Based on transaction-cost and resource-based theories (and other approaches), there is an extensive literature on the range of factors that are viewed as relevant to the outsourcing decision. However, this study’s investigations revealed a gap in the literature because the impact of outsourcing on liquidity has not been fully analysed. The study addressed this issue through an empirical investigation that identified a source of information on the amount of contractual purchase obligations arising from the outsourcing decision and demonstrated their significant impact on company liquidity. The data source was the United States Securities and Exchange Commission database that included each company’s annual return incorporating off-balance-sheet Sarbanes Oxley mandated disclosures. The study found that these disclosures as contractual purchase obligations can be used as a proxy for outsourcing activities and provided details of resulting future cash flows. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted to test for significant differences at the 5% confidence level between the results of three metrics before and after the inclusion of short-term purchase obligations. A null hypothesis of no difference between liquidity ratio mean ranks before and after the addition of purchase obligations <1 year was assumed. Analysis and testing revealed statistically significant differences (p = 0.012) between three liquidity metrics calculated using standard financial statement data and those that were adjusted for the off-balance-sheet contractual purchase obligation disclosures.

基于交易成本和基于资源的理论（和其他方法），关于被认为与外包决策相关的一系列因素有大量文献。但是，由于尚未完全分析外包对流动性的影响，因此本研究的调查揭示了文献方面的空白。该研究通过经验调查解决了这个问题，该调查确定了外包决策产生的合同购买义务金额的信息来源，并证明了其对公司流动性的重大影响。数据源是美国证券交易委员会数据库，其中包括每家公司的年度收益，并纳入了表外萨班斯·奥克斯利（Sarbanes Oxley）强制性披露的内容。研究发现，这些作为合同购买义务的披露可以用作外包活动的代理，并提供产生的未来现金流量的详细信息。进行了Wilcoxon签名秩检验，以测试在包含短期购买义务之前和之后，三个指标的结果在5％置信水平下的显着差异。假定零负债假设是在购买债务添加<1年之前和之后流动性比率平均值等级之间没有差异。分析和测试显示出统计学上的显着差异（进行Wilcoxon秩和检验是为了测试在包含短期购买义务之前和之后，三个指标的结果在5％置信水平下的显着差异。假设零负债假设是在购买债务添加<1年之前和之后流动性比率平均值等级之间没有差异。分析和测试显示出统计学上的显着差异（进行Wilcoxon秩和检验是为了测试在包含短期购买义务之前和之后，三个指标的结果在5％置信水平下的显着差异。假设零负债假设是在购买债务添加<1年之前和之后流动性比率平均值等级之间没有差异。分析和测试显示出统计学上的显着差异（p  = 0.012），这是使用标准财务报表数据计算出的三种流动性指标与针对表外合同购买义务披露进行调整的指标之间的差异。