A preliminary study on enterprise performance evaluation system?

What is the specific content of enterprise performance evaluation system? The following is the answer of Zhong Da Consulting Company.

First, the shortcomings of the traditional enterprise performance evaluation system

1, based on financial evaluation indicators, it is difficult to reflect and promote the growth of enterprise competitiveness in the new economic era. The traditional enterprise performance evaluation system mainly focuses on financial evaluation indicators, while some important non-financial indicators are not involved at all. The limitations of this performance evaluation system based on financial evaluation indicators are mainly manifested in:

(1) The traditional performance evaluation system pursues short-term goals. In the traditional performance evaluation system, the performance and profit of enterprises are an extremely critical evaluation index. Because managers must concentrate on dealing with quarterly and annual profit figures, they pay more attention to the short-term profitability of enterprises. In order to pursue accounting book profit, managers are very likely to use their business autonomy to make business decisions that increase short-term profits but harm long-term interests, that is, short-term behavior in business decisions. Pursuing short-term goals, such as increasing profits in the current year by cutting R&D funds, advertising funds and machine maintenance, obviously harms the long-term interests of enterprises. The higher the profit component in the evaluation system, the more likely it is that the short-term behavior of the enterprise will expand, because the accounting profit can only reflect the past facts and cannot fully show the future potential of the enterprise, even with the best accounting standards, fair auditing and objective auditing by accountants.

(2) The traditional performance evaluation system will lead managers to make suboptimal decisions. If the enterprise performance evaluation mainly depends on the investment return rate index, when the investment return rate of new projects and opportunities can not reach the realized investment return rate, enterprise managers are unwilling to accept such projects and opportunities in order to maintain the existing performance level. Because if enterprise managers accept such projects and opportunities, it will reduce the return on investment of enterprises and be unfavorable to their performance appraisal. In fact, if such projects and opportunities are consistent with the strategic objectives of the enterprise, or their return on investment can not reach the realized return on investment of the enterprise, but exceeds the minimum return on investment set by the enterprise, then such projects and opportunities should be accepted. Therefore, if the return on investment is regarded as the main index or the only index of performance evaluation, it will lead enterprise managers to make suboptimal decisions.

(3) The traditional performance evaluation system is weak in predicting the evaluation content and lacks the characteristics of the times. The traditional evaluation indicators pay too much attention to the evaluation of financial indicators and the value of evaluation indicators, ignoring non-financial indicators and non-monetary measurement indicators, and the calculation is not timely enough and the forecasting ability is weak. However, the fierce competitive environment increasingly requires management to pay attention to forward-looking aspects such as business decision-making, sustainable development, human capital and core competitiveness. Non-financial indicators such as market share, technological innovation, quality and service should play a greater role in enterprise performance evaluation. In view of the shortcomings of the above financial indicators evaluation system, it is necessary to improve the existing performance evaluation system and introduce non-financial indicators into the enterprise performance evaluation system.

2. The evaluation angle is single, the focus is not strong, and the relevance is insufficient. At present, China's financial evaluation mainly evaluates state-owned enterprises from three angles: country, bank and enterprise. However, with the in-depth development of market economy, this evaluation began to show its inadaptability. With the advent of knowledge economy, knowledge and new technology will become the main source of enterprise wealth, and human capital will become the key factor of enterprise development. Financial evaluation indicators should also be designed and formulated from the perspective of stakeholders based on the financial theory of enterprise stakeholders. Obviously, the existing financial evaluation system is based on a set of evaluation indicators that meet the needs of one or more parties, taking into account many parties, with no prominent focus and insufficient relevance, and needs to be further improved.

Second, improve the enterprise performance evaluation system.

1. Establish an enterprise performance evaluation system that combines financial and non-financial evaluation indicators. Non-financial indicators are various indicators measured in a non-monetary way by using enterprise data other than financial statements, such as the amount of harmful substances produced and the degree of pollution control that reflect the sustainable development ability of enterprises; Reflect the market share and customer satisfaction of product and service sales; Reflect the per capita salary level of employees, etc. Non-financial indicators make up for the deficiency of financial indicators to some extent.

Advantages mainly include:

1, which reflects the comprehensive content, can fully reveal the future development prospects of enterprises and provide non-monetary information such as human resources, digital assets and financial derivatives to enterprise stakeholders;

2, dynamic reflection, real-time tracking and strong forecasting ability;

3. Closely contact with the actual situation of the enterprise and be able to comprehensively evaluate the value of intangible assets of the enterprise; It is suitable for long-term evaluation and closely related to enterprise development strategy.

But non-financial indicators also have their own limitations:

1, which cannot be disclosed in the financial statements, can not establish a reliable relationship with corporate profits;

2. There are many ways to measure non-financial data, and the indicators of different enterprises are quite different, which is not conducive to the comparison between enterprises;

3. The system of non-financial indicators is imperfect, lacking the connection of causality, and sometimes they may conflict with each other.

From the above analysis, it can be seen that although the evaluation of non-financial indicators has many advantages, it also has certain defects. Paying too much attention to non-financial indicators is likely to lead to financial failure because of financial inflexibility. However, only paying attention to financial performance will easily lead to short-term behavior and affect the sustainable development of enterprises. In fact, financial performance and non-financial performance are inseparable parts of an enterprise's overall performance. Therefore, the ideal scientific enterprise performance evaluation system should be an organic combination of financial evaluation indicators and non-financial evaluation indicators.

2. Balanced scorecard. The best choice of establishing a good enterprise performance evaluation system. The balanced scorecard originated from Robert, a famous professor at Harvard Business School. Kaplan and David, President of American Renaissance Global strategic groups. The research plan of "future enterprise performance evaluation method" undertaken by P. Norton in 1990 aims to find out the performance evaluation model that transcends the traditional financial accounting measurement and transform the "strategy" of the enterprise into "action". This method not only completely changed the thinking of enterprise performance evaluation, but also prompted enterprises to consciously establish a management system to achieve strategic goals, and made breakthroughs in key areas such as products, processes, customers and market development, thus driving the revolution of performance evaluation and management system. As a comprehensive performance evaluation system, the balanced scorecard has the following advantages:

(1) The balanced scorecard conforms to the principle of establishing a performance evaluation system that pays equal attention to both financial evaluation and non-financial evaluation indicators. The traditional performance evaluation system is mainly financial evaluation indicators. In the increasingly complex and turbulent environment, a single financial indicator can not fully reflect the strength of enterprises. In order to make up for the shortcomings of a single financial indicator in customers, employees, suppliers, business processes, technological innovation and so on. The balanced scorecard adds three levels of non-financial indicators: customer, internal operation, learning and growth. The balanced scorecard combines financial indicators and non-financial indicators well, and forms a complete index system on this basis.

(2) The balanced scorecard can avoid the short-term behavior of enterprises. Financial evaluation indicators are often based on past information and cannot evaluate the potential of future growth of enterprises. Non-financial evaluation indicators can well measure the company's future financial performance. For example, investment in customer satisfaction can increase income, cultivate customers' loyalty to the company, attract new customers and reduce transaction costs, thus improving the company's future performance. From the perspective of strategic objectives and competitive needs, the balanced scorecard has realized the effective combination of the company's long-term strategy and short-term business activities.

(3) The balanced scorecard attaches importance to the evaluation of the sustainable development ability of enterprises. The balanced scorecard sets up four levels: finance, customers, internal operation, learning and growth, and realizes the balance between long-term goals and short-term goals, internal goals and external goals, results and causes, and subjects and objects. It links strategy, process and managers, and it is the result of the unification of dynamic evaluation and static evaluation.

For more information about project/service/procurement bidding, and to improve the winning rate, please click on the bottom of official website Customer Service for free consultation:/#/? source=bdzd