非财务指标的经济后果——顾客满意度与未来财务业绩研究【外文翻译】

合集下载

对企业业绩评价中的非财务指标的浅析

对企业业绩评价中的非财务指标的浅析1. 引言在企业的业绩评价中，除了财务指标外，非财务指标也是评价企业综合业绩的重要依据。

与财务指标相比，非财务指标更能反映企业的竞争力、可持续发展和社会责任等方面的情况。

本文将对企业业绩评价中的非财务指标进行浅析，探讨其重要性以及影响企业业绩的因素。

2. 非财务指标的定义非财务指标是指那些不能直接以货币形式计量的指标，包括但不限于市场份额、员工满意度、客户维系度、产品品质、创新能力等。

与财务指标相比，非财务指标更加综合全面，能够反映企业在市场、内部运营和社会环境等方面的表现。

3. 非财务指标的重要性3.1 客户满意度客户满意度是衡量企业产品或服务质量的重要指标。

当客户对企业的产品或服务感到满意，他们更有可能成为忠实客户，并推荐给他人。

持续提高客户满意度可以增加企业的市场份额和盈利能力。

3.2 员工满意度员工满意度是衡量企业内部管理的重要指标。

员工满意度高的企业能够吸引和留住优秀的人才，提高员工的工作效率和生产力。

同时，员工满意度低可能导致员工流失和劳动力成本的增加。

3.3 市场份额市场份额是衡量企业在某个市场中的竞争力的指标。

市场份额的增加表明企业能够吸引更多的客户和增加产品销售量。

通过增加市场份额，企业能够稳定和扩大自己在市场中的地位。

3.4 创新能力创新能力是衡量企业在产品研发和技术创新方面的能力。

一个具有强大创新能力的企业能够不断推出新产品和技术，满足市场需求，提高市场竞争力。

创新能力的提高可以帮助企业跟上市场发展的脚步。

3.5 社会责任企业的社会责任是指企业在经营过程中履行对社会和环境的责任。

一个负责任的企业会注重环境保护、员工福利和社区发展等方面的事项。

社会责任的履行可以提升企业的形象和声誉，获得社会各方面的支持和认可。

4. 影响企业非财务指标的因素4.1 内部管理良好的内部管理是影响企业非财务指标的重要因素之一。

包括企业文化、组织结构、人力资源管理等方面的因素。

企业绩效管理与员工激励的参考文献

企业绩效管理和员工激励是企业管理中的重要组成部分，对于提高企业的运营效率和员工的工作动力具有重要作用。

下面我们将介绍一些关于企业绩效管理和员工激励的参考文献，供大家参考。

一、企业绩效管理的参考文献1. Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance. Harvard business review,70(1), 71-79.这篇文章主要介绍了平衡计分卡在企业绩效管理中的应用。

作者提出了以财务、客户、内部业务流程和学习与成长四个维度来衡量企业的绩效，这些维度能够全面地反映企业的经营状况，有助于企业制定合理的经营战略和目标。

2. Ittner, C. D., Larcker, D. F. (1998). Are nonfinancial measures leading indicators of financial performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction. Journal of accounting research, 36, 1-35. 这篇文章研究了非财务指标是否能成为企业财务绩效的领先指标。

作者以客户满意度作为非财务指标，发现客户满意度确实能够预示企业未来的财务表现，为企业绩效管理提供了新的思路。

3. Neely, A., Gregory, M., Platts, K. (1995). Performance measurement system design: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Operations ProductionManagement, 15(4), 80-116.这篇文章对企业绩效管理中的绩效测量系统进行了文献综述和研究议程的探讨。

非财务指标对公司绩效衡量的影响研究

非财务指标对公司绩效衡量的影响研究引言：公司绩效衡量一直以来都是管理者们关注和追求的焦点。

传统上，财务指标被广泛应用于衡量公司绩效，如销售收入、利润率、市场份额等。

然而，随着商业环境的不断变化和发展，越来越多的人开始认识到，单纯依赖财务指标衡量公司绩效的局限性。

因此，非财务指标逐渐成为重要的补充，对公司绩效的影响也日益受到关注。

一、非财务指标的重要性1. 非财务指标能够提供全面的信息财务指标主要关注企业的盈利能力和财务健康状况，但并不能全面反映企业的整体绩效。

而非财务指标则涵盖了更广泛的方面，如顾客满意度、员工参与度、市场创新能力等，这些指标能够较为真实地反映企业的综合绩效。

2. 非财务指标与战略目标的衔接企业的战略目标是企业长期发展的指导方针，而财务指标主要集中在短期的财务目标上。

非财务指标能够更好地反映企业战略目标的实现程度，帮助管理者更好地把握公司发展方向。

二、非财务指标对绩效衡量的影响1. 顾客满意度指标顾客满意度是衡量企业商品或服务质量，以及顾客对企业的整体评价的重要指标。

通过顾客满意度的调查和衡量，企业能够了解顾客需求和期望，从而改进产品或服务，提升顾客体验，进而提高销售额和市场份额。

2. 员工参与度指标员工是企业最重要的资产之一，他们的工作积极性和参与度对企业绩效有着重要影响。

通过衡量员工参与度，企业能够了解员工对工作的投入程度，制定相应的激励政策和培训计划，提高员工满意度和工作效率，从而推动企业的发展。

3. 市场创新能力指标市场创新能力是企业在市场竞争中的核心竞争力之一。

通过衡量市场创新能力，企业能够了解产品研发能力、市场敏锐度和市场拓展能力等指标，从而指导企业的战略制定和产品创新，保持竞争优势。

4. 可持续发展指标可持续发展是企业长期发展的关键，非财务指标可以提供关于企业环境保护、社会责任和企业治理等方面的信息。

衡量可持续发展的指标能够帮助企业保持良好的声誉，吸引更多的投资者和合作伙伴，实现健康可持续的发展。

非财务指标对企业绩效衡量的影响研究

非财务指标对企业绩效衡量的影响研究在过去，企业绩效衡量主要依赖财务指标，如利润、收入和现金流量。

然而，随着企业环境的变化和社会对企业社会责任的重视，非财务指标在衡量企业绩效方面的作用变得越来越重要。

本文将探讨非财务指标在企业绩效衡量中的影响，并通过一些实证研究提供相关证据。

1. 非财务指标对企业绩效的重要性财务指标反映了企业的经济状况和财务健康度，但不能全面衡量企业的绩效。

非财务指标如员工满意度、客户满意度和环境可持续性等因素对企业绩效同样重要。

例如，员工满意度与员工绩效密切相关，高度满意的员工往往表现出更高的工作动力和创造力，从而为企业带来更好的绩效。

2. 非财务指标在企业绩效衡量中的应用非财务指标可以通过定量和定性的方式进行衡量和评估。

定量指标可以基于数据和统计进行量化，如客户满意度调查和员工绩效指标。

而定性指标则对于不容易量化的因素提供了相对主观的评估，如企业的声誉和品牌价值。

这些非财务指标相互补充，使得企业绩效的评估更加全面和准确。

3. 实证研究证明非财务指标对企业绩效的影响许多实证研究已经证明了非财务指标对企业绩效的影响。

例如，一项对500家公司的研究发现，员工满意度与企业利润之间存在正相关关系。

另一项研究发现，环境可持续性和企业的长期绩效之间存在显著正相关关系。

这些研究结果表明，非财务指标对企业的长期发展和绩效表现起着重要的作用。

4. 非财务指标的挑战和改进虽然非财务指标在企业绩效衡量中的应用越来越广泛，但仍面临一些挑战。

一方面，非财务指标往往更主观、难以量化和容易受到个人偏见的影响。

另一方面，企业往往在选择和定义非财务指标上存在一定的困难，需要更加科学和标准化的方法来进行衡量。

因此，未来的研究需要致力于改进非财务指标的衡量方法和提高其准确性和可靠性。

总结起来，非财务指标在企业绩效衡量中扮演着越来越重要的角色。

通过合理使用和评估非财务指标，企业能够全面了解自身的绩效表现，并做出相应的决策和改进。

绩效考核外文文献及其译文

The Dilemma of Performance AppraisalPeter Prowse and Julie ProwseMeasuring Business Excellence,V ol.13 Iss:4,pp.69 - 77AbstractThis paper deals with the dilemma of managing performance using performance appraisal. The authors will evaluate the historical development of appraisals and argue that the critical area of line management development that was been identified as a critical success factor in appraisals has been ignored in the later literature evaluating the effectiveness of performance through appraisals.This paper willevaluatethe aims and methodsof appraisal, thedifficulties encountered in the appraisalprocess. It also re-evaluates the lack of theoretical development in appraisaland move from he psychological approachesof analysistoamorecritical realisation ofapproaches before re-evaluating the challenge to remove subjectivity and bias in judgement of appraisal.13.1IntroductionThis paper will define and outline performance management and appraisal. It will start by evaluating what form of performance is evaluated, then develop links to the development of different performance traditions (Psychological tradition, Management by Objectives, Motivation and Development).It will outline the historical development of performance management then evaluate high performance strategies using performance appraisal. It will evaluate the continuing issue of subjectivity and ethical dilemmas regarding measurement and assessment of performance. The paper will then examine how organisations measure performance before evaluation of research on some recent trends in performance appraisal.This chapter will evaluate the historical development of performance appraisal from management by objectives (MBO) literature before evaluating the debates between linkages between performance management and appraisal. It will outline the development of individual performance before linking to performance management in organizations. The outcomes of techniques to increase organizational commitment, increase job satisfaction will be critically evaluated. It will further examine the transatlantic debates between literature on efficiency and effectiveness in the North American and the United Kingdom) evidence to evaluate the HRM development and contribution of performance appraisal to individual and organizational performance.13.2 What is Performance Management?The first is sue to discuss is the difficulty of definition of Performance Management. Armstrong and Barron(1998:8) define performance management as: A strategic and integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations by Improving performance of people who work in them by developing the capabilities of teams And individual performance.13.2.1 Performance AppraisalAppraisal potentially is a key tool in making the most of an organisation’s human resources. The use of appraisal is widespread estimated that 80–90%of organizations in the USA and UK were using appraisal and an increase from 69 to 87% of organisations between 1998 and 2004 reported a formalperformance management system (Armstrong and Baron, 1998:200).There has been little evidence of the evaluation of the effectiveness of appraisal but more on the development in its use. Between 1998 and 2004 a sample from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2007) of 562 firms found 506 were using performance appraisal in UK.What is also vital to emphasise is the rising use of performance appraisal feedback beyond performance for professionals and managers to nearly 95% of workplaces in the 2004 WERS survey (seeTable 13.1).Clearly the use of Appraisals has been the development and extension of appraisals to cover a large proportion of the UK workforce and the coverage of non managerial occupations and the extended use in private and public sectors.13.2.2 The Purpose of AppraisalsThe critical issue is what is the purpose of appraisals and how effective is it ？Researched and used in practice throughout organizations? The purpose of appraisals needs to be clearly identified. Firstly their purpose. Randell (1994) states they are a systematic evaluation of individual performance linked to workplace behaviour and/or specific criteria. Appraisals often take the form of an appraisal interview,usually annual,supported by standardised forms/paperwork.The key objective of appraisal is to provide feedback for performance is provided by the linemanager.The three key questions for quality of feedback:1. What and how are observations on performance made?2. Why and how are they discussed?3. What determines the level of performance in the job?It has been argued by one school of thought that these process cannot be performed effectively unless the line manager of person providing feedback has the interpersonal interviewing skills to providethat feedback to people being appraised. This has been defined as the “Bradford Approach” which places a high priority on appraisal skills development (Randell, 1994). This approach is outlined in Fig. 13.1 whichidentifies the linkages betweeninvolving,developing, rewarding and valuing people at work..13.2.3 Historical Development of AppraisalThe historical development of performance feedback has developed from a range of approaches.Formal observation of individual work performance was reported in Robert Owens’s Scottish factory inNew Lanarkin the early 1800s (Cole, 1925). Owen hung over machines a piece of coloured wood over machines to indicate the Super intendent’s assessment of the previous day’s conduct (white forexcellent, yellow, blue and then black for poor performance).The twentieth centuryled to F.W. Taylor and his measured performance and the scientific management movement (Taylor, 1964). The 1930sTraits Approaches identified personality and performance and used feedback using graphic rating scales, a mixed standard of performance scales noting behaviour in likert scale ratings.This was used to recruit and identify management potential in the field of selection. Later developments to prevent a middle scale from 5 scales then developed into a forced-choice scale which forced the judgement to avoid central ratings.The evaluation also included narrative statements and comments to support the ratings (Mair, 1958).In the 1940s Behavioural Methods were developed. These included Behavioural Anchored Rating Scales (BARS); Behavioural Observation Scales (BOS); Behavioural Evaluation Scales (BES); critical incident;job simulation. All these judgements were used to determine the specific levels of performance criteria to specific issues such as customer service and rated in factors such asexcellent,average orneeds to improve or poor.These ratings are assigned numerical values and added to a statement or narrative comment by the assessor. It would also lead to identify any potential need for training and more importantly to identify talent for careers in linemanagement supervision and future managerial potential.Post1945 developed into the Results-oriented approaches and led to the development of management by objectives (MBO). This provided aims and specific targets to be achievedand with in time frames such as pecific sales, profitability,and deadlines with feedback on previous performance (Wherry, 1957).The deadlines may have required alteration and led to specific performance rankings of staff. It also provided a forced distributionof rankingsof comparative performance and paired comparison ranking of performance and setting and achieving objectives.In the 1960s the developmentof Self-appraisal by discussion led to specific time and opportunity for the appraisee to reflectively evaluate their performance in the discussion and the interview developed into a conversation on a range of topics that the appraise needed to discuss in the interview. Until this period the success of the appraisal was dependent on skill of interviewer.In the 1990s the development of 360-degree appraisal developed where information was sought from a wider range of sources and the feedback was no longer dependent on the manager-subordinate power relationship but included groups appraising the performance of line managers and peer feedback from peer groups on individual performance (Redman and Snape, 1992). The final development of appraisal interviews developed in the 1990s with the emphasis on the linking performance with financial reward which will be discussed later in the paper.13.2.4 Measures of PerformanceThe dilemma of appraisal has always to develop performance measures and the use of appraisal is the key part of this process. Quantitative measure of performance communicated as standards in the business and industry level standards translated to individual performance. The introduction of techniques such as the balanced score card developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992).Performance measures and evaluation included financial, customer evaluation, feedback on internal processes and Learning and Growth. Performance standards also included qualitative measures Which argue that there is an over emphasis on metrics of quantitative approach above the definitions of quality services and total quality management.In terms of performance measures there has been a transformation in literature and a move in the 1990s to the financial rewards linked to the level of performance.The debates will be discussed later in the paper.13.3 Criticism of AppraisalsCritiques of appraisal have continued as appraisal shave increased in use and scope across sectors and occupations. The dominant critique is the management framework using appraisal as an orthodox technique that seeks to remedy the weakness and propose of appraisals as a system to develop performance.This “orthodox” approach argues there are conflicting pur poses of appraisal (Strebler et al, 2001). Appraisal can motivate staff by clarifying objectives and setting clear future objectives with provision for training and development needs to establish the performance objective. These conflicts withassessing past performance and distribution of rewards based on past performance (Bach, 2005:301).Employees are reluctant to confide any limitations and concerns on their current performance as this could impact on their merit related reward or promotion opportunities(Newton and Findley, 1996:43).This conflicts with performance as a continuum as appraisers are challenged with differing roles as both monitors and judges of performance but an understanding counsell or which Randell(1994)argues few manager shave not received the raining to perform.Appraisal Manager’s reluctance to criticise also stems from classic evidence fromMcGregor that managers are reluctant to make an egative judgement on an individual’s performance a sit could be demotivating,leadto accusationsoftheirown supportand contributiontoindividual poor performance and to also avoid interpersonal conflict (McGregor, 1957).One consequence of this avoidance of conflict is to rate all criterion as central and avoid any conflict known as the central tendency.In a study of senior managers by Long neckeretal.(1987),they found organisational politics influenced ratings of 60 senior executives.The findings were that politics involved deliberate attempts by individuals to enhance or protect self-interests when conflicting courses of action are possible and that ratings and decisions were affected by potential sources of bias or inaccuracy in their appraisal ratings (Longeneckeret al., 1987).There are methods of further bias beyond Longenecker’s evidence. The polit ical judgements and they have been distorted further by overrating some clear competencies in performance rather than being critical across all rated competencies known as the halo effect and if some competencies arelower they may prejudice the judgment acrossthe positive reviews known as the horns effect (ACAS, 1996).Some ratings may only cinclude recent events and these are known as the recency effects. In this case only recent events are noted compared to managers gathering and using data throughout the appraisal period .A particular concern is the equity of appraisal for ratings which may be distorted by gender ,ethnicity and the ratings of appraisers themselves .A range of studies in both the US and UK have highlighted subjectivity in terms of gender (Alimo-Metcalf, 1991;White, 1999) and ethnicity of the appraise and appraiser(Geddes and Konrad, 2003). Suggestions and solutions on resolving bias will be reviewed later.The second analysis is the radical critique of appraisal. This is the more critical management literature that argues that appraisal and performance management are about management control(Newton and Findley, 1996;Townley, 1993). It argues that tighter management control over employee behaviour can be achieved by the extension of appraisal to manual workers, professional as means to control. This develops the literature of Foucault using power and surveillance. This literature uses cases in examples of public service control on professionals such a teachers (Healy, 1997) and University professionals(Townley, 1990).This evidence argues the increased control of public services using appraisal as a method of control and that the outcome of managerial objectives ignores the developmental role of appraisal and ratings are awarded for people who accept and embrace the culture and organizational values . However, this literature ignores the employee resistance and the use of professional unions to challenge the attempts to exert control over professionals and staff in the appraisal process (Bach, 2005:306).One of the different issues of removing bias was the use of the test metaphor (Folgeretal.,1992).This was based on the assumption that appraisal ratings were a technical question of assessing “true” performance and there needed to be increased reliability and validity of appraisal as an instrument to develop motivation and performance. The sources of rater bias and errors can be resolvedby improved organisational justice and increasing reliability of appraiser’s judgement.However there were problems such as an assumption that you can state job requirements clearly and the organization is “rational” with objectives that reflect values and that the judgment by appraisers’ are value free from political agendas and personal objectives. Secondly there is the second issue of subjectivity if appraisal ratings where decisions on appraisal are rated by a “political metaphor”(Hart le, 1995).This “political view” argues that a appraisal is often done badly because there is a lack of training for appraisers and appraisers may see the appraisal as a waste of time. This becomes a process which managers have to perform and not as a potential to improve employee performance .Organisations in this context are “political” and the appraisers seek to maintain performance from subordinates and view appraises as internal customers to satisfy. This means managers use appraisal to avoid interpersonal conflict and develop strategies for their own personal advancement and seek a quiet life by avoiding censure from higher managers.This perception means managers also see appraisee seeks good rating and genuine feedback and career development by seeking evidence of combining employee promotion and pay rise.This means appraisal ratings become political judgements and seek to avoid interpersonal conflicts. The approaches of the “test” and “political” metaphors of appraisal are inaccurate and lack objec tivity and judgement of employee performance is inaccurate and accuracy is avoided.The issue is how can organisations resolve this lack of objectivity?13.3.1 Solutions to Lack of Objectivity of AppraisalGrint(1993)argues that the solutions to objectivity lies in part with McGregor’s (1957) classic critique by retraining and removal of “top down” ratings by managers and replacement with multiple rater evaluation which removes bias and the objectivity by upward performance appraisal. The validity of upward appraisal means there moval of subjective appraisal ratings.This approach is also suggested to remove gender bias in appraisal ratings against women in appraisals (Fletcher, 1999). The solution of multiple reporting(internal colleagues, customers and recipients of services) will reduce subjectivity and inequity of appraisal ratings. This argument develops further by the rise in the need to evaluate project teams and increasing levels of teamwork to include peer assessment. The solutions also in theory mean increased closer contact with individual manager and appraises and increasing services linked to customer facing evaluations.However, negative feedback still demotivates and plenty of feedback and explanation by manager who collates feedback rather than judges performance andfail to summarise evaluations.There are however still problems with accuracy of appraisal objectivity asWalker and Smither (1999)5year studyof 252 managers over 5 year period still identified issues with subjective ratings in 360 degree appraisals.There are still issues on the subjectivity of appraisals beyond the areas of lack of training.The contribution of appraisal is strongly related to employee attitudes and strong relationships with job satisfaction(Fletcher and Williams, 1996). The evidence on appraisal still remains positive in terms of reinvigo rating social relationships at work (Townley,1993)and the widespread adoption in large public services in the UK such as the national health Service (NHS)is the valuable contribution to line managers discussion with staff on their past performance, discussing personal development plans and training and development as positive issues.One further concern is the openness of appraisal related to employee reward which we now discuss.13.3.2 Linking Appraisals with Reward ManagementAppraisal and performance management have been inextricably linked to employee reward since the development of strategic human resource management in the 1980s. The early literature on appraisal linked appraisal with employee control (Randell, 1994;Grint, 1993;Townley, 1993, 1999) and discussed the use of performance related reward to appraisals. However therecent literature has substituted the chapter titles employee “appraisal” with “performance management”(Bach, 2005; Storey, 2007) and moved the focus on performance and performance pay and the limits of employee appraisal. The appraisal and performance pay link has developed into debates to three key issues:The first issue is has performance pay related to appraisal grown in use?The second issue is what type of performance do we reward?and the final issue is who judges management standards?The first discussion on influences of growth of performance pay schemes is the assumption that increasing linkage between individual effort and financial reward increases performance levels. This linkage between effort and financial reward increasing levels of performance has proved an increasing trend in the public and private sector (Bevan and Thompson, 1992;Armstrong and Baron, 1998). The drive to increase public sector performance effort and setting of targets may even be inconsistent in the experiences of some organizational settings aimed at achieving long-term targets(Kessler and Purcell, 1992;Marsden, 2007). The development of merit based pay based on performance assessed by a manager is rising in the UK Marsden (2007)reported that the: Use of performance appraisals as a basis for merit pay are used in65 percent of public sector and 69 percent of the private sector employees where appraisal covered all nonmanagerial staff(p.109).Merit pay has also grown in use as in 1998 20% of workplaces used performance related schemes compared to 32% in the same organizations 2004 (Kersley et al., 2006:191). The achievements of satisfactory ratings or above satisfactory performance averages were used as evidence to reward individual performance ratings in the UK Civil Service (Marsden, 2007).Table 13.2 outlines the extent of merit pay in 2004.The second issue is what forms of performance is rewarded. The use of past appraisal ratings as evidence of achieving merit-related payments linked to achieving higher performance was the predominant factor developed in the public services. The evidence on Setting performance targets have been as Kessler (2000:280) reported “inconsistent within organizations and problematic for certain professional or less skilled occupations where goals have not been easily formulated”. There has been inconclusive evidence from organizations on the impact of performance pay and its effectiveness in improving performance. Evidence from a number of individual performance pay schemes report organizations suspending or reviewing them on the grounds that individual performance reward has produced no effect in performance or even demotivates staff(Kessler, 2000:281).More in-depth studies setting performance goals followed by appraisal on how well they were resulted in loss of motivation whilst maintaining productivity and achieved managers using imposing increased performance standards (Marsden and Richardson, 1994). As Randell(1994) had highlighted earlier, the potential objectivity and self-criticism in appraisal reviews become areas that appraisees refuse to acknowledge as weaknesses with appraisers if this leads to a reduction in their merit pay.Objectivity and self reflection for development becomes a weakness that appraises fail to acknowledge as a developmental issue if it reduces their chances of a reduced evaluation that will reduce their merit reward. The review of civil service merit pay (Makinson, 2000)reported from 4major UK Civil Service Agencies and the National Health Service concluded that existing forms of performance pay and performance management had failed to motivate many staff.The conclusions were that employees found individual performance pay divisive and led to reduced willingness to co-operate with management ,citing managerial favorites and manipulation of appraisal scores to lower ratings to save paying rewards to staff (Marsden and French, 1998).This has clear implications on the relationship between line managers and appraises and the demotivational consequences and reduced commitment provide clear evidence of the danger to linking individual performance appraisal to reward in the public services. Employees focus on the issues that gain key performance focus by focusing on specific objectives related to key performance indicators rather than all personal objectives. A study of banking performance pay by Lewis(1998)highlighted imposed targets which were unattainable with a range of 20 performance targets with narrow short term financial orientatated goals. The narrow focus on key targets and neglect of other performance aspects leads to tasks not being delivered.This final issue of judging management standards has already highlighted issues of inequity and bias based on gender (Beyer, 1990; Chen and DiTomasio, 1996; Fletcher, 1999). The suggested solutions to resolved Iscrimination have been proposed as enhanced interpersonal skills training are increased equitable use of 360 degree appraisal as a method to evaluate feedback from colleagues as this reduces the use of the “political metaphor”(Randell, 1994;Fletcher, 1999).On measures linking performance to improvement require a wider approach to enhanced work design and motivation to develop and enhance employee job satisfaction and the design of linkages between effort and performance are significant in the private sector and feedback and awareness in the public sector (Fletcher and Williams, 1996:176). Where rises be in pay were determined by achieving critical rated appraisal objectives, employees are less self critical and open to any developmental needs in a performance review.13.4 ConclusionAs performance appraisal provides a major potential for employee feedback that could link strongly to increasing motivation ,and a opportunity to clarify goals and achieve long term individual performance and career development why does it still suffers from what Randell describes as a muddle and confusion which still surrounds the theory and practice?There are key issues that require resolution and a great deal depends on the extent to which you have a good relationship with your line manager . Barlow(1989)argued `if you get off badly with your first two managers ,you may just as well forget it (p. 515).The evidence on the continued practice of appraisals is that they are still institutionally elaborated systems of management appraisal and development is significant rhetoric in the apparatus of bureaucratic control by managers (Barlow, 1989). In reality the companies create, review, change and even abolish appraisals if they fail to develop and enhance organisational performance(Kessler, 2000). Despite all the criticism and evidence the critics have failed to suggest an alternative for a process that can provide feedback, develop motivation, identify training and potential and evidence that can justify potential career development and justify reward(Hartle, 1997).绩效考核的困境Peter Prowse and Julie Prowse摘要本文旨在用绩效考核方法来解决绩效管理的困境。

非财务指标对企业经营绩效的影响研究

非财务指标对企业经营绩效的影响研究在传统的企业经营中，财务指标一直被视为衡量企业绩效的重要指标之一，如利润率、营业收入等。

然而，随着经济的不断发展和环境的日益复杂，人们开始意识到财务指标并不能全面反映企业的经营状况和发展潜力。

因此，越来越多的企业开始关注非财务指标并将其纳入绩效评估体系中。

首先，非财务指标在企业经营中的重要性日益凸显。

随着消费者对企业社会责任的关注度不断加大，企业的社会形象和声誉越来越受到重视。

非财务指标，如员工满意度、客户满意度、环境友好性等，可以直接影响企业的品牌形象和消费者的购买决策。

例如，一个员工满意度较高的企业，员工可以更加积极主动地为企业工作，提高工作效率和产品质量，进而提高企业的竞争力。

同样地，一个环保意识较强的企业可以获得消费者的认可，形成品牌美誉度，吸引更多的消费者购买产品。

因此，非财务指标在企业经营中的重要性不言而喻。

其次，非财务指标的影响途径也值得研究。

非财务指标与企业的经营绩效之间往往存在因果关系。

例如，一家注重员工满意度的企业往往可以迅速响应市场需求，提高产品质量和服务水平，吸引更多的客户和订单，从而实现了营业收入的快速增长。

此外，非财务指标之间也存在相互关联。

例如，员工满意度和客户满意度常常呈正相关。

一个员工满意度高的企业，往往可以提供更好的产品和服务，从而提高客户的满意程度。

研究非财务指标与企业经营绩效的关系，可以帮助企业找到合适的途径和策略来提高绩效。

然而，非财务指标的研究也存在一定的挑战。

首先，非财务指标往往难以量化和标准化。

相对于财务指标而言，非财务指标往往更加主观和难以准确测量。

例如，员工满意度需要通过问卷调查等方式来获取，而不同员工可能对满意度的定义存在差异。

因此，研究人员需要设计科学有效的调查问卷来收集数据，并采用合适的统计方法进行数据分析。

其次，非财务指标的影响机制较为复杂。

与财务指标不同，非财务指标的影响往往是间接的，而且与其他因素存在相互作用。

绩效评价体系中非财务指标对财务业绩的影响研究

的乡下超市的业绩就不可以通过这两个非财务指标预测。
三、究设计研
企业是一系列契约的集合，管理者和股东是委托代理的契约关系，在委托代理关系中，委托人（股东）无法观察到代理人（管理者）的行为，是可以观察到结果，但委托人根据可观察到的代理人取得的业绩，对代理人进行绩效评价和激励。注重对管理者非财务业绩指标的评价与激励，可以促使管理者采取有利于企业战略目标的行动，实现长期利润的增长，提升企业价值。非财务指标是企业财务业绩的先行指标，非财务指标的结果会影响财务业绩的优劣。
非财务指标对财务业绩的影响，能体现在当期，可也可能对企业未来一段时间的财务业绩产生影响，０从２世纪９年代起，０国内外许多文献研究了非财务指标的应用与企业财务业绩的关系。（）一非财务指标与企业财务业绩的相关性研究Ｎｌｎｅｓ等ｏ（９２随机地调查了５家医院１０５１９）１５９位病人，结果发现，病人对医
二、献综述文
非财务指标的应用对企业业绩具有长期的的影响，它不仅能影
响企业当期的财务业绩，与未来的财务业绩也具有相关Ｉ本部分生。
将通过实证分析，进一步检验应用非财务指标对财务业绩的影响。（研究假设一）由于非财务指标是指代理人投入努力而带来的客户满意度、生产率、品质量等尚未转化为货币价值的中间成产
取一家公司下属的ｌ家旅馆进行详细研究，结果发现这些旅馆的８
很多研究文献还表明，非财务指标的应用不仅能影响企业当

经营业绩评价中非财务指标设置及问题讨论

经营业绩评价中非财务指标设置及问题讨论随着市场竞争的加剧和经营环境的日益复杂，企业越来越重视非财务指标的运用，以更全面、客观地评估企业的经营业绩。

随着非财务指标的应用越来越广泛，也不可避免地出现了一些问题。

本文将介绍一些常见的非财务指标以及在运用指标时需要注意的问题。

一、常见的非财务指标1.客户满意度：客户满意度是衡量公司经营绩效的一项最常见的非财务指标之一。

该指标常常被用于评估公司在引领客户体验方面的能力、提高产品和服务质量方面的表现、以及与客户沟通的能力。

2.员工满意度：员工满意度是指员工对公司工作环境、工资待遇、培训和发展机会、管理风格和企业文化等方面的满意度。

从员工角度出发考虑企业经营绩效，是可以充分发挥人力资源的优势和潜力。

3.品牌影响力：品牌影响力是指企业在市场中的知名度、美誉度和口碑等方面的表现。

这对企业在市场中的地位和营销策略有着至关重要的影响。

4.创新：创新是企业在技术和市场上的表现。

考虑到市场和技术不断变革，管理者需要不断地关注公司的创新能力，使其能够与市场、客户和竞争对手保持同步。

5.社会责任：企业的社会责任意味着承担企业在经济、环境和社会方面的影响，并为推进可持续发展做出贡献。

通过关注企业的社会责任，管理者可以重点关注公司在生态环境和社会责任等方面的表现，从而增强客户信任和品牌形象。

二、在应用非财务指标时需要注意的问题1.选择适当的非财务指标：如何选择适当的非财务指标是关键。

在考虑选定策略指标时，应根据企业的情况和目标而定。

需要量化的指标必须首先符合企业的目标和理念，并且能够衡量或反映公司的经营绩效。

2.确保指标可衡量：非财务指标往往较为主观，具有一定的模糊性，管理者需要确保其可衡量性。

应尽可能地制定一套可以衡量指标的标准，以消除主观因素的干扰，并且保证指标的可重复性和稳定性。

3.周密的数据收集和分析：非财务指标的数据往往需要收集和分析大量的信息。

对于数据的准确性和完整性，管理者需要进行周密的分析，并在收集数据时避免错误和失误。

EVA：一个较好的财务绩效评价方法【外文翻译】

本科毕业论文（设计）外文翻译原文：EV A: A better financial reporting toolEconomic Value Added (EV A) is a financial performance measure being adopted by many companies in corporate America. This new metric, trademarked by Stern Stewart and Company, is a profit measure based on the concept of true economic income which includes the cost of capital for all types of financing. EV A provides a more comprehensive measure of profitability than traditional measures because it indicates how well a firm has performed in relation to the amount of capital employed. This article summarizes the EV A concept of measuring profitability, the EV A calculation and the benefits of adopting an EV A framework.The EV A Concept of ProfitabilityEV A is based on the concept that a successful firm should earn at least its cost of capital. Firms that earn higher returns than financing costs benefit shareholders and account for increased shareholder value.In its simplest form, EV A can be expressed as the following equation:EV A = Operating Profit After Tax (NOPAT) - Cost of CapitalNOPAT is calculated as net operating income after depreciation, adjusted for items that move the profit measure closer to an economic measure of profitability. Adjustments include such items as: additions for interest expense after-taxes (including any implied interest expense on operating leases); increases in net capitalized R&D expenses; increases in the LIFO reserve; and goodwill amortization. Adjustments made to operating earnings for these items reflect the investments made by the firm or capital employed to achieve those profits. Stern Stewart has identified as many as 164 items for potential adjustment, but often only a few adjustments are necessary to provide a good measure of EV A.[1]Measurement of EV AMeasurement of EV A can be made using either an operating or financing approach. Under the operating approach, NOPAT is derived by deducting cash operating expenses and depreciation from sales. Interest expense is excluded because it is considered as a financing charge. Adjustments, which are referred to as equity equivalent adjustments, are designed to reflect economic reality and move income and capital to a more economically-based value. These adjustments are considered with cash taxes deducted to arrive at NOPAT.EV A is then measured by deducting the company's cost of capital from the NOPAT value. The amount of capital to be used in the EV A calculations is the same under either the operating or financing approach, but is calculated differently.The operating approach starts with assets and builds up to invested capital, including adjustments for economically derived equity equivalent values. The financing approach, on the other hand, starts with debt and adds all equity and equity equivalents to arrive at invested capital. Finally, the weighted average cost of capital, based on the relative values of debt and equity and their respective cost rates, is used to arrive at the cost of capital which is multiplied by the capital employed and deducted from the NOPAT value. The resulting amount is the current period's EV A.The remainder of this article summarizes the financing approach because it emphasizes the significance of capital employed and illustrates how accounting rules impact the calculation of EV A. Exhibit 1 on page 33 shows a sample calculation of EV A.EV A Calculation and AdjustmentsAs stated above, EV A is measured as NOPAT less a firm's cost of capital. NOPAT is obtained by adding interest expense after tax back to net income after-taxes, because interest is considered a capital charge for EV A. Interest expense will be included as part of capital charges in the after-tax cost of debt calculation.Other items that may require adjustment depend on company-specific activities. For example, when operating leases rather than financing leases are employed, interest expense is not recorded on the income statement, nor is a liability for futurelease payments recognized on the balance sheet. Thus, while interest is implicit in the yearly lease payments, an attempt is not made to distinguish it as a financing activity under GAAP.Under EV A, however, the interest portion of the payment is estimated and the after-tax amount from it is added back into NOPAT because the interest amount is considered a capital charge rather than an operating expense. The corresponding present value of future lease payments represents equity equivalents for purposes of capital employed by the firm, and an adjustment for capital is also required. See Exhibit 1 for sample adjustments commonly used in the calculation of EV A.R&D expense items call for careful evaluation and adjustment. While GAAP generally requires most R&D expenditures to be expensed immediately, EV A capitalizes successful R&D efforts and amortizes the amount over the period benefiting the successful R&D effort.Another example of an EV A adjustment is the LIFO reserve increase. The increase is added back to profit because it converts inventory from a LIFO to FIFO valuation, which is a better approximation of current replacement cost. The full amount of the LIFO reserve represents past holding gains and accordingly is added back to the equity component to reflect the capital invested by the firm in inventory not yet reflected in equity under GAAP.Other adjustments recommended by Stern Stewart include the amortization of goodwill. The annual amortization is added back for earnings measurement, while the accumulated amount of amortization is added back to equity equivalents. Goodwill amortization is handled in this manner because by "un-amortizing" goodwill, the rate of return reflects the true cash-on-yield. In addition, the decision to include the accumulated goodwill in capital improves the real cost of acquiring another firm's assets regardless of the manner in which the acquisition is accounted. While the above adjustments are common in EV A calculations, according to Stern Stewart, those items to be considered for adjustment should be based on the following criteria: Materiality: Adjustments should make a material difference in EV A.Manageability: Adjustments should impact future decisions.Definitiveness: Adjustments should be definitive and objectively determined.Simplicity: Adjustments should not be too complex.If an item meets all four of the criteria, it should be considered for adjustment. For example, the impact on EV A is usually minimal for firms having small amounts of operating leases. Under these conditions, it would be reasonable to ignore this item in the calculation of EV A. Furthermore, adjustments for items such as deferred taxes and various types of reserves (i.e. warranty expense, etc.) would be typical in the calculation of EV A, although the materiality for these items should be considered. Unusual gains or losses should also be examined and eliminated if appropriate. This last item is particularly important as it relates to EV A-based compensation plans.The Significance of the Capital ChargeUnder traditional financial reporting, a cost rate is not assigned for the equity used to finance operations. Thus, the use of net income as a performance measure is limited by the exclusion of that cost. In addition, when used in calculations such as return on equity, net income also includes the accounting distortions included in its calculation and that of book value.EV A, on the other hand, through its adjustment efforts, seeks to eliminate the impact of accounting distortions while treating the impact of financing costs more comprehensively in its capital cost charge. Therefore, a truer measure of economic profit is provided by EV A than that provided by the use of traditional GAAP-based measures. This may be significant because some companies spend heavily on R&D and the accounting treatment for this and certain in tangibles is not included on GAAP-based balance sheets. EV A provides a way to compare performance among firms impacted by these accounting weaknesses.The specific amount of the capital charge for EV A is based on the amount of equity equivalents determined after adjustments, multiplied by the capital cost rate. The capital cost rate is based on the individual cost rates for both debt and equity. While the cost rate for debt can be readily determined, the rate for equity requires some effort. The cost for equity can be measured by using the capital asset pricing model, or other risk premium approaches.Once that rate is determined, it is combined with the relative proportions of capital to produce the weighted average cost of capital (WACC). It is that overall rate, when combined with all capital including equity equivalents, that produces the overall capital charge used in EV A. After the capital charge is calculated and deducted from NOPAT, the full extent of EV A' s benefits can be observed, because all opportunity costs involved in the production of income have been measured and included in profitability. An example of the WACC is shown in Exhibit 1.EV A-Based Compensation PlansFor firms that reward managers based on performance, EV A can offer advantages over traditional profit-based plans. First, by tying compensation to a better performance metric, the company can achieve a better matching of its own objectives with those of the manager. Second, EV A can help reduce some conflicts of interest often associated with managers and profitability measurement. Because an objective of EV A is to eliminate the impact of accounting distortions on profitability and the influence of management in its calculation, EV A is a better representation upon which to reward executives.It should be noted that EV A measurement is not without subjective elements. It may be necessary to involve an independent committee to determine the appropriateness of specific EV A adjustments and how to best handle unusual situations. Stern Stewart also recommends that EV A-based bonus systems involve some form of deferral of pay with the full amount of EV A bonuses dependent on long-term success.This feature of paying only a portion of the current amount and banking the remainder for the future is an important component of the system and is designed to enhance long-term loyalty to the firm. Bonuses should also be uncapped and include stock options, thereby turning managers into owners. The ability of the system to lower bonuses based on subsequent performance is one feature that makes EV A systems fair to both the company and its managers. Thus, EV A and its inclusion in compensation, rewards long-term success and helps the company promote this aspect of corporate performance.The overall success of the plan is dependent on several important factors including the ability of all employees to understand and agree with its goals. To reach this objective, it is necessary to provide focused training of EV A to all employees in the company. In that way, everyone better understands the philosophy and their role in the system. While this training may take considerable time and effort, it is usually rewarded by sustained improvements in EV A.EV A DriversAnother advantage of EV A systems is the emphasis on EV A drivers and the contribution of certain activities to EV A. When implementing EV A, firms seek to determine those areas of the business most responsible for success. By isolating activities, such as inventory management or capacity utilization, firms can judge the value of these on projects, divisions, etc. Thus management can focus on ways to increase economic value, rather than on reported numbers alone. By including capital contributions which do not require a stock price, firms are also able to use EV A in evaluating the performance of individual units or divisions of the firm as well as the managers who run those businesses. EV A helps focus on improving operating profits without tying up more capital in the business, curtailing or liquidating investments that do not meet capital costs, and/or reducing the cost of capital. Management actions such as cost reductions, improvements in technology, reduced working capital, or the optimal use of debt, represent the types of benefits resulting from EV A analysis and implementation.Share Price and EV AA controversy that surrounds EV A is whether it correlates well with a firm's stock prices as claimed by Stern Stewart. While many believe that it does, the results of several studies are mixed.[3] Nevertheless, many seem convinced of the overall benefit of EV A. Therefore, firms contemplating the adoption of EV A, or any performance-based measure used for decision making and compensation, should examine their own individual characteristics, the underlying theory of the measure sought, and the likelihood that the measure selected will capture the attributes it seeks.For advocates of EV A, the underlying theory of finance embedded in itscalculation is one of its strengths. This can more easily be seen when one considers that the present value of EV A parallels that of using net present value, and for capital projects, would be expected to yield a similar result.Source: Larry M.Prober,2000 “EV A: A better financial reporting tool”. Pennsylvania CPA Journal, vol.71, lessue 3,p27.译文：EV A：一个较好的财务绩效评价方法经济增加值（EV A）作为财务绩效评价的一种方法，目前正被很多美国公司所应用。

非财务指标评价下企业绩效分析与提升

非财务指标评价下企业绩效分析与提升企业绩效是衡量企业运营和发展情况的重要指标，能够直接影响企业的竞争能力和市场地位。

除了财务指标，还有许多非财务指标可以用于评价企业绩效，并帮助企业分析和提升绩效。

1.客户满意度：客户是企业绩效的重要衡量指标。

通过调查客户满意度可以了解客户对企业提供的产品或服务的评价和反馈。

企业可以通过将客户满意度纳入绩效管理体系，并定期开展客户满意度调查来评估自身绩效，并针对客户反馈的问题和不满进行改进和提升。

2.员工满意度：员工是企业绩效的重要影响因素，他们的满意度和工作动力会直接影响企业的运营和发展。

通过员工满意度调查，企业可以了解员工对工作环境、福利待遇、晋升机会等方面的评价和反馈。

企业可以通过改善员工福利待遇、建立良好的工作氛围、提供培训和晋升机会等方式提升员工满意度，从而提高绩效。

3.市场份额：市场份额是衡量企业在市场中所占比重的指标，能够反映企业的市场竞争力和地位。

企业可以通过定期跟踪市场份额的变化，了解自身在市场中的竞争情况，并采取相应的市场策略来提升市场份额。

例如，通过增加产品种类和规格、改善产品质量和服务，提高品牌知名度等方式提升市场份额。

4.创新能力：创新能力是衡量企业绩效的重要非财务指标之一、企业的创新能力能够直接促进企业的持续发展和提高绩效。

企业可以通过监测和评估自身的创新能力，如研发投入、专利申请数量等指标，来了解自身创新水平并制定相应的创新策略。

同时，企业还可以通过引入创新人才、与高校和研究机构合作等途径来提升创新能力。

5.环保指标：环保指标是衡量企业社会责任和可持续发展的重要指标。

企业可以通过监测和评估环保指标，如能源消耗、废水排放、固体废弃物处理等指标，来了解企业的环保表现，并采取相应的环保措施和技术改进来提升环保绩效。

环保绩效的提升不仅可以减少企业的环境风险，还能够提高企业的市场形象和品牌声誉。

通过以上非财务指标的评价和分析，企业可以全面了解自身的绩效状况，并制定相应的提升策略。

客户盈利能力分析中英文外文翻译文献

客户盈利能力分析外文文献翻译(含：英文原文及中文译文)文献出处：Raaij E M V, Vernooij M J A, Triest S V. The implementation of customer profitability analysis: A case study[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2003, 32(7):573-583.英文原文The implementation of customer profitability analysis: A case studyRaaij E M V, Vernooij M J A, Triest S VAbstractBy using customer profitability analysis (CPA), firms can determine the profit contribution of customer segments and/or individual customers. This article presents an approach for the implementation of CPA. The implementation process is illustrated using a case study of a firm producing and selling professional cleaning products. The case study highlights specific issues related to CPA in an industrial setting,and the results provide examples of the possible benefits of implementing a process of regular CPA.D 2003 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Customer profitability; Customer relationship management (CRM); Implementation; Case study1. IntroductionWithin any given customer base, there will be differences in the revenues customers generate for the firm and in the costs the firm has toincur to secure those revenues. While most firms will know the customer revenues, many firms are unaware of all costs associated with customer relationships. In general, product costs will be known for each customer, but sales and marketing, service, and support costs are mostly treated as overhead. Customer profitability analysis (CPA) refers to the allocation of revenues and costs to customer segments or individual customers, such that the profitability of those segments and/or individual customers can be calculated.The impetus for the increasing attention for CPA is twofold. First, the rise of activity-based costing (ABC) in the 1990s led to an increased understanding of the varying extent to which the manufacturing of different products used a firm’s resources (Cooper & Kaplan, 1991; Foster &Gupta, 1994). When using ABC, firms first identify cost pools: categories of activities performed within the organization(e.g., procurement).Second, information technology makes it possible to record and analyze more customer data— both in type and in amount. As data such as number of orders, number of sales visits, number of service calls, etc. are stored at the level of the individual customer, it becomes possible to actually calculate customer profitability.It is considered good industrial marketing practice to build and nurture profitable relationships with customers. To be able to do this, afirm should know how current customer relationships differ in profitability, as well as what customer segments offer higher potential for future profitable customer relationships.2. The potential benefits of CPAThe direct benefits of CPA lie in the insight it provides in the uneven distribution of costs and revenues over customers. The information on the spread of costs among customers will be valuable in particular, as the distribution of revenues will generally be known to the firm. This insight in the extent to which specific customers consume the firm’s resources generates new opportunities for the firm in three areas: cost management, revenue management, and strategic marketing management.First, CPA uncovers opportunities for targeted cost management and profit improvement programs. Published figures show examples where 20% of customers generate 225% of profits (Cooper & Kaplan, 1991), where more than half of the customers is unprofitable (Storbacka, 1997)or where the loss on a customer can be as high as 2.5 times sales revenue (Niraj, Gupta, & Narasimhan, 2001). CPA, as a specific application of ABC, reveals the links between activities and resource consumption, and it therefore points directly to profit opportunities (Cooper & Kaplan, 1991). Second, CPA provides a basis for well-informed pricing decisions, bonus plans, and discounts to customers. It shows why filling some orders cost more than others and enables firms to have their prices reflectthose differences (Shapiro et al., 1987).The analysis outcomes may also help in revising existing discounting structures to improve profitability (cf. Kalafatis & Denton, 2000).Third, CPA opens up possibilities for segmentation and targeting strategies based on cost and profitability profiles. Some companies have segmented their customer base in platinum, gold, iron, and lead customers, based on their contributions to profits.These potential benefits of CPA are frequently cited in the literature. Yet the issues arising in actually implementing CPA are seldom discussed. In the next section, an overall approach for the implementation of CPA is presented.3. An overall approach for implementing CPAThe actual calculation of customer profitability amounts to an extensive ABC exercise. To make CPA really useful, the implementation should go further than drawing up a customer profitability model and plugging data into it, as the value of the analysis is in the actions based on better informed decision-making. Therefore, a six-step approach to implementing CPA is suggested. This approach, outlined in Fig. 1, provides a directive for a team consisting of at least a marketer and a management accountant. Depending on the characteristics of the firm and its information systems, the team can also include operations managers and information specialists.The sixth and final step deals with establishing the necessary infrastructure for the continued use of CPA. Embedding CPA in the daily routines of sales and marketing and accounting may well necessitate changes in procedures(e.g., marketing planning), changes in responsibilities, and changes in systems (e.g., information systems). The next section presents the application of this six-step approach in a business-to-business setting.4. The implementation of CPA in an industrial cleaning firmThe case organization is one of the national sales offices of a multinational firm that engages in the development, production, sales, and marketing of professional cleaning products (chemicals, cleaning systems, and consumables).Among the f irm’s main markets are industrial laundry, office cleaning, hotel cleaning, kitchen hygiene, and personal hygiene. Its products are sold directly (to large end-users such as in-flight caterers and to service integrators such as professional cleaners), as well as through distributors. The firm has divided its market into market sectors based on the nature of the end-user (e.g., healthcare, lodging, or dairy).As with many industrial firms, this firm employs a considerable sales and service force. The sales force is responsible for the initiation, maintenance, and development of customer relationships. The service force is responsible for order processing, customer training, advice, product demonstrations, maintenance, and repair.Procedures are also part of the infrastructure. To improve the accuracy of future customer profitability figures, the sales managers and account managers were requested to start registering the duration of their customer visits. In the absence of such a registration in the first round of analysis, sales costs were allocated to customers as a percentage of revenues. The willingness of the sales force to record their time spent for customers was high, as they understood the importance of this information for accurate analyses of customer profitability.5. Learning from CPAThe exercise described above was this firm’s first experience with CPA. As Ward and Ryals (2001) suggest, the most effective approach for attaining accurate valuations of customer relationships is an iterative approach in which a customer profitability model is progressively implemented in the organization. This means that, with each cycle, the model is to be improved until the calculations are sufficiently accurate for marketing purposes. For this firm, the first improvement for the next iteration concerns the registration of sales force hours to allocate sales costs more accurately. It has further decided to repeat the CPA exercise every 6 months and implement improvements along the way. For the firm, the exercise has sparked learning on three different levels: On the first, and most basic level, the firm has learned what each customer’s last year contribution has been to the firm’s operating income and how thisinformation can be used for cost management, revenue management, and marketing management. Second, the firm is learning how revenues and costs are best allocated to individual customers. The first attempt described in this article is only the start of a continuous improvement of such allocation methods. And third, the firm is learning what the various factors are that determine the value of each individual customer (customer profitability being but one of those factors).6. DiscussionThere are a few things you should know about CPA users. First, CPA numbers are constructed from multiple data sources. The accuracy of these data sources limits the possible accuracy of customer profitability figures. In addition, the CPA model must be a good representation of actual processing.The CPA exercise reported here is a retrospective analysis, which is an example of an analysis of past revenues and costs incurred by customers in a particular cycle. Managers will also be interested in prospective customer profit analysis. The quasi-CPA calculates the net present value of the future expected costs and revenues associated with serving the customer throughout his future life. The Quasi-Accountant Office is also known as the customer lifetime value analysis.To be able to estimate future costs and benefits, and the analysis of customer profitability is a valuable, if not necessary, first step.7. ConclusionIn this case, a six-step approach to implementing CPA within the company. Costs and revenue should be allocated to the only active customer, which means that the customer who starts analysis and identification can consider the active customer's customer database. The second step involves the company's internal production to serve the customer's costs, analysis of all activities. For all activities, the cost driver has to be calculated in such a way that it can be calculated for each cost driver how many units are identified for each individual customer. The actual calculation step 3 performs subsequent interpretation of the results and weighs the customer's a priori expectations of profit distribution. Based on the discussion of (preliminary) outcomes, the related costs allocated to the customer's previous decisions may be modified to improve the accuracy and/or fairness of the distribution. Once the number of calculation methods agreed, marketing strategies, procedures and actions can taste new information. It may require very unprofitable accounts to act immediately, improvement programs can be installed to reduce unnecessary costs, and new strategies may be targeted at the development of a particular customer base. As a sixth process, it may be necessary to adjust the organization to establish an infrastructure Use CPA in your organization.Regarding the third issue, which is the CPA-based differentiatedmarketing strategy, industrial companies should consider adopting profitability-based market segmentation and have been applied to financial services and other non-major industries and market differentiation strategies. Once a customer’s profit figures are established within a customer pyramid rated by customers as platinum, gold, iron, lead or customers, customers can serve at their own level. Since profit base segmentation is a new industrial enterprise, the first effective implementation of this may be to gain a disproportionate share of returns.The CPA will bring a lot of new information to the company for the first time. Therefore, the CPA is its own value. At this point, there is little evidence of its widespread use, and the actual implementation of companies in industry. In an increasingly focused era of CRM, customer loyalty, CPA is likely to be in urgent need of such efforts.中文译文客户盈利能力分析的实施:案例研究Raaij E M V, Vernooij M J A, Triest S V摘要通过使用客户盈利能力分析(CPA ),企业可以决定客户群和/或个人客户的利润贡献。

非财务指标与未来财务业绩的价值相关性：理论分析与实证研究【文献综述】

毕业论文文献综述会计学非财务指标与未来财务业绩的价值相关性：理论分析与实证研究随着非财务业绩指标被大力提倡并得到越来越广泛的应用，非财务指标的业绩后果与未来财务业绩的相关性问题近年来成为国外的研究热点，其中顾客满意度是一个企业长期成功最重要的驱动因素和最为广泛研究的非财务业绩指标。

正是由于认识到顾客满意度的重要性，大多数公司投入大量资源努力提高顾客满意度，管理人员也依据该指标进行经营决策。

鉴于在顾客满意度上的资源投入及其经济后果，理解顾客满意度和未来财务业绩之间的相关性显得十分重要。

1 非财务业绩指标的优越性业绩评价指标不仅体现了企业的战略计划，而且为评价组织目标的实现情况、管理人员的业绩考评及薪酬提供了重要依据。

财务业绩评价指标的选择是我国理论界与实务界所面临的极具争议的研究课题。

传统的财务指标体系建立在会计信息基础之上，容易被操纵，高级管理人员的一些投机风气可能会使企业无法实现长期利益。

传统财务指标关心的是反映内部流程的结果的过去经营绩效的信息，仅仅是对过去业绩的事后反映，缺少预测未来业绩的能力。

由此看出，传统的绩效评价体系已无法满足管理需求。

企业开始在业绩评价体系中引入影响企业成功的其它关键因素，如：战略目标、产品和服务的质量、创新能力、顾客满意度等，而这些关键成功因素多是非财务指标。

非财务指标所具有的全面性、前瞻性、及时性、动态性、外向性等特点，可以很好地弥补传统的财务指标业绩评价体系的不足。

越来越多的学者寻求在传统业绩评价体系的基础上加入非财务指标，建立综合业绩评价体系。

Montgomery(1997)认为，顾客导向的经营理念和管理实践，需要企业建立以顾客为中心的业绩评价体系，以便更好地评价组织的经营效率和效果。

Nanny，Miller和Volkmann(1998)认为，过分注重财务报告目标和有形产出，是当前成本会计体系的一个最大的缺点。

Kaplan(1984)和Fitzgerald等(1994)认为，对短期财务业绩的关注，可能导致许多企业忽视影响企业成功的重要因素。

经营业绩评价中非财务指标设置及问题讨论

经营业绩评价中非财务指标设置及问题讨论经营业绩评价是组织对自身经营活动效果的衡量及评价，为了准确评价并监控经营业绩，除了财务指标外，还需要设置非财务指标来评估企业的发展状况。

非财务指标是指用以评估企业营运状况和进展的定量和定性的指标，它们可以包括市场份额、顾客满意度、员工离职率、产品质量、研发投入等。

非财务指标不仅能提供补充和丰富的信息来评估企业的经营状况，还能加强对财务指标的解释和理解。

在非财务指标的设置中，可以根据企业所处的行业和特点，选择适合的非财务指标。

以下是一些非财务指标的设置及问题讨论：1. 市场份额：市场份额是企业在市场上所占的比例，可以帮助评估企业的竞争力和市场地位。

问题讨论可以包括：市场份额是否稳定或增长？是否存在市场份额流失的原因？2. 顾客满意度：顾客满意度是衡量企业产品或服务质量的重要指标。

问题讨论可以包括：是否有顾客投诉？顾客满意度是否改善了企业的销售和忠诚度？3. 员工离职率：员工离职率是衡量企业员工满意度和企业文化的指标。

问题讨论可以包括：员工离职率的原因是什么？是否有关于员工福利、培训和晋升机会的问题？4. 产品质量：产品质量是衡量企业生产或提供的产品达到标准的程度。

问题讨论可以包括：是否存在产品质量问题？如何改善产品质量？是否有关于供应链管理的问题？5. 研发投入：研发投入是衡量企业创新能力和未来发展潜力的指标。

问题讨论可以包括：研发投入和研发成果的关系如何？研发投入是否收到预期的回报？非财务指标的设置和问题讨论需要考虑以下几点：1. 确定指标的目标和关联性：每个非财务指标应当明确设置目标，并与企业的战略目标和财务指标相互关联。

2. 数据收集和分析：需要建立有效的数据收集和分析机制，确保非财务指标能够反映企业的真实状况，并能提供有效的决策支持。

3. 周期性评估和反馈：对非财务指标进行周期性评估，并及时提供反馈和改进建议，以帮助企业持续优化经营业绩。

4. 指标的权衡和综合：非财务指标和财务指标相互关联，需要进行权衡和综合来全面评估企业的经营业绩。

浅析非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的作用

浅析非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的作用非财务指标在企业业绩评价中扮演着重要的角色。

除了财务数据外，非财务指标也是评价企业绩效的重要参考。

非财务指标包括客户满意度、员工满意度、市场份额、创新能力、品牌价值等，它们可以反映企业的竞争力、发展潜力和可持续性。

本文将就非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的作用进行浅析。

1. 客户满意度客户满意度是衡量企业经营绩效的重要指标之一。

客户满意度高意味着企业产品或服务的质量得到了认可，客户愿意继续购买并推荐给他人。

客户满意度低则意味着产品或服务存在质量问题或者企业的服务态度有待改善。

通过定期调查客户满意度，并根据调查结果改进产品和服务，可以有效提升企业的市场占有率和盈利能力。

员工是企业最宝贵的资源，员工的工作积极性和敬业度直接关系到企业的生产效率和服务质量。

通过评估员工的满意度可以了解他们对企业工作环境、薪酬福利、发展机会等方面的满意程度，从而及时发现和解决员工存在的问题，提升员工的工作积极性和减少员工的流失率，提高企业的生产效率和服务质量。

3. 市场份额市场份额是企业在某一行业市场中所占的比例，也是企业竞争力的重要体现。

通过对市场份额的监测和分析，企业可以了解自己在行业市场中的地位和竞争对手的动态，及时调整市场策略，保持或扩大市场份额，提高企业的盈利能力。

4. 创新能力创新是企业发展的动力，也是企业保持竞争力的关键。

企业的创新能力体现在新产品研发、技术更新、管理创新、营销策略等方面。

通过对企业创新能力的评估，可以了解企业的发展潜力和竞争优势，促使企业不断进行技术创新和管理创新，提高企业的市场竞争力。

5. 品牌价值品牌是企业的无形资产，也是企业竞争的重要筹码。

品牌价值高意味着企业的知名度和美誉度高，产品和服务受到消费者的信赖和青睐，可以为企业带来更多的商机和盈利机会。

通过评估企业的品牌价值，可以帮助企业树立正确的品牌定位和管理理念，提升品牌影响力，增强竞争优势。

非财务指标在企业业绩评价中扮演着不可替代的角色，它们可以为企业的发展提供全方位的参考和指导。

顾客满意度与企业财务业绩的关系研究

顾客满意度与企业财务业绩的关系研究顾客满意度与企业财务业绩的关系研究引言：顾客满意度是企业成功的核心要素之一，因为满意的顾客会成为忠实的客户，并且可能会推荐企业给他们的朋友和家人。

然而，很少有人对顾客满意度与企业财务业绩之间的关系进行深度研究。

本文将探讨顾客满意度与企业财务业绩之间的关系，并重点关注如何提高顾客满意度对企业财务业绩的影响。

一、顾客满意度对企业财务业绩的影响1. 企业财务业绩的定义与指标：企业财务业绩通常通过一系列指标来衡量，包括销售额、利润、市场份额和股东回报率等。

这些指标反映了企业的盈利能力、市场竞争力和股东价值。

2. 顾客满意度的定义与测量：顾客满意度是顾客对企业产品或服务体验的感知和评价程度。

通常通过调查问卷、客户反馈和市场研究等方法进行测量。

满意度评价通常包括产品质量、服务质量、价格、交付时间和售后支持等方面。

3. 顾客满意度对销售额的影响：满意的顾客更有可能再次购买企业的产品或服务，从而提高企业的销售额。

另外，满意的顾客可能还会推荐企业给他们的社交网络，从而扩大企业的客户群。

4. 顾客满意度对利润的影响：满意的顾客通常更乐于支付更高的价格，而不会因为价格而转向竞争对手。

这可以帮助企业提高产品的利润率。

另外，满意的顾客可能会给予更多的附加销售和升级机会，进一步提高企业的利润。

5. 顾客满意度对市场份额的影响：满意的顾客容易成为企业的品牌忠诚者，并积极向其他人推荐企业的产品或服务。

这有助于企业扩大市场份额，并抵制竞争对手的侵蚀。

6. 顾客满意度对股东回报率的影响：满意的顾客有助于企业保持稳定的现金流，增加企业的股东回报率。

满意的顾客可能会增加股东的信心，提高企业的股票价格。

二、提高顾客满意度对企业财务业绩的影响1. 提供优质的产品和服务：企业应努力提供高品质的产品和服务，以满足顾客的期望。

这包括产品的设计与制造，以及售前和售后服务的质量。

2. 主动倾听顾客的需求和反馈：企业应积极与顾客进行沟通，了解他们的需求和反馈。

外文文献翻译(附原文)——客户满意

测量管理客户满意定义顾客满意度因为顾客满意度的概念对于许多公司是新的,因此重要的是要明确这一词意味着什么。

顾客满意是顾客的期望得到满足或产品、服务超过应有的程度时对企业感知的精神状态。

实现顾客满意会导致公司的忠诚和产品再购买.这个定义有一些重要的影响：因为顾客满意是一种主观的,非量化的状态，测量将不准确，将需要采样和统计分析。

顾客满意度的测量必须在了解了顾客的期望和属性表现之间的差距之后进行。

顾客满意度的测量和底线结果之间必定有相关的联系。

“满意”，本身就与顾客有着千丝万缕的联系。

例如，它可以指任何或所有下列例子：某一特定产品或服务质量的满意度;与正在进行的业务关系的满意度;产品或服务的价格性能比的满意度；产品/服务的满意度，因为达到或超过客户的期望。

根据企业的性质和与客户的具体关系，每个行业都可以添加到这个列表.客户满意度的测量变量会有所不同，它取决于正在研究什么类型的满意。

例如，制造商通常期望按时交货和遵守规范，因此供应商采取的满意的措施应包括这些关键变量.明确界定和了解客户的满意度，可以帮助任何公司确定产品和服务创新的机会，并作为绩效考核和奖励制度的基础。

它也可以作为客户满意度测量程序的基础,可以确保质量改进的结果集中在客户是最重视的问题上。

顾客满意度测量方案目标客户满意度测量方案的目标,除了一个明确的定义顾客满意,任何一个成功的研究方案必须有明确的目标，一旦达成就会得到等号的结果。

最基本的目标应该满足任何测量程序，包括以下内容：了解所有客户的期望和要求；确定公司和其竞争对手如何满足这些期望和要求；基于你发现的产品标准上进行服务开发；随时间变化的趋势进行检验,以便采取及时的行动; 确定优先事项和标准来判断,你如何达到这些目标;设计适当的客户满意度测量程序之前，以下基本问题必须清楚地回答：我们收集的信息将如何使用？如何将这一信息允许我们采取组织内部的行动呢?我们应该如何使用此信息,以保持我们的客户和寻找新的呢？必须认真考虑组织希望实现何种结果，如何将这一目标传播到整个组织并且如何使用这些信息。

浅析非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的作用

浅析非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的作用企业的业绩评价是指对企业在一定时期内所取得的经营成果进行分析和评估的过程。

而在这个过程中，除了财务指标外，非财务指标也扮演着至关重要的角色。

非财务指标是指对企业业绩进行监测和评估的一系列指标，它们可以反映出企业的创新能力、竞争力、员工满意度等方面的情况。

在企业业绩评价中，非财务指标的作用不可忽视，下面本文将从市场表现、员工满意度、企业社会责任和创新能力等方面进行浅析。

非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的作用之一是反映出企业的市场表现。

市场表现是企业在市场上的竞争能力和市场地位的表现。

企业可以通过非财务指标来观察市场表现，如市场份额、客户满意度、品牌知名度等。

通过对这些指标的监测和评估，企业可以了解自己在市场上的地位和竞争力，及时调整自己的战略方针，以保持市场优势。

员工满意度也是非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的重要作用之一。

员工是企业的重要资源，员工满意度直接关系到企业的生产效率和服务质量。

通过监测员工满意度指标，企业可以了解员工对企业的满意度，改善员工的工作环境和福利待遇，提高员工的工作积极性和减少员工流失率，从而提升企业的绩效和竞争力。

企业社会责任也是非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的一个重要方面。

企业应承担起对社会和环境的责任，通过监测企业的社会责任指标，如环境保护投入、慈善捐赠额度等，了解企业对社会的贡献和环境保护情况，提升企业的社会形象和公众认可度，为企业长期发展打下良好基础。

创新能力也是非财务指标在企业业绩评价中的重要作用之一。

创新是企业持续发展的动力源泉，企业要在市场竞争中立于不败之地，必须不断推进创新。

通过监测创新能力指标，如研发投入、创新产品占比等，了解企业的创新能力和创新成果，及时调整企业的创新策略，保持企业的市场竞争力。

非财务指标在企业业绩评价中扮演着至关重要的角色，它们可以全面反映企业的经营状况、市场地位及可持续发展能力。

在企业管理中，除了关注财务指标外，还应该注重非财务指标的监测和评估，为企业的持续发展提供有力支持。

企业绩效评价中的非财务指标研究

企业绩效评价中的非财务指标研究企业绩效评价中的非财务指标研究一、引言在当今全球竞争激烈的商业环境中，企业绩效评价成为了企业管理的重要组成部分。

实施有效的绩效评价可以帮助企业监控和改善自身的运营状况，为企业的长期发展提供决策依据。

除了传统的财务指标，如利润率、营业收入等，非财务指标在近些年来变得越来越受到关注。

本文将探讨企业绩效评价中的非财务指标的重要性，并通过案例研究分析非财务指标在实际运用中的效果。

二、非财务指标的定义及分类非财务指标是指用以衡量企业绩效的除了财务数据以外的指标。

相比于传统的财务指标，非财务指标更注重企业的内部运营状况和外部环境变化对企业绩效的影响。

非财务指标通常包括以下几个方面：1. 客户满意度：衡量企业提供产品或服务的质量以及顾客的反馈。

通过调查问卷、投诉率等方式来评估客户对企业的满意程度。

2. 员工满意度：衡量企业员工对于工作环境、薪酬福利等方面的满意度。

员工满意度可以反映出企业的人力资源管理水平。

3. 创新能力：衡量企业在技术研发、产品创新方面的能力。

创新能力强的企业通常能更好地适应市场变化和应对竞争压力。

4. 品牌价值：衡量企业品牌在市场中的认知度、形象和价值。

品牌价值是企业的无形资产，能够吸引客户、提高销售额。

5. 市场份额：衡量企业在市场中所占的比例。

市场份额可以反映出企业在竞争中的地位和行业的竞争格局。

6. 社会责任：衡量企业在社会上的声誉和道德、伦理标准的履行程度。

社会责任是企业可持续发展的重要因素之一。

三、非财务指标在企业绩效评价中的重要性传统的财务指标虽然能够反映企业的经营状况和财务健康性，但对于企业的长期发展和持续竞争优势的评价并不充分。

非财务指标的引入可以提供更全面的评价角度，帮助企业发现潜在问题并进行改善，同时也能够反映企业的内在价值和可持续发展能力。

1. 完善的绩效评价体系：引入非财务指标可以建立更完善的绩效评价体系，使企业的绩效评价更加客观、准确。

非财务指标在企业绩效评价中的应用研究

非财务指标在企业绩效评价中的应用研究随着企业社会责任意识的提升和市场竞争的加剧，企业绩效评价不再仅仅依靠财务指标，而是更注重多方面的影响因素，包括经营环境、员工满意度、社会形象等一系列非财务指标。

本文将探讨非财务指标在企业绩效评价中的应用研究。

一、非财务指标在企业绩效评价中的重要性1.1 员工满意度员工是企业的核心资源，他们的满意度和忠诚度对企业的绩效有直接的影响。

因此，评价员工满意度成为企业非财务指标的重要内容。

通过调查员工的薪资、福利、工作环境、职业发展机会等需要，企业可以了解员工的满意度并采取相应的措施。

1.2 客户满意度客户满意度是企业的核心竞争力，直接与企业的生存和发展密切相关。

客户满意度调查可以帮助企业了解消费者对品牌、产品、服务的评价，从而为企业的改进和创新提供重要的依据。

1.3 社会责任在当前的社会背景下，企业的社会责任意识越来越强，公众对企业的道德、环保、公益等方面的评价也越来越严格。

因此，企业应该在绩效评价中考虑社会责任对企业绩效的影响。

尽管社会责任对企业短期绩效评价的影响难以量化，但是从中长期的角度看，履行社会责任会为企业带来良好的口碑和声誉。

二、非财务指标在企业绩效评价中的应用案例2.1 中国移动中国移动是中国最大的移动运营商，在整个行业中处于领先地位。

在企业绩效评价中，中国移动主要关注客户满意度、网络质量和服务品质等指标。

在客户满意度方面，中国移动通过多种方式收集消费者反馈，改善产品和服务满足消费者需求。

此外，中国移动还加强了对人才的培训和管理，提升员工的个人素质和综合能力，帮助员工更好地服务于客户。

2.2 联想联想是一家全球知名的电脑品牌，以创新技术和良好的客户体验著称。

在集团绩效评价中，联想重视客户满意度、员工满意度和社会责任等非财务指标。

联想通过认真的品牌建设和产品创新，打造品牌形象和口碑，在不断提高客户满意度的同时增强了品牌实力和话语权。

此外，联想重视员工生命健康和职业发展，充分认识到员工对企业的重要性。

非财务指标评价研究(一)

非财务指标评价研究(一)摘要：单一的以财务指标为主的评价体系往往会导致管理层的短期行为，针对传统财务指标评价的种种不足，许多学者强调了非财务指标评价的重要性。

他们认为相对于财务指标，非财务指标更具有前瞻性，它舍有更多地指导管理实践的决策信息，更能真实地反映管理者的实际贡献。

关键词：非财务指标；绩效评价；激励机制一、传统财务指标的局限性McKenzie&Schiling(1998)指出财务指标评价体系有其明显的缺陷，财务指标评价体系会导致管理者做出一些有利于短期利益却对公司长远发展不利的决定，管理者为获取短期利益往往以牺牲对研究的投入等为代价。

Chakxavarthy(1986)也认为，传统的利润指标评估的是公司过去的绩效，而战略性的长期绩效需要评估更多前瞻性的指标。

lttner&Larcker(1998)总结了财务指标的局限性：(1)财务指标是滞后性指标，是组织过去经营状况的反应，对未来的盈利能力不具备预测性。

(2)以财务指标为主的评价体系容易导致经营管理层的短视行为，为了追求短期的财务效益而不顾牺牲组织的长远利益。

(3)财务指标评价体系是一种以结果为导向的评价体系，对驱动财务效益产生的因素缺乏考虑。

(4)以财务指标为主的评价体系往往会掩盖组织在运营过程中存在的问题，不利于管理的监控。

(5)缺乏对人力资本、信息资本、组织资本等无形资产的评估，而无形资本被许多学者认为是组织核心竞争力的源泉。

Fisher&Braneato(1995)在案例研究中补充分析了财务指标的几个限制：(1)财务指标对发现管理中间题的本质及解决方案上提供的信息非常有限；(2)它不利于捕捉关键的商业机会；(3)它是种高度总结、概括性的指标，不利于指导管理行为；(4)它没有反应公司内部交叉职能的运作过程。

由于单一的以财务指标评价为主的评价体系存在种种缺陷，对非财务指标的研究越来越多。

Chen&Morris(1986)研究的结果显示，面临竞争压力越大的企业越注重非财务指标的评价。