Three major methods of corporate performance evaluation

1, a single evaluation method

Single evaluation method refers to the selection of a single indicator, the calculation of the actual value of the indicator, and compared with the evaluation criteria set, so as to evaluate the evaluation of the object's business performance. This method is certainly simple, but from the theoretical analysis, there are the following shortcomings: on the one hand, a single performance evaluation indicator is often difficult to cover all the information of the evaluation object, which will inevitably make the quality characteristics of the performance indicator affected. Research results show that the consistency and accuracy of performance indicators can be improved through the reasonable combination of multiple performance indicators. On the other hand, in modern enterprise business activities, the key factors affecting enterprise performance have become more complex, and the form of performance expression tends to be diversified, for example, the evaluation indicators of eco-economic efficiency include both economic performance indicators and environmental performance indicators. As a result, even a single indicator with strong comprehensiveness can hardly fully reflect the overall characteristics of business management performance. Therefore, a comprehensive evaluation method should be adopted as much as possible in practice.

2, comprehensive evaluation method

In practice, the general use of comprehensive evaluation method is a multi-indicator comprehensive evaluation method, such as the traditional comprehensive evaluation method of the efficacy coefficient method and the comprehensive analysis and judgment method, the modern comprehensive evaluation method of the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method (Fuzzy Compre-hensive Evaluation, referred to as FCE) and the hierarchical analysis method (the Analytical Analytical Method). The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and other methods are among the multi-indicator comprehensive evaluation methods, which are often comprehensively used in the comprehensive performance evaluation of enterprises. The following is an overview of these methods:

(1) Efficacy coefficient method.

The efficacy coefficient method is a quantitative analysis method often used in traditional performance evaluation, which means that according to the principle of multi-objective planning, a number of evaluation indexes are determined to be a satisfactory value and an impermissible value, and then with the satisfactory value as the upper limit and the impermissible value as the lower limit, the degree to which the indexes have realized the satisfactory value is calculated and transformed into the corresponding evaluation scores, and then a weighted average is obtained to obtain the comprehensive evaluation score in order to evaluate the comprehensive performance level of the evaluation object. The comprehensive evaluation score is obtained by weighted average to assess the comprehensive performance level of the evaluation object. It has the following characteristics:

①According to the characteristics of the evaluation object, the formulation of different aspects of the evaluation of multiple objectives, multiple variables to analyze and judge, this feature meets the enterprise performance evaluation system multi-objective, multi-level, multi-factor evaluation requirements;

②based on the evaluation of different aspects of the multiple objectives. Set up a number of quantitative evaluation indicators, which meets the evaluation needs of the enterprise performance evaluation index system of a number of indicators;

3 in order to avoid errors caused by a single evaluation standard evaluation results, according to the evaluation of the range of values of indicators, set up in the same conditions under the evaluation of a particular indicator of reference to the value of a number of evaluation standards. At the same time, according to the evaluation of the object in the evaluation of the standard range of position and the evaluation of the standard value of the distance, set the efficacy of the function. These features can be realized in modern enterprises in the case of large differences in the value of the indicators, a true reflection of the performance of the enterprise, objective and fair evaluation of the strategic objectives of the enterprise. China's Ministry of Finance and other four ministries and commissions issued in 1999, the state-owned capital performance evaluation system for quantitative indicators adopted this evaluation method.

(2) Comprehensive analysis and judgment method.

The comprehensive analysis and judgment method, also known as the expert scoring method, refers to the evaluation of experts in accordance with the principles of independence, objectivity and impartiality, based on their own knowledge, experience and analytical ability, with reference to the established evaluation standards, the use of subjective analytical judgment method, from different sides of the evaluation of the qualitative and quantitative analysis of the target, to determine the overall characteristics of the subject of evaluation. The comprehensive analysis and judgment method belongs to a qualitative evaluation method, which can integrate all factors affecting performance into the evaluation work as much as possible, so that the evaluation results are closer to the facts. It avoids the situation that the evaluation results are not accurate enough due to the deviation of variable selection and data import in various measurement models, but the comprehensive analysis and judgment method is greatly influenced by the subjective will and value tendency of evaluation experts, and it is difficult to make the evaluation results completely objective and fair. Therefore, in the evaluation of enterprise performance, the comprehensive analysis and judgment method is often used as a supplement to the efficacy coefficient method to make up for the shortcomings of the quantitative evaluation method. For example, the performance evaluation system of state-owned capital funds is a typical example of performance evaluation methods using the efficacy coefficient method as the main method and the comprehensive analysis and judgment method as a supplement.

(3) Fuzzy comprehensive judgment method.

This method is based on fuzzy mathematics, using fuzzy set theory, quantifying some unclear boundaries and factors that are not easy to quantify, and making a comprehensive evaluation of the system. It can combine quantitative testing and expert system to solve the problem of multi-factor (index), judgment of fuzziness and uncertainty. Its basic principle: it first determines the factor (index) set U=(X1, X2,...Xm) and evaluation set V=(V1, V2, Vm) of the judged object. Where Xi is each single indicator, Vi is the evaluation grade level of Xi, which can be generally divided into five grades: V={excellent, good, average, poor, poor). Finally, the fuzzy judgment matrix and the weight set of factors are subjected to fuzzy operation and normalized to get the fuzzy evaluation comprehensive results. The fuzzy comprehensive judgment method not only solves the problem of vagueness and uncertainty of judgment well, the affiliation function and fuzzy statistical methods provide an effective method for quantification of qualitative indexes, realizing an effective collection of qualitative and quantitative methods; moreover, the fuzzy evaluation synthesis result is a vector, i.e., the subset of the set of judgments on its domain, which overcomes the shortcomings of the results singularity of the traditional mathematical methods, and the results contain rich information . However, the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method also has shortcomings, for example, in some cases, the determination of the affiliation function is difficult; the correlation between the evaluation indexes causes the repetition of the evaluation information; the determination of the weights of the factors carries a certain degree of subjectivity and so on.

(4) Hierarchical analysis method.

In the 1970s, the famous American operations researcher T. L. Satty proposed a method of combining qualitative and quantitative, systematic and hierarchical analysis of the problem, known as hierarchical analysis. It is a flexible, simple and applicable multi-objective, multi-criteria decision-making method. It is a complex problem according to certain principles, that is, decomposed into a number of sub-problems, each sub-problem for the same treatment, thus obtaining the formation of an orderly multi-level structure according to the affiliation relationship, the same level of the elements of the two to two comparisons, and the matrix operation to determine the relative importance of the elements of the elements of the dominant elements of the previous level of the relative importance of the weights, which determines the importance of each sub-problem on the overall goal of the weights. This method better considers and integrates various qualitative and quantitative information in the comprehensive evaluation process, and through subjective logical judgment analysis and objective precise calculation and deduction, it not only absorbs the results of qualitative analysis, but also gives play to the advantages of quantitative analysis, so that the decision-making process has a strong rationality and scientificity, and it can deal with many practical problems that traditional optimization techniques can not begin to deal with, and the scope of application is also relatively wide. However, the method still exists in the application of the randomness of the evaluation process and the subjective uncertainty of the evaluation experts and the ambiguity of the understanding, and the judgment matrix is prone to serious inconsistencies.