing conclusions have made it the central equilibrium model of financial economics.