IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cbu/jrnlec/y2015vspecialp360-368.html

Productivity, Technical Equipment And Sales. Empirical Evidence From The Romanian Companies

Author

Listed:
  • DEMYEN SUZANA

    (UNIVERSITY EFTIMIE MURGU OF RESITA FACULTY OF ECONOMIC SCIENCES)

  • MILOS LAURA RAISA

    (UNIVERSITY EFTIMIE MURGU OF RESITA FACULTY OF ECONOMIC SCIENCES)

Abstract

The relationship between turnover and organizational performance represented the field of interest for various authors in literature, some of the studies identifying even a strong association between the organizational performance and the management of human resources itself. Turnover thus represents an indicator of results which has a fundamental role in characterizing the efficiency of the activity carried out by a company. The final results are conditioned by the volume of resources, which are however, limited, an efficient strategy of management being necessary for the correct accomplishment of the previous established objectives and capitalization of its real potential. Findings regarding the size of a business or a company and its variation in time are necessary in attracting and securing the resources which are indispensable for achieving the objectives and goals proposed. To fully understand a company's activity, any analysis of an indicator must include a description of its dynamics. Thus, the analysis of the turnover in time can be achieved using conventional statistical models. In concrete terms, it is part of the economic and financial results indicators, helping to diagnose and to evaluate the company, estimating efficient management practices. The present paper aims at illustrating the relevance of a factorial analysis model for a sample of enterprises selected, the results highlighting the connection between the sales and labor productivity, but also between sales and the degree of technical equipment. The study revealed the following aspects: a positive and direct connection between labor productivity and sales, so we can state that higher levels of productivity produce higher sales, but also a negative connection between the degree of technical equipment and the level of sales, relation which is very important since we want to know how well a business is employing its assets to generate sales.

Suggested Citation

  • Demyen Suzana & Milos Laura Raisa, 2015. "Productivity, Technical Equipment And Sales. Empirical Evidence From The Romanian Companies," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 0, pages 360-368, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cbu:jrnlec:y:2015:v:special:p:360-368
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.utgjiu.ro/revista/ec/pdf/2015-Special%20ECOTREND/60_Demyen,%20Milos.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Siebert, W. Stanley & Zubanov, Nick & Chevalier, Arnaud & Viitanen, Tarja, 2006. "Labour Turnover and Labour Productivity in a Retail Organization," IZA Discussion Papers 2322, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. iqbal, athar & mati, madhu, 2012. "Relationship between Non-current Assets & Firms Profitability," MPRA Paper 44132, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Alan Bevan & Saul Estrin & Mark E. Schaffer, 1999. "Determinants of Enterprise Performance during Transition," CERT Discussion Papers 9903, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
    4. Sara L. Keck, 1997. "Top Management Team Structure: Differential Effects by Environmental Context," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(2), pages 143-156, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Demyen Suzana & Milos Laura Raisa, 2015. "Productivity, Technical Equipment And Sales. Empirical Evidence From The Romanian Companies," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 6, pages 360-368, December.
    2. Shumilov, Andrei, 2008. "Performance of business groups : evidence from port-crisis Russia," BOFIT Discussion Papers 24/2008, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
    3. Sabina Nielsen, 2010. "Top Management Team Internationalization and Firm Performance," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 185-206, April.
    4. Díaz-Fernández, M. Carmen & González-Rodríguez, M. Rosario & Simonetti, Biagio, 2015. "Top management team’s intellectual capital and firm performance," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 322-331.
    5. Galyna Grygorenko & Stefan Lutz, 2007. "Firm performance and privatization in Ukraine," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 253-266, September.
    6. Walsh, Patrick Paul & Whelan, Ciara, 2001. "Firm performance and the political economy of corporate governance: survey evidence for Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 85-112, June.
    7. Koman, Matjaž & Laki?evi?, Milan & Prašnikar, Janez & Svejnar, Jan, 2013. "Asset Stripping, Rule of Law and Firm Survival: The Hoff-Stiglitz Model and Mass Privatization in Montenegro," IZA Discussion Papers 7821, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Svejnar, Jan, 2007. "China in Light of the Performance of Central and East European Economies," CEPR Discussion Papers 6320, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Ad de Jong & Ko de Ruyter & Martin Wetzels, 2005. "Antecedents and Consequences of Group Potency: A Study of Self-Managing Service Teams," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(11), pages 1610-1625, November.
    10. Jan Hanousek & Evžen Kočenda & Jan Svejnar, 2007. "Origin and concentration," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 15(1), pages 1-31, January.
    11. Jake G. Messersmith & Jeong-Yeon Lee & James P. Guthrie & Yong-Yeon Ji, 2014. "Turnover at the Top: Executive Team Departures and Firm Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 776-793, June.
    12. Craig Galbraith & Alex DeNoble & Sanford Ehrlich & Jessica Mesmer-Magnus, 2010. "Review panel consensus and post-decision commercial performance: a study of early stage technologies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 253-281, April.
    13. Klara Sabirianova Peter & Jan Svejnar & Katherine Terrell, 2012. "Foreign Investment, Corporate Ownership, and Development: Are Firms in Emerging Markets Catching Up to the World Standard?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(4), pages 981-999, November.
    14. Timofeev Andrey, 2002. "Fiscal Decentralization and Soft Budget Constraints," EERC Working Paper Series 01-12e, EERC Research Network, Russia and CIS.
    15. Bessonova, Evguenia & Gonchar, Ksenia, 2019. "How the innovation-competition link is shaped by technology distance in a high-barrier catch-up economy," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 86, pages 15-32.
    16. Omran, Mohammed, 2009. "Post-privatization corporate governance and firm performance: The role of private ownership concentration, identity and board composition," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 658-673, December.
    17. D'Souza, Juliet & Megginson, William L. & Ullah, Barkat & Wei, Zuobao, 2017. "Growth and growth obstacles in transition economies: Privatized versus de novo private firms," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 422-438.
    18. Jie Gao & Cui Huang & Jun Su & Qijun Xie, 2019. "Examining the Factors Behind the Success and Sustainability of China’s Creative Research Group: An Extension of the Teamwork Quality Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    19. Klaus E Meyer, 2000. "International Production Networks and Enterprise Transformation in Central Europe," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 42(1), pages 135-150, April.
    20. Mercedes Rodríguez-Fernández & Ana I. Gaspar-González & Eva M. Sánchez-Teba, 2020. "Does Diversity in Top Management Teams Contribute to Organizational Performance? The Response of the IBEX 35 Companies," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cbu:jrnlec:y:2015:v:special:p:360-368. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ecobici Nicolae The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Ecobici Nicolae to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fetgjro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.