企业绩效管理【外文翻译】
绩效管理 外文翻译 外文文献 中英翻译
绩效管理外文翻译外文文献中英翻译____________________________________________________________________ ________________________ Performance management-how to appraise employee performance AbstractPerformance appraisal is an important content of human resource management in modern enterprises. According to the problems existing at the present stage Chinese enterprise performance evaluation, put forward the improvement measures to improve the performance appraisal. Performance management is the responsibility between managers and employees and improve the communication performance of the ongoing. The partners should understand why they become partners, thereby supporting the work. Performance evaluation is a part of performance management, do not confuse the twoIntroductionChallenges of performance managementReasons to avoid performance management: Manager: reports and program has no meaning; no time; afraid of conflict; feedback and observation. (performance management, prevent problems in investment in time, ensure the managers have the time to do the thing you should do staff: bad experience; what was about to happen no bottom; do not understand the significance of performance management; don't like received criticism. Criterion two, performance management,organizational success: 1 Factors: coordination among units means,towards a common goal; problem, find the problems, find problems or prevent problems; obey the law, be protected by the law; make major decisions, a way of getting information; improve the quality of staff,to make the organization more competitive., performance management of organization,must be useful to managers, the only reason of performance management is to help employees to success. to understand better how to design and what made him act. , the performance management challenge is how to find practical,meaningful ways to finish it, which need thought and wisdom.Performance management is a systemThe performance plan -- starting point of performancemanagement:employees and managers to work together, as employees do what, do what degree of problem identification, understanding.Continuous performance communication: both tracking____________________________________________________________________________________________ progress, find the obstacles that affect performance and process so that the two sides success required information. Communication methods: (1) around were observed;(2)employees; (3) allow employees to work review;Performance diagnosis: to identify individuals, departments and organizational performance by the real reason for the problem of communication and problem solving process.Performance management is a small system in the large system. If you want to get the maximum profit, must complete the performance management process,and not a part of.Performance management and strategic planning, budget,staff ,employee salary incentive system, improve the quality of plans are related. Do the performance management process to do the preparation of 1, there are two key points: with the staff to collect meaningful, to establish the information needed to measurable goals; to do some basic work, so that in the whole process of performance management and employee can fully cooperation. In part, access to information and data of performance management effect is it can help organizations, units and employees towards a direction some "target"information each employee's job description; (2) employee last performance review data and related documents.The performance plan three steps: preparation, meeting, finalize plans. your job, you should do what, how to measure your success, sets threat mosphere and seize the key; to review the relevant information, ask more,talk less; the job duties and specific goal; determine the success criteria; discuss what are the difficulties and need what help; discuss the importance level and authorized to ask problem; 4, note: in the performance management process, should pay attention to communication with staff thought is the action guide, to carry out effective performance communication, we must pay attention to in the thought. All aspects of the performance communication throughout theperformance cycle, plays an important role in any one link in the chain, leaving the performance communication, any unilateral decisions managers will affect the enthusiasm of the staff, performance management. No performance communication there is no performance management. In orderto make the performance management on the right track, truly play its role,enterprises must____________________________________________________________________________________________ put the supervisor and employee performance communication as a priority among priorities to research and development, through the system specification, performance management become competent habit, the habit of employees, to solve the performance problem employees work for dialogue and exchanges, the performance management into effect.Three methods of performance evaluation: Predicament 1, individual performance evaluation --: the best opera actor and amateur orchestra concert.The opera actors play the extreme, but the effect is very bad. No one is isolated,only focus on the individual, can not solve the problem. We call on an individual basis on employee performance evaluation, but if we emphasize individual performance but not the antecedents and consequences and conditions of performance, we do not progress, because we did not find the real reason -- may be because employees can not control things and punish employees, may also be because of the wrong reason 2, regardless of the what way to assess performance, avoid two traps are important: 1) don't do performanceproblems or"always the fault of employees" this hypothesis; 2) without any assessment can give the "why" and "what is happening in the picture". Evaluation is just the beginning, is a further discussion as well as the starting point of diagnosis. Three methods of performance evaluation: 3, 1) rating method:: features, to and behavior project; identify each project performance level gauge and other ways. Advantages: easy tofinish the work of assessment. Disadvantages:forget why do this work;too vague, in the performance plan, prevention,protection and development staff and so did not what role in improving methods:with employees regularly write brief conversation; evaluation; interpretation and evaluation project meaning; together with the staff rating 2)ranking method:forcing staff to compete with each other, havestimulation can be short term, long term may cause internal malicious competition. 3) target and standard evaluation method: Standard: according to the prior and employees a series of established criteria to measure the performance of employees. Advantages: the personal goals and work together to reduce the possibility of target; both sidesdisagree;defect: need more time; text work more; more energy.Communication method and communication technology____________________________________________________________________________________________Way of thinking: the process of performance management is theprocess of communication.Relationship with the staff is not onlyreflected in the behavior on performance management, but also shouldreflect the daily and how successful way of thinking: A, the process of performance management is a complete process together with the staff, not a for staff B, except for some unilateral disciplinary action, performance plan, communication and assessment should adopt a cooperative mode; C, most of the staff, once you understand what they are asked to do things, will try the method can meet the requirements D,performance management is not the purpose of staring past mistakes, clear posibility, but in the problem solving problems and possible e, performance deficit to be clear, the cause of the deficit, whether for personal reasons or the system reason; F, in most cases, if the manager will support staff as their work,so that each employee 2, must set some skills communication skills: Manager here guide employees to participate in the discussion process and understand the process of responsibility. Purpose: don't most probably it did not actually happen. Be prepared to establish a common responsibility and each stage all contribute to the relationship, the target. Clear the common responsibility: to improve the performance is not only the responsibility of the staff. Clear procedures: prevent conflict resolution skills: clear individual responsibility, invites employees to take advice. For the people of the criticism and comments: avoid if you don't listen, you don't know what you talking about,could you be quiet for a while, you read the report in the past did not remarks:avoid such as how many years, you always can't finish the job on time, we have ried that, there is no with the need need making guide guilty intent: to avoid if you really care about theteam, you should work harder; I guess you don't care about this project not appropriate advice and sure: avoid as I know the project is late,but I'm sure you'll catch up; you will do well. You will understand the need,need to unsolicited advice and sure: avoid you must do it; this is the only way; to finish this today, and put it on my desk. A provocative question: Why did you say those who avoid. What you think; is the needto need; what is you get this conclusion? Don't trust to avoid language: are you sure you can finish on time?I've heard you need to exaggerate these need: avoid you never finish the work on time; you always try to reject my proposal. The cooling technique of fierce debate.____________________________________________________________________________________________The performance of a, discuss the process of dispute, we should pay attention to two goals: must make suggestions on conflict; avoid damage relations, cause new problems in the future performance. B, give employees a vent frustration and anger for feeling, not very fastcounter attack. C, remember the people when they do appear conflict. D, the way of handling conflicts: conflicts through persuasion, won theright to try to understand the means; staff positions, find a solution. E, conflict is the most effective treatment technology is active listening.F, and be confused in mind or angry employees dealing, the basic principle is the first concern of his emotional. G, disputes arise, request the dispute settle ment measures, but never from the subject. H, too excited, communication should be suspended.The performance of communication is the core of performance management, is refers to between the employers and employees performance evaluation reflects the problems and evaluation mechanism itself to conduct substantive interviews,and tries to seek countermeasures, a management method for service in the later stage of enterprise and employee performance, improve and enhance the.A process of performance management is on the lower level on the performance target setting and implementation and ongoing two-way communication.____________________________________________________________________ ________________________绩效管理——如何考评员工表现摘要绩效考核是现代企业人力资源管理的重要内容。
绩效管理 外文翻译 外文文献 中英翻译
Performance management-how to appraise employee performance AbstractPerformance appraisal is an important content of human resource management in modern enterprises. According to the problems existing at the present stage Chinese enterprise performance evaluation, put forward the improvement measures to improve the performance appraisal. Performance management is the responsibility between managers and employees and improve the communication performance of the ongoing. The partners should understand why they become partners, thereby supporting the work. Performance evaluation is a part of performance management, do not confuse the twoIntroductionChallenges of performance managementReasons to avoid performance management: Manager: reports and program has no meaning; no time; afraid of conflict; feedback and observation. (performance management, prevent problems in investment in time, ensure the managers have the time to do the thing you should do staff: bad experience; what was about to happen no bottom; do not understand the significance of performance management; don't like received criticism. Criterion two, performance management, organizational success: 1 Factors: coordination among units means, towards a common goal; problem, find the problems, find problems or prevent problems; obey the law, be protected by the law; make major decisions, a way of getting information; improve the quality of staff, to make the organization more competitive., performance management of organization,must be useful to managers, the only reason of performance management is to help employees to success. to understand better how to design and what made him act. , the performance management challenge is how to find practical,meaningful ways to finish it, which need thought and wisdom.Performance management is a systemThe performance plan -- starting point of performance management:employees and managers to work together, as employees do what, do what degree of problem identification, understanding.Continuous performance communication: both trackingprogress, find the obstacles that affect performance and process so that the two sides success required information. Communication methods: (1) around were observed;(2)employees; (3) allow employees to work review;Performance diagnosis: to identify individuals, departments and organizational performance by the real reason for the problem of communication and problem solving process.Performance management is a small system in the large system. If you want to get the maximum profit, must complete the performance management process,and not a part of.Performance management and strategic planning, budget, staff ,employee salary incentive system, improve the quality of plans are related. Do the performance management process to do the preparation of 1, there are two key points: with the staff to collect meaningful, to establish the information needed to measurable goals; to do some basic work, so that in the whole process of performance management and employee can fully cooperation. In part, access to information and data of performance management effect is it can help organizations, units and employees towards a direction some "target"information each employee's job description; (2) employee last performance review data and related documents.The performance plan three steps: preparation, meeting, finalize plans. your job, you should do what, how to measure your success, sets threat mosphere and seize the key; to review the relevant information, ask more,talk less; the job duties and specific goal; determine the success criteria; discuss what are the difficulties and need what help; discuss the importance level and authorized to ask problem; 4, note: in the performance management process, should pay attention to communication with staff thought is the action guide, to carry out effective performance communication, we must pay attention to in the thought. All aspects of the performance communication throughout the performance cycle, plays an important role in any one link in the chain, leaving the performance communication, any unilateral decisions managers will affect the enthusiasm of the staff, performance management. No performance communication there is no performance management. In order to make the performance management on the right track, truly play its role,enterprises mustput the supervisor and employee performance communication as a priority among priorities to research and development, through the system specification, performance management become competent habit, the habit of employees, to solve the performance problem employees work for dialogue and exchanges, the performance management into effect.Three methods of performance evaluation: Predicament 1, individual performance evaluation --: the best opera actor and amateur orchestra concert.The opera actors play the extreme, but the effect is very bad. No one is isolated,only focus on the individual, can not solve the problem. We call on an individual basis on employee performance evaluation, but if we emphasize individual performance but not the antecedents and consequences and conditions of performance, we do not progress, because we did not find the real reason -- may be because employees can not control things and punish employees, may also be because of the wrong reason 2, regardless of the what way to assess performance, avoid two traps are important: 1) don't do performance problems or"always the fault of employees" this hypothesis; 2) without any assessment can give the "why" and "what is happening in the picture". Evaluation is just the beginning, is a further discussion as well as the starting point of diagnosis. Three methods of performance evaluation: 3, 1) rating method:: features, to and behavior project; identify each project performance level gauge and other ways. Advantages: easy to finish the work of assessment. Disadvantages:forget why do this work; too vague, in the performance plan, prevention,protection and development staff and so did not what role in improving methods:with employees regularly write brief conversation; evaluation; interpretation and evaluation project meaning; together with the staff rating 2) ranking method:forcing staff to compete with each other, have stimulation can be short term, long term may cause internal malicious competition. 3) target and standard evaluation method: Standard: according to the prior and employees a series of established criteria to measure the performance of employees. Advantages: the personal goals and work together to reduce the possibility of target; both sides disagree;defect: need more time; text work more; more energy.Communication method and communication technologyWay of thinking: the process of performance management is the process of communication.Relationship with the staff is not only reflected in the behavior on performance management, but also should reflect the daily and how successful way of thinking: A, the process of performance management is a complete process together with the staff, not a for staff B, except for some unilateral disciplinary action, performance plan, communication and assessment should adopt a cooperative mode; C, most of the staff, once you understand what they are asked to do things, will try the method can meet the requirements D,performance management is not the purpose of staring past mistakes, clear posibility, but in the problem solving problems and possible e, performance deficit to be clear, the cause of the deficit, whether for personal reasons or the system reason; F, in most cases, if the manager will support staff as their work,so that each employee 2, must set some skills communication skills: Manager here guide employees to participate in the discussion process and understand the process of responsibility. Purpose: don't most probably it did not actually happen. Be prepared to establish a common responsibility and each stage all contribute to the relationship, the target. Clear the common responsibility: to improve the performance is not only the responsibility of the staff. Clear procedures: prevent conflict resolution skills: clear individual responsibility, invites employees to take advice. For the people of the criticism and comments: avoid if you don't listen, you don't know what you talking about,could you be quiet for a while, you read the report in the past did not remarks:avoid such as how many years, you always can't finish the job on time, we have ried that, there is no with the need need making guide guilty intent: to avoid if you really care about the team, you should work harder; I guess you don't care about this project not appropriate advice and sure: avoid as I know the project is late, but I'm sure you'll catch up; you will do well. You will understand the need,need to unsolicited advice and sure: avoid you must do it; this is the only way; to finish this today, and put it on my desk. A provocative question: Why did you say those who avoid. What you think; is the need to need; what is you get this conclusion? Don't trust to avoid language: are you sure you can finish on time?I've heard you need to exaggerate these need: avoid you never finish the work on time; you always try to reject my proposal. The cooling technique of fierce debate.The performance of a, discuss the process of dispute, we should pay attention to two goals: must make suggestions on conflict; avoid damage relations, cause new problems in the future performance. B, give employees a vent frustration and anger for feeling, not very fast counter attack. C, remember the people when they do appear conflict. D, the way of handling conflicts: conflicts through persuasion, won the right to try to understand the means; staff positions, find a solution. E, conflict is the most effective treatment technology is active listening.F, and be confused in mind or angry employees dealing, the basic principle is the first concern of his emotional. G, disputes arise, request the dispute settle ment measures, but never from the subject. H, too excited, communication should be suspended.The performance of communication is the core of performance management, is refers to between the employers and employees performance evaluation reflects the problems and evaluation mechanism itself to conduct substantive interviews,and tries to seek countermeasures, a management method for service in the later stage of enterprise and employee performance, improve and enhance the.A process of performance management is on the lower level on the performance target setting and implementation and ongoing two-way communication.绩效管理——如何考评员工表现摘要绩效考核是现代企业人力资源管理的重要内容。
企业风险管理与公司绩效外文文献翻译中英文2020
企业风险管理与公司绩效外文翻译中英文2020英文Enterprise risk management and firm performance: Role of the riskcommitteeMuhammad Malik, Mahbub Zaman, Sherrena Buckby AbstractIn recent years, there have been increasing efforts in the corporate world to invest in risk management and governance processes. In this paper, we examine the impact of Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) on firm performance by examining whether firm performance is strengthened or weakened by the establishment of a board-level risk committee (BLRC), an important governance mechanism that oversees ERM processes. Based on 260 observations from FTSE350 listed firms in the UK during 2012–2015, we find the effectiveness of ERM significantly and positively affects firm performance. We also find strong BLRC governance complements this relationship and increases the firm performance effects of ERM. Our findings suggest the mere formation of a BLRC is not a panacea for ERM oversight; however, existence of a structurally strong BLRC is crucial for effective ERM governance.Keywords: Enterprise risk management, Risk committee, Risk governance, Firm performanceIntroductionRecent events, including the corporate downfalls of the early 2000s and the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) of 2007–09, have led to increased international regulatory efforts to enhance risk management (RM) practices. In the UK, the Walker Report (2009) and guidelines from the Financial Reporting Council (FRC, 2011, FRC, 2014a, FRC, 2014b) suggest listed firms should adhere to sophisticated RM practices, including the creation of a holistic RM framework and greater involvement from boards of directors in risk governance. An increasing number of UK listed firms now adhere to these recommendations, which focus on the establishment of an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) process and the establishment of a board-level risk committee (BLRC) to enhance the board’s risk oversight function. This paper contributes to the literature on ERM by examining the impact of ERM on UK firm performance, particularly whether this relationship is strengthened or weakened by the adoption of a BLRC. To date, research investigating the roles and outcomes of a BLRC is scarce. This study focuses on evidence from UK listed firms to provide key insights into this emerging issue.Our study, motivated by key corporate governance guidelines, considers the impact of ERM process adoption (including the structural strength of BLRC) on firm performance in UK FTSE350 firms. We apply Tobin’s Q as our firm performance measure based on prior resea rch(Baxter et al., 2013; Farrell and Gallagher, 2015, Hoyt and Liebenberg, 2011, Lin et al., 2012, McShane et al., 2011) and adopt the Gordon et al. (2009) ERM index as a composite measure of the effectiveness of ERM processes. Previous studies measure the presence of ERM activity using a binary variable (Hoyt and Liebenberg, 2011, Lechner and Gatzert, 2018, Lin et al., 2012, Pagach and Warr, 2010). In contrast, the Gordon et al. (2009) index reflects the presence of an ERM function in a firm and measures the effectiveness of ERM processes regarding business strategy, operations, reporting, and compliance (COSO, 2004). BLRC structural strength is measured using six dimensions related to its structure and composition, drawing on risk governance guidelines and prior research on the effectiveness/efficacy of board-level committees with a similar monitoring role to the BLRC (Goodwin and Seow, 2002, Xie et al., 2003, Zaman et al., 2011).Our empirical findings suggest ERM is positively associated with UK firm performance. The results suggest ERM is an efficient form of “internal” RM and if overseen by the BLRC should maximize shareholders’ wealth. The findings suggest a structurally strong BLRC (a committee with high levels of monitoring and diligence comprised of financial experts exhibiting gender diversity) strengthens ERM impact on firm performance. This implies BLRC adoption by itself is insufficient to achieve ERM oversight. However, BLRC structural strength is identifiedas necessary for effective ERM governance. As BLRC formation is an emerging ERM practice (Brown et al., 2009, Hines et al., 2015), our study addresses a gap in current RM literature by examining whether a BLRC strengthens or weakens the impact of ERM on firm performance providing an important contribution to the field.BackgroundIn the UK, the Walker (2009) report and FRC guidelines (FRC, 2011, FRC, 2014a, FRC, 2014b) recommend UK listed firms should adopt a holistic approach to ERM. The guidelines suggest UK listed firms adopt a multifaceted approach to risk identification and risk assessment, and consider all the principal risks faced by the entity. An effective RM infrastructure adopted and governed by a high-level risk governance structure (a BLRC) promotes a strong risk culture at all levels of the firm, approves enterprise risk strategy and risk appetite, and monitors organisational risk mitigation plans. Taken together, the FRC (2014b) suggests listed firms should adopt a robust and effective RM system to safeguard against major risks that could seriously affect organisational performance, future prospects, or damage firm reputation. As a result of the clear guidance provided for risk committees in the UK, our study focuses on revealing whether BLRCs in listed firms are found to be structurally sufficient to support the ERM oversight functions outlined in the Walker (2009) report. We are motivated to gather evidenceof the relationship between ERM and firm performance using UK data for the following reasons. After the GFC, demand for firm-level risk oversight increased in the UK and internationally. The Walker (2009) report contributed to this demand by encouraging the formation of a BLRC and driving the adoption of an ERM function in listed UK firms.In the US, the Dodd-Frank Act (2010) also mandated similar requirements for US listed firms but did not provide the same level of detailed prescription regarding the role, responsibilities, and processes of a BLRC compared to UK regulations. Prior research has examined this relationship in US settings using various proxies for ERM. ERM research has not reached a consensus to date, with results indicating ERM is both value relevant (Gordon et al., 2009, Grace et al., 2015, McShane et al., 2011) and not value relevant (Beasley et al., 2008, Lin et al., 2012, Pagach and Warr, 2010). In Europe, two recent studies (Florio and Leoni, 2017, Lechner and Gatzert, 2018) find ERM is positively associated with firm performance. Due to this lack of consensus in the literature, we are motivated to examine the impact of ERM on firm performance using UK data to consider whether ERM is value relevant and whether it is associated with improved firm performance, especially when related to the adoption of a BLRC as an ERM governance mechanism.In a US based study, Gordon et al. (2009) propose the impact ofERM-driven firm performance is dependent upon the proper match between monitoring by the board4 and ERM processes. They posit how participation and encouragement from the board is essential for effective ERM adoption, a perspective shared by Kleffner et al., 2003, Sobel and Reding, 2004. Our study contributes by extending the findings of Gordon et al. (2009) across two dimensions. First, we recognise responsibility for ERM oversight is usually delegated to the BLRC, a sub-committee of the full board. Second, we examine how risk committee structural characteristics influence ERM effectiveness and consequently firm performance.Prior literature suggests a newly emerging BLRC generally assists the board in carrying out its ERM responsibilities, such as risk oversight, fostering risk culture, and improving the quality of risk monitoring and reporting (Aebi et al., 2012, Brown et al., 2009, COSO, 2004). RM literature in the UK provides evidence of risk reporting patterns in listed firms (Linsley and Shrives, 2005, Linsley and Shrives, 2006). However, the links between corporate governance and risk reporting (Abraham and Cox, 2007), and the effects of traditional RM on firm value (Panaretou, 2014), demonstrate there is a paucity of UK empirical evidence investigating the impact of ERM practices and the influence of a BLRC oversight on firm performance.Our paper contributes to international RM literature in the followingways. First, UK RM research focused on the incentives of risk reporting (Elshandidy et al., 2018). Our paper extends prior research by focusing on the informativeness of UK ERM practices (Baxter et al., 2013, Gordon et al., 2009, Florio and Leoni, 2017, Hoyt and Liebenberg, 2011, Lechner and Gatzert, 2018, Pagach and Warr, 2010). RM has received considerable attention from both professional and regulatory UK bodies, including improved RM guidelines from the FRC (FRC, 2011, FRC, 2014b). Panaretou (2014) examines the valuation impacts of derivative usage (a practice in financial RM) in UK firms and finds hedging practices are weakly or non-significantly associated with firm performance. We extend the study of Panaretou (2014) by examining the valuation impacts of the effectiveness of ERM processes. Our study contributes to the literature examining the risk-related corporate governance mechanisms that affect firm performance (Aebi et al., 2012, Ames et al., 2018, Brown et al., 2009, Florio and Leoni, 2017, Tao and Hutchinson, 2013). Previous studies suggest the presence of a BLRC represents strong RM (Aebi et al., 2012), indicating greater levels of ERM implementation and integration of RM in corporate governance mechanisms (Florio and Leoni, 2017). We extend these studies by investigating the impact of six key structural characteristics of a BLRC on firm performance effects of ERM.Discussion and conclusionIn recent years, there have been increased efforts in the UK to improve risk governance mechanisms. In this paper, we investigate whether a firm’s RM, particularly ERM processes, is linked to firm performance. We also examine the interaction role of the BLRC, as a risk governance mechanism, in this relationship. We find effective ERM processes improve firm performance measured by Tobin’s Q, thus giving support to the theoretical claims by prior researchers regarding performance implications associated with the implementation of ERM (Baxter et al., 2013, Brown et al., 2009, Florio and Leoni, 2017, Gordon et al., 2009, Liebenberg and Hoyt, 2003, Nocco and Stulz, 2006). This result infers the higher the effectiveness of a firm’s ERM, the greater the ability of the firm to achieve its strategic objectives i.e. strategy, operations, reporting, and compliance (COSO, 2004). We find that a BLRC improves the ERM and firm performance relationship. In particular, the existence of a strong BLRC is essential for ERM processes to be effective enough to increase market performance.Our study contributes to the empirical research on RM and has clear practical implications. First, the results demonstrate ERM is positively related to firm performance, and the adoption of ERM processes is more attractive for UK firms who have not yet implemented ERM. However, adoption is not sufficient – an effective ERM system needs to efficiently achiev e organisational objectives and positively impact shareholders’wealth creation. Unlike traditional silo-based RM, which is isolated, fragmented, and uncoordinated (task-by-task or department-by-department) with a focus solely on financial RM, the holistic approach of ERM incorporates and integrates decision-making at multiple levels and prevents risk aggregation within the organisation. By adopting an effective ERM, a firm can create value through: 1) strategy (by maximizing its market position relative to its competitors); 2) operations (by increasing operational efficiency); 3) reliable financial reporting system; and 4) compliance with applicable laws and regulations. COSO (2004) describes ERM best practice as including (but not be limited to) a holistic method of RM, standardization of risk measures, formalization of risk ownership at all levels of the organisation, engagement of all employees in RM processes, localization of risk culture, and assurance of proper recording, documentation and communication of risks and opportunities. We identify how adopting ERM practices in UK listed firms should more efficiently implement FRC guidelines on RM (FRC, 2011, FRC, 2014a, FRC, 2014b). Second, since ERM is a holistic approach embedded throughout the organisation, it provides a multifaceted platform for corporate governance when focusing on value maximization through RM. We find with regard to risk governance, the BLRC supports the function of ERM. Our results indicate the valuation outcomes of ERM are affected by the structure and composition of theBLRC.One of the key contributions of our study is how a structurally strong BLRC, larger in size, more active, and with higher independent, financial, female, and inter-committee directorships, supports a stronger ERM and firm performance relationship. Conversely, a weak BLRC could adversely affect this relationship and reduce the performance implications of ERM. Our study identifies that UK corporate regulatory bodies should introduce detailed guidelines in relation to BLRC formation and structure to promote better quality risk governance. Walker (2009) encourages firms to establish a BLRC and details their responsibilities, but does not stipulate clear guidelines on the committee’s structure and composition and interactions.Finally, our findings have international implications. Since COSO (2004) provides a globally accepted international level ERM framework (Florio and Leoni, 2017, Lechner and Gatzert, 2018), we suggest that to improve the effectiveness of ERM proces ses to meet a firm’s strategic objectives, it is crucial to improve firm performance implications. We expect the effectiveness of ERM processes supplements the important features of ERM identified by previous researchers, such as CRO appointment (Beasley et al., 2008), ERM ratings from external agencies (McShane et al., 2011), ERM program maturity (Farrell and Gallagher, 2015), and the level of ERM implementation (Florio and Leoni, 2017). Inaddition, as the adoption of BLRCs is increasing globally for the oversight of RM processes (Al-Hadi et al., 2016, Florio and Leoni, 2017, Hines and Peters, 2015, Ng et al., 2013, Tao and Hutchinson, 2013) we suggest structural balance of the BLRC is important for effective risk governance.As with all research, this study is not free from limitations. First, the small sample size limits the power of our analysis and generalizability of findings. As investments in RM and governance are continuing to increase; future researchers will be able to employ larger samples to ext end this study’s analysis and generalizations. Second, this study employs the Gordon et al. (2009) ERM index to measure the ERM effectiveness of a firm. This index focuses on the COSO (2004) framework and measures the strength of an ERM program, however, the index is unable to capture the maturity of the ERM program of a firm. Future studies could assist with developing a more sophisticated ERM index. Third, we ignore the independence of the ERM function. The Walker (2009) report requires an independent CRO to participate in the BLRC and the risk oversight process ultimately be accountable to the full board. A future study could further examine the risk-reporting framework of UK firms in terms of CRO reporting, accountability, and efficiency of the ERM function and BLRC monitoring.中文企业风险管理与公司绩效：风险委员会的作用穆罕默德·马利克马布卜·扎曼谢雷娜·巴克比摘要近年来，企业界在投资风险管理和治理流程方面做出了越来越多的努力。
企业绩效管理外文翻译文献综述
企业绩效管理外文翻译文献综述企业绩效管理外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Can Performance Management Foster Intelligent Behavior?Bjarte BogsnesThe world has changed, not just in increasingly fast-changing and unpredictable ways, but also the competence and expectations of people in our organizations. Unfortunately, too few seem to understand or accept that these developments call for radically new and different ways of leading and managing. Traditional management practices do not make usthe agile organizations we need to be.The problem starts with the label, "Performance Management" implying, "If I don't manage you, there will be no performance."We need a new mindset, one that is less about managing performance and more about creating conditions for great performance to occur. We need self-regulating models, requiring less management, but more leadership from everyone.Think about traffic, where we want good performance and a safe good flow. Traffic authorities have different ways of making this happen. The traffic light is a popular choice, but those managing the process (programmers) are not in the situation; information used in their process is not fresh, which is clear as you wait in front of that red light.The roundabout is a very different alternative. Those managing are the drivers themselves. The information used isreal time, coming from own observations. While that information is also available in front of the traffic light, drivers do not have the authority to act on it. By the way, the "zipper" or "every second car through" is not a rule, but a guiding principle.The roundabout normally is more efficient than the traffic light, because of two significant differences in the decision-making process, information and authority. A third element is also required for the roundabout to be more efficient: while the traffic light is a simple-rulesbased system, the roundabout is values-based. A value-set based on, "Me first, I don't care about the rest," is not a big a problem in front of the red light, but is a serious problem in a roundabout. Here, a positive common purpose of wanting a safe and good flow is critical. Drivers must be more considerate, open about own intentions while trying to understand the intentions of peers. Instead of managing performance, traffic authorities have created conditions for self-managed performance to occur.What would the implications be for the loathed performance review? The principles and practices described at Return Path are sensible and interesting. I like the concept of horizontal commitments toward peers, instead of vertical commitments to higher management. At the same time, we need to broaden our definition of performance. In traditional performance, a commitment is too often about "hitting the number." This is too narrow. We need to ask questions such as, how are we doing compared to peers? How are we using KPIs to reflect on performance, or using hindsight and management assessment to verify results? Did we really move toward our longer-term ambitions? How sustainable are the results? Last but not least, there has to be room for values if performance systems are tofoster intelligent behavior; we need to ask, how where those results achieved?At Statoil our integrated performance management approach links ambitions to actions. Our targets reflect a broad set of ambitions,including people, health, safety, environment, operations and financial performance. Read more about our management model and how we apply a holistic and values-based approach to this broader performance agenda.The words of Dee Hock, former GEO of Visa, should guide the design of our management processes, including our performance reviews: "Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex, intelligent behavior. Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple, stupid behavior."While researching my book. Talent Economics, I interviewed employees about what really motivates today's workforce. I discovered a disconnect between the performance support my interviewees wanted versus how managers recounted their contribution to these conversations.Over the last 20 years, the employee mindset has evolved faster than has the art and science of management. Nowhere is this starker than in the area of performance management practices, particularly the annual review. In both the developed and developing world, employees report that this end-of-year activity breeds stress, anxiety and mistrust. How ironic that a process aimed at improving organizational performance, is itself underperforming!It's time to "reboot" our performance management operating system, installing two specific system updates: l. The "Democracy" update. As much as we try to make theperformance appraisal a two way dialogue, we cannot run away from the fact that at its core, the conversation today is often a top-down review. My research shows that many 21st century employees are rejecting conversations that are one-way: in hot job markets today, managers must realize "who is appraising whom." With other offers readily available, many employees enter a performance dialogue privately considering if their manager is worth another year of their career. The performance management conversation now reflects a company's Employee Value Proposition, much as we learn in the lead Perspective.The Democracy update means that managers only gain the right to give feedback when they first genuinely seek the same on their own performance as leaders. Not just through 360-degree reviews, but also through authentic conversations asking, "How am I performing as your manager? " and "How can I help you succeed?" Only then can the conversation shift to, "How you can improve?"and "This is what you should focus on."2. The Success module. Greater employee autonomy and empowerment also changes the meaning of management. We have gone from a "supervisor of task and outcomes" to an "enabler of performance, innovative thinking and collective success." To make this shift, we must give up the judge's robes for the coach's uniform. If employees don't succeed, managers are on the hook, too.This is particularly relevant when coaching a team to success. People bring different skills to a team and how well they work together really matters. If team reviews work better to achieve a goal, so be it. The Return Path story illustrates how review processes can be designed and executed around what matters most, and where everyone dons the uniforms of player and coach.What if, instead of making the heart of a performance conversation the evaluation, it became a vehicle to improve success of the individual, the team and the business? What if performance feedback was paired with dialogue about transforming the business, the product or customer experience? This genuinely reboots and upgrades performance management to focus on individual and organizational success.It is indeed time to upgrade performance management practices: we can no longer manage a 21st century employee using 20th century mindsets.People & Strategy. 2013, V ol. 36 Issue 2, p12-13. 2p.译文：绩效管理能促进自我管理行为吗?Bjarte Bogsnes世界随着时间的推移而变化莫测，连那些与时变化而不可预测的通道也随之改变，与此同时组织人员的能力和期望也顺应时代潮流。
企业绩效评估英文文献
Performance evaluation usually also known as performance appraisal or "performance" is the enterprise borne by each worker in the work of the application of science and qualitative and quantitative methods, workers and the actual results of the enterprise value of the contribution or assessment and evaluation. It is an important corporate personnel management, strong corporate governance is one of the means. The purpose of performance evaluations by each individual assessment improve the efficiency, and eventually realize the goal of enterprise.In the enterprise for performance evaluation work, we need to do a lot of related work. First, the need for performance evaluation of the meaning of scientific explanation, the entire organization of a unified understanding. Performance appraisal is an integral part of modern organizational management tool. It is a periodic review and evaluation of staff performance management system, is in charge of or related personnel to staff the work of the evaluation system. Effective performance appraisal, can not only identify each employee's contribution to the organization or inadequate, but also on the whole of the management of human resources to provide decisive assessment information, so that we can improve organizational feedback function, improve staff performance, but also Motivation, could also serve as a fair and reasonable reward staff basis.Performance appraisal is the sum of a series of related concepts, which include: to the work, performance standards, evaluation, assessment interviews, in-service counselling. Performance Assessment and Application PerformanceTrue performance management system is not just a simple set at the beginning of appraisal standards, and then evaluate the end of the year, but by the beginning of a performance plan for post-job himself clearly in the direction of the efforts in the performance of the ongoing efforts of the year, senior officers provide ongoing guidance and feedback, to help complete the various layers of the target level.Therefore, a performance management system is not just the performance objectives of the completion of the final evaluation, and performance goals should be a whole process of comprehensive management, including performance objectives determined in the implementation of the day-to-day or stage inspection and guidance, feedback, the amendment, the HKEAA , incentives, it is a cyclical cycle process. This cyclical process of the last cycle is a key step is: formulate scientific and rational evaluation methods, performance assessment and appraisal, and the right incentives. Performance Assessment examination usually led by the Human Resources Department is responsible for organizing, coordinating, the relevant departments to coordinate.A performance evaluation(1) PurposeThe actual performance of the past performance and plan for the difference between a formal evaluation to identify ways to improve and enhance the performance of the future.(2) evaluation and assessment content1. Actual performance over the past year review and assessment, including the collection of key performance indicators or targets implementation of the results, and actual results will have set standards for the control and decide the scores level.2. Performance for the next year to develop or adapt key performance indicators, objectives and capacity development plans.3. Determine remuneration adjustments and incentive programme.(3) The results of the implementation of collection1. Human Resources is responsible for organizing from the relevant departments or units to meet.2. The objective of the examination, during examination should be done prior to the meeting and some of the preparatory work, the performance of the officers concerned to collect specific implementation of the various aspects related to listen to the feedback: that the subordinate staff of the internal and external customer feedback. Relevant text files, data information, you recall peacetime observation. And the actual performance of individual employees and conduct performance and capacity than the clear understanding, and preliminary assessment of the performance of staff, Score-level performance and capacity situation. Arrangements for a performance discussion with the staff and meeting time, subordinate to the message: You attach great importance to this meeting.3. For the staff: staff must be assessed prior to the meeting that the agenda for the meeting. Notice two weeks ago and the best in him to get to know the purpose of the meeting, some of the staff had completed its preparations for the performance of prior information and self-assessment.(4) Calculation of individual performance scoresTo enable employees work performance among comparable to the effective implementation of incentive, the commonly used performance percentile calculation method to assess the performance of individual employees completion. Individual performance score is calculated as follows: Individual performance scores = ∑ (KPIi performance percentile × KPIi weight) × KPI total weight + ∑ (target completion percentile × weight) × objective of the total weight(5) individual performance feedbackAfter the annual evaluation, the results should be the timely performance feedback to be evaluated, in the assessment of people have no objection to the circumstances, with the incentive for individuals linked. Who has been assessed objections, the companies can appeal the appeals process.The same as the mid-term review, performance assessment can be conducted to discuss the performance feedback.(6) Performance Evaluation discussion1. Stressed that the purpose of performance evaluation and the meeting will discuss the agendaSet a relaxed atmosphere for the discussion on Performance Evaluation main purpose is to explore how to improve future performance. Reaffirming the importance of participation by staff. Itemized on the completion of targets or goals. In both preparations, the plans and performance evaluation form included in the targets or goals for the article-by-article discussions on the situation, subordinate to each indicator or target for a summary. Share your observation of their performance. No need to be discussed specific details but rather on the results of a highlight goal to reach or exceed the situation.2. Itemized assessment scores levelOn the list of all key performance indicators or targets itemized effect of the completion of discussions, the first to subordinate their key performance indicators or targets in accordance with the completion of standards for measuring scores level, do you think that those more suitable Score - to discuss those differences do you think there are scores level, and review of performance to find the facts, focus on performance rather than the facts themselves, access to the scores of consensus. If the preliminary goals and measurable indicators of a clear, in their daily work and ongoing guidance and tracking of medium-term, comprehensive performance assessment meeting acknowledged the difficulty can be reduced significantly, because they are not the results are particularly surprised.3. Performance for diagnosisIn the assessment of those who completed better performance indicators and targets as well as those who have not completed the targets and goals of the reasons for analysis, in what some staff shown consistent patterns of behaviour to obtain certain strengths or weaknesses led to a certain? What if we adopt a different approach may achieve our goals or standards?4. Discuss improvement planTold the staff and the total score after the personal performance evaluation scores. Asked to maintain good performance, can be taken to resolve issues related to the programme of action. Records of these action programmes for the development of annual performance plans standby. Formulatecorresponding area of capacity development, concrete actions and the desired results.5. Higher-level managers reviewedManagers at all levels will be the performance of its staff assessment results reported to the higher authorities, managers reviewed, the higher their managers for performance evaluation and assessment of the views of the two sides that the final assessment resultsSecond, the results of performancePerformance management and reward must be linked to incentive mechanisms can reflect its value. According to the staff performance appraisal results determine a reasonable pay incentives, performance appraisal is to ensure that the principal means of incentives and the core problem. In the design of the performance management system at the same time, we are also in accordance with their own characteristics for the synchronous design staff at all levels of the performance-related pay system.Performance results will be used normally as follows:1. Promotion wage (because of the specific situation in the promotion case may be)2. Performance bonuses determined (specifically identified because of the way the case may be)3. Career developmentPerformance Management is the ultimate goal of improving productivity and efficiency, through the success of each employee contributed to the success of enterprises. When staff performance evaluation scores of lower-level, we should discuss how to improve the performance required for the completion of the ability to improve performance and develop a plan of action. According to the results of performance assessment, in conjunction with other assessment, identifying outstanding performance, good quality, excellent innovation capability of managers and staff through job rotation, special training, etc., from the quality and the ability to conduct a comprehensive training, adjustments in the team added officers, to give priority to be promoted. At the same time, through the comparison of the results of performance assessment, analysis, evaluation was to identify the quality of representation and the gap between positions, in accordance with company management policy andlong-term development strategy for the management requirements, design and implementation of targeted training and timely improving management capacity and level.For those who can not meet the required performance, capacity is not significantly improve the staff to consider whether there are other suitable positions better than the original position to play its role. Through the careerdevelopment of employees, performance, the ability to work or personal behaviour and the career prospects of staff link to each other, thereby strengthening the ability to improve performance and the awareness of all the staff to improve the ability to complete performance targets. Also the human cost to the performance of transformation, the transformation of human capital to be specific implementation.In order to better the performance of the different performance management, talent can refer to the following matrix model.Table 7: talent Matrix ModelAnd the potential for high capacityInLowMedium outstanding qualified failurePerformance4. Other incentivesImplementation of pay linked to performance, although the performance of the staff to upgrade the level of better incentives, and is also a major incentive. But it is undeniable their own, there are also some limitations, but because of organizational factors, environmental factors and personal factors also caused a fixed wage increases and incentive bonuses specific operational difficulty and complexity of these problems are properly resolved, will be detrimental to performance incentives incentives.In actual operation should be actively avoid these negative factors can be considered in a larger scope reward and incentive approach. The realization of growth in wages and performance bonuses for major awards and incentives, with other incentives, and to reward with a continuous policy framework, and give full play to the potential role of other incentives, can be used to make up for the performance of wages restrictive role. Below other incentives for a brief description:To master the different forms of incentives, as well as the effect of different incentives, is the first step in the implementation of effective incentives. In the broad perspective, the incentives can be divided into two categories:One is external incentives. Including wage increases, performance bonuses and other rewards the nature of incentives, such as job promotion, training opportunities, study tour, tourist resort, from the high-level recognition and commendation.The second category is intrinsic reward. Including its own staff of the incentives (such as a sense of achievement), welfare, conferred the honorarytitle given challenging responsibilities, important and meaningful work, set goals and make decisions, such as the influence.These stresses in the form of incentives, according to different types, different locations, as well as staff time needs of different incentives for different incentives, real incentives to achieve this purpose it is necessary to make things right incentives, rewards employees have liked things that we should follow the implementation of incentive when one of the principles. Another incentive should also be in the grasp of achievement should not be confined to the understanding of the best employees; incentives to specific, and timely.Third, performance plans to amendThe company's strategic direction or will be the focus of the company each year with the different stages of development of the company or outside competition to the changing situation to be adjusted accordingly, the level of departments or work of staff of the target will be adjusted accordingly. Upon completion of performance appraisal, in a wide range of listening to the views of various parties on the basis of performance management should be on the practice of concluding a comprehensive analysis of concrete from the following considerations:1. Performance Performance Assessment Scheme content (including key performance indicators, setting objectives)Identify the most successful part of what? What is the most difficult operation? What is not meaningful? Targets adjustment will be reflected in the major work activities or key regional results. In addition, even if the work is the same or similar activities as the key to regional results, but also because of the completion of the outcome of the capacity of regional or external factors and other factors to be adjusted accordingly, and this adjustment will be reflected in the measurement standards.2. Performance Plan target (including key performance indicators and challenges of the goal indicators indicators, as well as the completion of targets set standards)According to actual performance compared with the objectives to determine whether the targets set reasonable value, and the next year the value of performance indicators defined plan will provide experience and guidance. 3. Performance guidance and enhanced methods and performance evaluation and reporting methods.On guidance and assessment methods to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the test, remove unreasonable factors, and the amendment. In a comprehensive summation of the basis of the analysis, according to the company's new business development plan and the annual operating budget objectives, and revised performance plan to the next round of the operating performance plan.。
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 AppraisalAppra isal 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 wor k 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 rec eived 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 objectivi ty 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困境。
企业绩效管理外文文献翻译译文
外文文献翻译译文一、外文原文CorporatePerformanceManagementAbstractTwo of the most important duties of a chief executive officer are (1) toformulates t rat egy and(2)tomanage h i s c ompany’s p er f orm ance.Inthisa r ticlewe e xaminethe second of these tasks and discuss how corporate performance should be modeledand managed.Webeginbyconsideringtheenvironmentin whichacompanyoperates,which includes, besides outside stakeholders, the industry it belongs and the marketit supplies, and then proceed to explain how the functioning of a company can beu nder s t ood by a nex a m i nationof i ts bus i n ess,o per a ti ona landperform a nce managementmod els.Nextwedescribethestructurerecommendedby theauthorsforacorporateplanning,controlandevaluationsystem,themostimportantpartofa corp orate performance management system. The core component of theplanningsystem is the corporate performance evaluation model, the structure of which ism apped i nt o the pl anning sys t em’s da ta b ase,si m ula t ion modelsandbudgeting t ool s’structures, andalsousedtoshapeinformationcontainedinthe system’s products,besidesbeingthenucleusoft helanguageusedbythe system’s agentstotalkabout corporateperformance.Theontologyofplann ing,theguidingprinciplesofcorporate planningandthehistoryof”M ADE”,thecorporateperform ancemanagementsystem di scus s e d inthisarti c le,arere vi ew e dn e xt,before w ep ro cee d todisc us s i nde t ailt h e structural components of the corporate planning and control system introduced before.We conclude the article by listing the main steps which should be followedwhen implementing aperformance planning, control and evaluation system for a company.1.IntroductionTwo of the most important corporate tasks for which a chief executive officeris primarilyresponsibleare(1)toformulatestrategyand(2)tomanagethecompany’s p erf ormance. In thisarticle we examine the second of these tasks and discuss howcorporateperformance should be modeled andmanaged.T operfo r mistoac c ompli s h,t o a chieve(de s i r ed)r e s u ltsoroutc om es.So,whe n talkingabo utcorporateperformance,wearereferringtothedegreebywhichdesired resultsoroutcomesarea chievedbyacompany.Managingcorporateperformance involves planning, controlling, analyzing and evaluating, not only the resultsachieved bythecompany,butalsothemeansbywhichtheseresultsarereached.Amongthe re sults,orgoals,pursuedbymostcompanieswecanmentiongrowth,marketshare,profitabilityan dvaluecreation;andthemeanstoachievetheseresultsincludep roductivi ty,effect i veness,innova t iona nd c ompetiti ve nes s.T hos e a rethe t y p eofthings we should have in mind when specifying a corporate performancemanagement system.Before discussing how to model corporate performance, it is convenienttoconsider the environment in which a company operates, which includes, besides out s i de sta ke holde rs, the indust r y i t be l ongs and the marke t it suppli e s. Themain aspectsofanindustrytobelookedatwhen consideringitsinfluenceoncorporateperformancearestructureandregulation,themaincompetito rs,entrybarriers,substituteproductsand supplier’s negotiatingpower.Associatedquestionsare :How production is organized, vertically or horizontally? How much competitive isthe i ndustry and who are the m a in competitors, t h ose tha t ca pt ure th e l a rges t part oft hemarketshare?Is itunregulated,self-regulatedorregulatedbyagovernmentagency?Howstrongarebarrierstotheentryofnewcompetito rs?Canproductsfromother industries function as substitutes for the ones produced in the industry? Whataboutthe power industry suppliers have when negotiating prices and tradeconditions?At the opposite side of the industry in the corporate environment we havethe marketwherethecompanytradesitsproducts,itsmainattributesbeingsize,growth rate,segmentation,exitbarriersand consumers’negotiating power.Typicalquest ions thatshouldbeaskedwhenassessingitseffectoncorporateperformanceare:Whatis the marketsize,indollars,foreach of the company’s products?Whatarethe short-term and long-term market growth rates? Is it a wholesaleor a retailmarket?Are the sales cyclical? How can the market be segmented (by geography, purchasingpower,customerage,etc.)?Whichbarriersdoesaclientrunintowhenchangings uppli e rs? D o c l ients ha v e t he power t o impose pric e s and t ra de conditions?Wecallthepeoplewhohaveinterestinorareaffectedbya company’s performanceits“stak eholders”,andgroupthemin thecategoriesof“insiders”and“outsiders”.Theinsidersarethe company’s entrepreneursorcontr ollingshareholders and its managers and employees. The outsiders include customers, suppliers, minority shareholders, debt holders, the government in its roles of public goodssupplier,regulatorandtaxcollector,andalsothecommunitieswherethecompany doesbus i ne s s.It isim port ant t onote t hats t a kehol de rs,bes i desbeinga f fecte db y,al s oinfluencecorporateperformanceanditisoftennec essarytosearchfortheeffectsof this influencewhen appraisingperformance.That is meant to increase the depth of this brief analysis of corporatestructureand external relations.Microeconomictheory considers the company as asocial p roductionunittha t uses a certa i ntechnolo g ytop r oducea s eto f outputsfromas e tof inputs.Thefunctionthatmapsi nputquantitiesintomaximumoutputquantities obtainablefromtheinputsiscalledthe“productio n function”or“productionfrontier”.Knowledge of this function is important for measuring the technical efficiency ofaproduction unit, a very significant performance metric. Several techniques existfort hespe c ifi c at i on of pro duc tion funct i ons or fro nt iers, gr oupe d und e r the nam e so f“Data Envelopment Analysis”and“S tochasticFrontier Analysis”.Companies are created by entrepreneurs, the agents that organize andcoordinate production with the help of professional managers. Entrepreneurs play a crucialrolein shaping corporate performance. On oneside, recognized entrepreneurial capacity─and also large contact networks ─are vital for raising the financial capitalnecessary tobuildstructuralorphysicalcapital. On anotherside,the entrepreneurs’reputation and contacts are essential to attract the intellectual capital that, together withthe structural capital, is the foundation of innovation capacity.A business model is a conceptual representation of the way a companydoes business.Itsmaincomponents,are:the company’s valueproposition;thetargetedmarket segments; the distribution, marketing communications, and customerrelationshipchannels;the core competenciesneeded;operating and managementt echnol og ies;t hepar t ner s’ne tw ork;andtherevenue,costand va lue creat i on m ode ls.Understandingthe business modelis the first step to implement acorporate performancemanagementsystem.The modelshould indicate whether the company has a broad customer base or targets specific market segments, and in the secondcase,identifythesesegments.Thegoodsandservicesprovidedbythecompanyandthe com mercial conditions under which they are sold (including such things asguarantees,technicalassistance, etc.), comprise the valueproposition.The channelused forp roductdistr i buti on ca n bea di re c t-t oc ustomer s a l esc ha nnelthroughthe I nte r net,orbe comprised of bricks and mortar companyownedstores, wholesale agents,retail companies,etc.Thecompanycanuseseveralmarketingchannelstogetmessages thro ughtoitscustomers,suchasTVandprintedmedia,andemployacallcentertogive support and receive complaints and suggestions from them. Core competencies ar e t heon e sthecomp an y ne edstomas t erinorde r toga i nac om pet i tivead va nta g ei n relation to other companies in the same marketplace. These competenciesshould restonproperoperationalandmanagementtechnologies,andbe supplemented by a network of partners, if necessary. As a final point, a business model must includea revenue,acostandavaluecreationmodelinordertobeprofitabletothe company’s s hare h old e rs.We can think of the operational model of a companyasencompassinganorganizationalmodel,afunctionalmodelandacorporatedatamodel. The organizationalmodeldepicts,inaninvertedhierarchicaltree,therolesoftheagents involve dinthe company’s operation.Thefunctionalmodelportraysall theactivitiesthattogetherformthewholetowhichwereferbytheexpression“company’s operations”,structuredinlogical,sequentialsteps formingoperationalprocesses.At last, the corporate data model is an entity-relationship diagram that shows themain entitiesaboutwhichthecompanycollectsdatawithitsattributesandtherelationshipsbetw eenthem.Thelastmodelweneedtoexamineinordertounderstandthefunctioningofacorporation is the performance management model it uses, which is, ingeneral,composedoffourbuildingblocks.Thecorporategovernancesystem,thecorporatep e rfo rmanc ep la nnin g,control a nde va lua t ionsyste m,t he individual m anage r sperformance planning, control and evaluation system and the managementvariable compensation system (or bonus system). The corporate governance systemcomprises three well knownactors, the chief executive officer, the directors and theshareholders,andisdesignedtomediatetherelationsbetweenthem.Underthegovernancesyste m,we find two planning and control systems, having as its targets the performance ofthe company(asawholeandofitsdivisions)andtheperformanceofitsindividualm ana g ers,re s p e ct i vely.L i nking t heset w osyste m sw e finda com p ensa t ions y st e mthat assigns fractions of a bonus pool, which is a function of the aggregatecompany performance,toitsmanagersonthebasisoftheirindividualperformances.An e ffective management model should be forward-looking, that is, centered ontheimprovement of future performance, and focused on valuecreation.A thorough understanding o f a ll t he m od e l s des c ribed above is anec e s s ary prerequisiteforone tobeabletoplan,monitor,analyze,evaluateand controlcorporate performance.Inthenextsectionwewillexamineinmoredetailacrucial component of the management model previously described: the corporateperformance planning, control and evaluationsystem.2.The C orporate P erf o rmanc e Planni ng,C ontrolan d Eva l u at io n System.That shows the structure recommended by the authors for acorporateplanning,controlandevaluationsystem,themostimportantpartofacorporateperforma nce management system. The core component of the planning system, as can bededucedfrom its central position in the mentioned figure, is the performance evaluationmodel.Thestructureofthismodelismappedintothe system’s database,simulationm odels and budgeting tools’structures, and also used to shape information contained in the system’s products,besidesbeingthenucleusofthelanguageusedbythe system’s agentstotalkaboutcorporateperformance.Thecorporateplanningand controlprocessisformedbythecoordinatedactionsoftheplanningandcontrolagents,whoseaimist hegenerationofthe system’s outputs,which includeassumptions,goals,forecasts, plans, budgets, investment projects, performance valuations, varianceanalysis,etc.Theseproductstaketheformofpaperandelectronicdocumentsands pread s heets,a nd of PowerPointpresent a t i ons.T he a gents fol lowanagreedupontime schedule and rely on a business intelligence (BI) software to support theiractions.TheBIsoftwareimplementstheperformanceevaluationmodelforthepurposesof rep resenting and simulating corporate performance and provides the necessarytools forthe system’s agentstoproducethe system’soutputs.Datausedbythesystem comes from the accounting and other corporate databases. In the following sectionsof thisarticlewewillexamineindetaileachoftheaforementionedplanningsystemc ompon ents.Before proceeding, however, we will make a pause to discuss the ontologyof planning. One can readily identify in this figure three major structures: the strategic,the motivation and the action frameworks. In the strategic framework, which ischiefly related to the risk versus return dialectics, we can identify theexternal i nf l uence s to corporat e performa n ce, c om pris i ng both opportuni ti es a nd threats, and the internal ones, materialized by strengths and weaknesses. Suppliers and consumersnegotiatingpower,entryandexitbarriers,competitorsandsubstituteproductsarethe ma in determinants of external influences. Technological change has also apervasiveinfluence on corporate performance. Comparing the motivation (ends) andaction(means) fr a meworks, we can as s ociate v a rious levels or l ayers in w hich c or po ra t e aimsaredefinedtothecorrespondingactionclasses,thatis,visiontomission,longtermgo alstostrategy,shorttermgoalstotacticsandactualresultstoactualactions.Policy and business rules are restrictionsunder which strategy and tactics,respectively, must be formulated, and actual action carriedout.It may be convenient, at this point, to give a general definition of theterms“planning”and“control”.Corporateplanningis a processbywhichmanagement define the desired future performance of a corporation, and identify and decide onthe actionsthatneedtobetakeninordertoachievethatperformance.Themainstepscomprisingap lanningcycleareexposed.Corporatecontrol,ontheotherhand,isan operational process which aims to check whether the actual performance isinaccordance with the plannedone, and, eventually, to modify the planned actionsinordertoguaranteethatthefinaldesiredperformancewillbe met. The corporatebudg etisoneo f themostim port antoutputs o fthec orpor atepl a nninga n dcont rol proces s.Itistheprimemanagementtoolusedtoimprovecorporateperformanceand toalignmanageme ntinterests withthoseoftheshareholders.Wecanconcludethis section by stating the nine guiding principles of corporate planning and control:i.Planning is concerned in first place with results and in second placewiththe means to achieve theseresults.ii.Planning is concerned with the present value of costsand benefits to bei ncurred in the f ut u re a s a cons e quence of dec i s i ons undertaken in t he pres e nt.iii.Themainobjectiveofplanningis to createvalueforthe corporation’s shareholders.iv.Fortheabovegoal to bemet,itisnecessarytofulfill customers’expectations concerning quantity, price and quality of marketed products at the least possiblecost,and to m ai nta i n a skilled and full y m otivat ed w or k force.v.Planning and control activities should be organized through a systemwhosecomponents are the planning and control agents, process, time schedule,products,models&tools,anddatabase.vi.Thecorporatebudgetshouldbe the planningandcontrol system’s product t hat consol i dat e s t he r es ul ts w hi ch the company p lans to achi ev e i n the next period and the actions it should undertake in order to meetthem.vii.The corporate budget must contain all the information necessary forthe evaluation of the short term planned performance of the company, itsmarketing,operational, economic, patrimonial and financial aspects being dullyconsidered.viii.The corporate budget should not be viewed exclusively as a means ofcost reductionorcontrol,butmainlyasatooltoenhanceperformanceandincreasethe company’s economicvalue.ix.The planning process in itself is as important as its outputs, andshould contributetoleverage management’s knowledgeabout the company’s i nternal workings, and also to help focus its efforts on the critical areas ofcorporateperformance.S ource: Pedro Góes MonteirodeOliveira STARPLAN ConsultoriaEmpresarial Ltda.,2009.“Corporate Performance Management”.WorkingP aper,vol.41,no.4,pp.1-7..二、翻译文章译文：企业绩效管理摘要行政总裁两个最重要的职责是：制定战略和处理他的公司表现。
#PerformanceManagement(绩效管理英文文献)
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT POLICYThe Governing Body of Homerton Children’s Centre adoptedthis performance management policy on31 October 2007.APPLICATION OF THE POLICYThe policy applies to the head teacher and to all teachers employed by the school except teachers on contracts of less than one term, those undergoing induction (ie NQTs> and those who are the subject of capability procedures.PURPOSEThis policy sets out the framework for a clear and consistent assessment of the overall performance of teachers and the head teacherand for supporting their development needs within the context of the school's improvement plan and their own professional needs. Where teachers are eligible for pay progression, the assessment of performance throughout the cycle against the performance criteria specified in the statement will be the basis on which the recommendation is made by the reviewer.This policy should be read in conjunction with the school's pay policy which provides details of the arrangements relating to teacher's pay in accordance with the School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document.LINKS TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT, SCHOOL SELF EVALUATION AND SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGTo comply with the requirement to show howthe arrangements for performance management link with those for school improvement, school self-evaluation and school development planningand to minimise workload and bureaucracy the performance management process will be the main source of information as appropriate for school self-evaluation and the wider school improvement process.Similarly, the school improvement and development plan and the school's self evaluation form are key documents for the performance management process.All reviewers are expected to explore the alignment of reviewees' objectives with the school's priorities and plans. The objectives should also reflect reviewees' professionalaspirations.CONSISTENCY OF TREATMENT AND FAIRNESSThe Governing Body is committed to ensuring consistency of treatment and fairness in the operation of performance management.To ensure this the following provisions are made in relation to moderation, quality assurance and objective setting.Quality assuranceThe head teacher has determined that she will delegate the reviewer role for some or all teachers for whom she is not the line manager.In these circumstances the head teacher will moderate all the planning statements to check that the plans recorded in the statements of teachers at the school:• are consistent between those who have similar experience and similar levels of responsibility• comply with the school's performance management policy, the regulations and the requirements of equality legislationThe Governing Body will review the quality assurance processes when the performance policy is reviewed.OBJECTIVE SETTINGThe objectives set will be rigorous, challenging, achievable, time-bound, fair and equitable in relation to teachers with similar roles/responsibilities and experience, and wil l have regard to what can reasonably be expected of any teacher in that position given the desirability of the reviewee being able to achieve a satisfactorybalance between the time required to discharge his professional duties and the time required to pursue his personal interests outside work, consistent with the school's strategy for bringing downward pressure on working hours. They shall also take account of the teacher's professional aspirations and any relevant pay progression criteria. They should be such that, if they are achieved, they will contribute to improving the progress of children at the school.The reviewer and reviewee will seek to agree the objectives butwhere a joint determination cannot be made the reviewer will make the determination.In this school:all teachers, includingthe head teacher, will have no more than 3objectivesteachers, including the head teacher, will not necessarily all have the samenumber of objectivesall teachers, including the head teacher, will have a whole school objective Though performance management is an assessment of overall performance of teachers and the head teacher, objectives cannot cover the full range of a teacher's roles/responsibilities. Objectives will, therefore, focus on the priorities for an individual for the cycle. At the review stage it will be assumed that those aspects of a teacher's roles/responsibilities not covered by the objectives or any amendment to the statement which may have been necessary in accordance with the provisions of theregulations have been carried out satisfactorily.Reviewing ProgressAt the end of the cyc l e assessment of performance against an objective will be on the basis of the performance criteria set at the beginning of the cycle. Good progress towards the achievement of a challenging objective, even if the performance criteria have not been met in full, will be assessed favourably.The performance management cycle is annual, but on occasions it may be appropriate to set objectives that will cover a period over more than one cycle. In such cases, the basis on which the progress being made towards meeting the performance criteria for the objective will be assessed at the end of the first cycle and will be recorded in the planning and review statement at the beginning of the cycle.APPEALSAt specified points in the performance management process teachers and head teachers have a right of appeal against any of the entries in their planning and review statements.Where a reviewee wishes to appeal on the basis of more than one entry this would constitute one appeal hearing.Details of the appeals process are covered in the school's paypolicy.CONFIDENTIALITYThe whole performance management process and the statements generated under it, in particular, will be treated with strict confidentiality at all times. Only the reviewee's line manager or, where she has more than one, each of her line managers will be provided with access to the reviewee's plan recorded in her statement, upon request, where this is necessary to enable the line manager to discharge her line management responsibilities. Reviewees will be told who has requested and has been granted access.TRAINING AND SUPPORTThe school's CPD programme will be informed by the training and development needs identified in the training annex of the reviewees' planning and review statements.The governing body will ensure in the budget planning that, as far as possible, appropriate resources are made available in the school budget for any training and support agreed for reviewees.An account of the training and development needs of teachers in general, including the instances where it did not prove possible to provide any agreed CPD, will form a part of the head teacher's annual report to the governing body about the operation of the per f ormance management in the school.With regard to the provision of CPD in the case of competing demands on the school budget, a decision on relative priority will be taken with regard to the extent to which: (a> the CPD identified is essential for a reviewee to meet their objectives。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
外文文献翻译译文一、外文原文Corporate Performance ManagementAbstractTwo of the most important duties of a chief executive officer are (1) to formulate strategy and (2) to manage his company’s performance. In this article we examine the second of these tasks and discuss how corporate performance should be modeled and managed. We begin by considering the environment in which a company operates, which includes, besides outside stakeholders, the industry it belongs and the market it supplies, and then proceed to explain how the functioning of a company can be understood by an examination of its business, operational and performance management models. Next we describe the structure recommended by the authors for a corporate planning, control and evaluation system, the most important part of a corporate performance management system. The core component of the planning system is the corporate performance evaluation model, the structure of which is mapped into the planning system’s database, simulation models and budgeting tools’ structures, and also used to shape information contained in the system’s products, besides being the nucleus of the language used by the system’s agents to talk about corporate performance. The ontology of planning, the guiding principles of corporate planning and the history of ”MADE”, the corporate performance management system discussed in this article, are reviewed next, before we proceed to discuss in detail the structural components of the corporate planning and control system introduced before. We conclude the article by listing the main steps which should be followed when implementing a performance planning, control and evaluation system for a company.1.IntroductionTwo of the most important corporate tasks for which a chief executive officer is p rimarily responsible are (1) to formulate strategy and (2) to manage the company’s performance. In this article we examine the second of these tasks and discuss howcorporate performance should be modeled and managed.To perform is to accomplish, to achieve (desired) results or outcomes. So, when talking about corporate performance, we are referring to the degree by which desired results or outcomes are achieved by a company. Managing corporate performance involves planning, controlling, analyzing and evaluating, not only the results achieved by the company, but also the means by which these results are reached. Among the results, or goals, pursued by most companies we can mention growth, market share, profitability and value creation; and the means to achieve these results include productivity, effectiveness, innovation and competitiveness. Those are the type of things we should have in mind when specifying a corporate performance management system.Before discussing how to model corporate performance, it is convenient to consider the environment in which a company operates, which includes, besides outside stakeholders, the industry it belongs and the market it supplies. The main aspects of an industry to be looked at when considering its influence on corporate performance are structure and regulation, the main competitors, entry barriers, substitute products and supplier’s negotiating power. Associated questions are: How production is organized, vertically or horizontally? How much competitive is the industry and who are the main competitors, those that capture the largest part of the market share? Is it unregulated, self-regulated or regulated by a government agency? How strong are barriers to the entry of new competitors? Can products from other industries function as substitutes for the ones produced in the industry? What about the power industry suppliers have when negotiating prices and trade conditions?At the opposite side of the industry in the corporate environment we have the market where the company trades its products, its main attributes being size, growth rate, segmentation, exit barriers and consumers’ negotiating power. Typical questions that should be asked when assessing its effect on corporate performance are: What is the market size, in dol lars, for each of the company’s products? What are the short-term and long-term market growth rates? Is it a wholesale or a retail market? Are the sales cyclical? How can the market be segmented (by geography, purchasingpower, customer age, etc.)? Which barriers does a client run into when changing suppliers? Do clients have the power to impose prices and trade conditions?We call the people who have interest in or are affected by a company’s performance its “stakeholders”,and group them in the categories of “insiders” and “outsiders”. The insiders are the company’s entrepreneurs or controlling shareholders and its managers and employees. The outsiders include customers, suppliers, minority shareholders, debt holders, the government in its roles of public goods supplier, regulator and tax collector, and also the communities where the company does business. It is important to note that stakeholders, besides being affected by, also influence corporate performance and it is often necessary to search for the effects of this influence when appraising performance.That is meant to increase the depth of this brief analysis of corporate structure and external relations.Microeconomic theory considers the company as a social production unit that uses a certain technology to produce a set of outputs from a set of inputs. The function that maps input quantities into maximum output quantities obtainable from the inputs is called the “production function”or “production frontier”. Knowledge of this function is important for measuring the technical efficiency of a production unit, a very significant performance metric. Several techniques exist for the specification of production functions or frontiers, grouped under the names of “Data Envelopment Analysis” and “Stochastic Frontier Analysis”.Companies are created by entrepreneurs, the agents that organize and coordinate production with the help of professional managers. Entrepreneurs play a crucial role in shaping corporate performance. On one side, recognized entrepreneurial capacity ─and also large contact networks ─ are vital for raising the financial capital necessary to build structural or physical capital. On another side, the entrepreneurs’ reputation and contacts are essential to attract the intellectual capital that, together with the structural capital, is the foundation of innovation capacity .A business model is a conceptual representation of the way a company does business. Its main components, are: the company’s value proposition; the targeted market segments; the distribution, marketing communications, and customerrelationship channels; the core competencies needed; operating and management technologies; the partners’ network; and the revenue, cost and value creation models. Understanding the business model is the first step to implement a corporate performance management system. The model should indicate whether the company has a broad customer base or targets specific market segments, and in the second case, identify these segments. The goods and services provided by the company and the commercial conditions under which they are sold (including such things as guarantees, technical assistance, etc.), comprise the value proposition. The channel used for product distribution can be a direct-tocustomer sales channel through the Internet, or be comprised of bricks and mortar companyowned stores, wholesale agents, retail companies, etc. The company can use several marketing channels to get messages through to its customers, such as TV and printed media, and employ a call center to give support and receive complaints and suggestions from them. Core competencies are the ones the company needs to master in order to gain a competitive advantage in relation to other companies in the same marketplace. These competencies should rest on proper operational and management technologies, and be supplemented by a network of partners, if necessary. As a final point, a business model must include a revenue, a cost and a value creation model in order to be profitable to the company’s shareholders.We can think of the operational model of a company as encompassing an organizational model, a functional model and a corporate data model . The organizational model depicts, in an inverted hierarchical tree, the roles of the agents involved in the compa ny’s operation. The func tional model portrays all the activities that together form the whole to which we refer by the expression “company’s operations”, structured in logical, sequential steps forming operational processes. At last, the corporate data model is an entity-relationship diagram that shows the main entities about which the company collects data with its attributes and the relationships between them.The last model we need to examine in order to understand the functioning of a corporation is the performance management model it uses, which is, in general,composed of four building blocks. The corporate governance system, the corporate performance planning, control and evaluation system, the individual managers performance planning, control and evaluation system and the management variable compensation system (or bonus system). The corporate governance system comprises three well known actors, the chief executive officer, the directors and the shareholders, and is designed to mediate the relations between them. Under the governance system, we find two planning and control systems, having as its targets the performance of the company (as a whole and of its divisions) and the performance of its individual managers, respectively. Linking these two systems we find a compensation system that assigns fractions of a bonus pool, which is a function of the aggregate company performance, to its managers on the basis of their individual performances. An effective management model should be forward-looking, that is, centered on the improvement of future performance, and focused on value creation.A thorough understanding of all the models described above is a necessary prerequisite for one to be able to plan, monitor, analyze, evaluate and control corporate performance. In the next section we will examine in more detail a crucial component of the management model previously described: the corporate performance planning, control and evaluation system.2. The Corporate Performance Planning, Control and Evaluation System.That shows the structure recommended by the authors for a corporate planning, control and evaluation system, the most important part of a corporate performance management system. The core component of the planning system, as can be deduced from its central position in the mentioned figure, is the performance evaluation model. The structure of this model is mapped into the system’s database, simulation models and budgeting tools’ structures, and also used to shape information contained in the system’s p roducts, besides being the nucleus of the language used by the system’s agents to talk about corporate performance. The corporate planning and control process is formed by the coordinated actions of the planning and control agents, whose aim is the generat ion of the system’s outputs, which include assumptions, goals, forecasts, plans, budgets, investment projects, performance valuations, varianceanalysis, etc. These products take the form of paper and electronic documents and spreadsheets, and of PowerPoint presentations. The agents follow an agreed upon time schedule and rely on a business intelligence (BI) software to support their actions. The BI software implements the performance evaluation model for the purposes of representing and simulating corporate performance and provides the necessary tools for the system’s agents to produce the system’s outputs. Data used by the system comes from the accounting and other corporate databases. In the following sections of this article we will examine in detail each of the aforementioned planning system components.Before proceeding, however, we will make a pause to discuss the ontology of planning. One can readily identify in this figure three major structures: the strategic, the motivation and the action frameworks. In the strategic framework, which is chiefly related to the risk versus return dialectics, we can identify the external influences to corporate performance, comprising both opportunities and threats, and the internal ones, materialized by strengths and weaknesses. Suppliers and consumers negotiating power, entry and exit barriers, competitors and substitute products are the main determinants of external influences. Technological change has also a pervasive influence on corporate performance. Comparing the motivation (ends) and action (means) frameworks, we can associate various levels or layers in which corporate aims are defined to the corresponding action classes, that is, vision to mission, long term goals to strategy, short term goals to tactics and actual results to actual actions. Policy and business rules are restrictions under which strategy and tactics, respectively, must be formulated, and actual action carried out.It may be convenient, at this point, to give a general definition of the terms “planning” and “control”.Corporate planning is a process by which management define the desired future performance of a corporation, and identify and decide on the actions that need to be taken in order to achieve that performance. The main steps comprising a planning cycle are exposed . Corporate control, on the other hand, is an operational process which aims to check whether the actual performance is in accordance with the planned one, and, eventually, to modify the planned actions inorder to guarantee that the final desired performance will be met. The corporate budget is one of the most important outputs of the corporate planning and control process. It is the prime management tool used to improve corporate performance and to align management interests with those of the shareholders. We can conclude this section by stating the nine guiding principles of corporate planning and control:i. Planning is concerned in first place with results and in second place with the means to achieve these results.ii. Planning is concerned with the present value of costs and benefits to be incurred in the future as a consequence of decisions undertaken in the present.iii. The main objective of planning is to create value for the corporation’s shareholders.iv. For the ab ove goal to be met, it is necessary to fulfill customers’ expectations concerning quantity, price and quality of marketed products at the least possible cost, and to maintain a skilled and fully motivated workforce.v. Planning and control activities should be organized through a system whose components are the planning and control agents, process, time schedule, products, models & tools, and database.vi. The corporate budget should be the planning and control system’s product that consolidates the results which the company plans to achieve in the next period and the actions it should undertake in order to meet them.vii. The corporate budget must contain all the information necessary for the evaluation of the short term planned performance of the company, its marketing, operational, economic, patrimonial and financial aspects being dully considered.viii. The corporate budget should not be viewed exclusively as a means of cost reduction or control, but mainly as a tool to enhance performance and increase the company’s economic value.ix. The planning process in itself is as important as its outputs, and should contribute to leverage management’s knowledge about the company’s internal workings, and also to help focus its efforts on the critical areas of corporate performance.Source:Pedro Góes Monteiro de Oliveira STARPLAN Consultoria Empresarial Ltda. ,2009. “Corporate Performance Management” . Working Paper , vol.41, no.4, pp.1-7..二、翻译文章译文：企业绩效管理摘要行政总裁两个最重要的职责是：制定战略和处理他的公司表现。