20世纪70年代以来，企业之间的竞争日益激烈，迫使企业不但要关注当前的生存，更要重视未来的发展，必须具有战略眼光和长远的战略目标，这一切都促使了战略管理由理论迅速走向实践。决定现代企业生存和发展的最根本因素是其战略是否正确，以及企业的管理层是否出色地实施了这种战略。战略业绩评价是企业战略执行过程中的一个重要环节，通过评价所形成的反馈信息，可供企业管理层适时地修正和调整企业战略。传统的以财务指标为核心的业绩评价体系已经无法适应现代企业战略管理控制的要求，必须构建一种将企业的关键业绩指标与战略规划过程紧密结合的业绩评价体系，并使业绩评价体系与企业的战略目标体系相配套，面向企业的未来和全局，为实现企业价值最大化目标和提升核心竞争力提供有效的支持。
西方国家业绩评价理论与方法的沿革可以划分为三个阶段，即成本业绩评价阶段、财务业绩评价阶段和战略业绩评价阶段。标准成本制度的产生和差异分析系统的建立是成本业绩评价发展的高峰，业绩评价首次将事后核算与事前预测和事中控制相结合，初步实现了对成本的控制，大大促进了劳动生产力的提高；财务业绩评价阶段最具代表性的评价体系是杜邦分析系统，这一阶段的特点是以财务业绩衡量作为业绩评价的主导方向；战略业绩评价阶段是多种创新业绩评价模式层出不穷的时期，先后出现了业绩金字塔、平衡记分卡、经济增加值和业绩棱镜等颇有建树的业绩评价模式和方法，至今这些模式和方法在企业战略业绩评价实践中仍具有相当的影响力，并在实践中不断被理论界和实务界加以完善。
中国的企业业绩评价实践在由计划经济向市场经济转轨的过程中，先后经历了以产品产量和企业产值为核心的业绩评价时期、以产值和利润率为核心的业绩评价时期、以经济结构和经济效益为核心的业绩评价时期、以社会贡献为核心的业绩评价时期和和以企业整体绩效为核心的业绩评价时期。但是，在中国企业业绩评价与管理实践中仍存在一些尚未解决的问题，包括（1）企业的战略制定与战略执行相脱节。（2）企业各部门之间沟通不利，造成相互独立、各自为政的状况。（3）企业仅仅关注财务指标，注重短期效应，忽略了非财务指标的作用。（4）信息技术和量化指标的应用，并不能够保障企业得到可靠的运营成果，企业文化的建设仍存在很大空缺。（5）企业信息不统一，缺乏分析环节和和整体性研究，难以从信息中得到需要的资料。
本文就战略业绩评价体系的构建问题展开了研究。通过研究，揭示规律，建立科学、实用的战略业绩评价体系，为转型过程中的中国企业战略制定者和战略实施者提供信息，帮助企业更好地实施战略导向的管理控制，使企业的战略制定者、战略实施者、内部组织单元和企业员工的目标和行动最大限度地协调一致，以提升和保持企业的核心竞争力，是本研究要达到的根本目的。企业战略业绩评价是管理会计的一项内容，涉及经济学、管理学、会计学、市场学、人力资源管理等学科。在研究中，本文利用文献研究、比较与分类、分析与综合、归纳与演绎、实证研究等方法，对企业战略业绩评价问题进行综合性探讨。本文的研究步骤、主要结论、特色与创新点可概括如下：
第一，战略业绩评价的概念界定和研究现状。本文澄清和界定了企业战略业绩评价的相关概念，明确了战略业绩评价体系在战略管理系统中的地位，探讨了战略业绩评价的产生背景，并对国内外战略业绩评价的相关研究文献进行了系统的梳理、归纳和评述。20世纪90年代以后，国外战略业绩评价的研究可以划分为这样几个重要方面：（1）对业绩评价信息作用或职能的研究；（2）以财务指标为主的业绩评价模式——控制观；（3）综合应用财务指标和非财务指标的战略业绩评价模式——整体观。每一方面的研究都涉及到业绩评价的作用、评价系统设计、业绩评价系统模型和对组织的影响等内容。我国学术界对企业业绩评价的理论研究在大量借鉴国外最新成果的基础上，已经基本与国际同步。
第二，理论基础研究。战略业绩评价体系是建立在一系列经济学和管理学理论基础之上的。委托代理理论明确了业绩评价的目的；利益相关者理论确定了评价的出发点；控制理论表明，企业战略业绩评价系统既是战略管理控制系统的重要组成部分，其本身又是一个完整的控制过程，是反馈控制、同期控制和前馈控制的有机结合；权变理论要求战略业绩评价体系突破传统静态业绩评价模式的局限性；行为科学理论要求战略业绩评价将人的因素放更为重要的位置上；激励理论对战略业绩评价体系的科学性提出了更高的要求；而战略管理理论既是战略业绩评价的理论基础，又能够引导企业将业绩评价系统纳入战略管理的过程当中，利用评价机制促成企业整体长远战略目标的实现。
第三，战略业绩评价主体、评价客体和评价目标。战略业绩评价体系由评价主体、评价客体、评价目标、评价指标、评价标准、评价方法和评价报告七个要素构成。在评价主体的定位方面，本文比较了以出资人为核心的单一主体观和涉及众多利益相关者的多元主体观产生的背景和特点，指出将评价主体集中化的必要性。鉴于略战业绩评价以企业的战略目标为核心，是一种基于企业内部经营管理活动的评价控制过程，因此，战略业绩评价的主体应定位为企业内部战略制定者和实施者，是考虑其他利益相关者需要的内部评价主体。在评价客体定位方面，分析了企业整体业绩、部门（或单位、团队）业绩和个人业绩三层面之间的区别和联系，界定了本文对评价客体的研究重点——企业战略在企业整体及企业战略业务单元中运行的过程和结果，并着重分析了战略业务单元作为企业战略运行载体的特点。战略业绩评价的目标包括关键成功要素的确定、提供业绩指标完成情况的比较信息和提供战略控制与协调方面的信息。
第四，战略业绩评价指标体系总体框架的设计。战略业绩评价指标的质量特征包括相关性、准确性、可理解性和及时性四个方面；评价指标体系的设计原则包括目标一致原则、权变原则、可操作性原则和均衡互补原则，它们是确保指标体系达到其质量要求的基本原则。本文提出的财务与非财务指标、定量指标和定性指标、先行指标和滞后指标、内部指标与外部指标的均衡互补是在前人研究基础上的创新表述。战略业绩评价指标体系的总体框架应满足可控性和完整性的要求，并根据企业的控制结构进行分层。本文设计了财务指标与非财务指标相结合的总体框架。财务指标以经济增加值（EVA）为起点，结合传统财务指标，共计22项；非财务指标分别反映了企业的客户和市场能力、内部业务流程、员工及创新能力、公司治理能力、与政府、社区关系及供应商关系等六个层面，共计46项指标。这个指标体系总体框架为企业建立适合自身特点的业绩评价指标体系提供了参考。本文进一步定义并说明了各项具体指标，并对重要指标在使用上的利弊进行了诠释。
第五，战略业绩评价标准的确立。战略业绩评价标准设计的原则包括目标引导性、可接受性、激励性、相对精确性和动态性。业绩评价可用的标准包括历史标准、预算/预测标准、经验标准、行业标准和竞争标准。战略业绩评价标准的建立应以企业的战略目标和战略规划为出发点，以评价指标体系的关键业绩指标为框架，针对本企业的历史数据、同行业相关数据和竞争对手关键资料的分析，结合对本企业内部组织背景及资源和能力的分析，对影响企业业绩的关键业绩标准进行预测，形成以战略目标为导向、以预测方法为核心、根据企业竞争环境和自身背景的变化随时进行调整的业绩评价标准体系。
第六，战略业绩评价方法的选择。战略业绩评价方法上的选择是综合评价方法，即以多元指标体系为基础，在评价指标、评价标准和评价结果之间建立一定的函数关系，通过计算每个指标的实际值，根据函数关系得出评价结论。综合评价方法对定量指标可采取综合指数法或功效系数法进行计分，对定性指标可采取综合分析判断法（因子赋值法）计分。综合评价方法的难点在于指标趋同化处理、指标无量纲化处理和指标权数的确定。本文尝试建立一种基于粗糙集理论和熵权法的综合评价模型。粗糙集法和熵权法的共同优点是它们克服了以前模糊评价中的评价人的主观性，它们均无需进行专家打分，克服了主观方法对指标筛选和权重确立的主观随意性，从而保证客观地反映指标间的现实关系，提高综合评价的有效性。粗糙集法在指标属性约减方面具有较强的功能，但在指标赋权方面尚不够成熟；熵权法的计算技术较为成熟，利用电子化的计算可以方便地得到客观的评价结果，并容易估计出评价结果的准确程度及误差大小，但它的缺陷在于对给出的指标没有进行有效的删减。本研究为了扬长避短，采取的评价模型首先利用粗糙集法对指标体系进行约减，将一些影响较小或者意义不大的指标予以删减，以提高评价指标的可控性；然后再采用熵权法对筛选后的指标进行赋权。
第七，基于粗糙集和熵权法的综合评价模型实证研究。本文选取了50家家电信息行业的上市公司2005年年报提供的公开信息，计算有关财务和非财务指标，先进行离散化，然后利用粗糙集进行指标的约减，再利用熵权法对各指标赋权，最后根据计算结果对这50家上市公司进行排名，以验证评价模型的客观性和有效性。通过模型的运算和对结果的分析，本文认为，该综合评价模型具有一定的科学性和可行性。将粗糙集法和熵权法相结合，并将财务指标和非财务指标共同纳入该综合评价模型进行计算和分析，是本文的创新点之一。
第八，中国企业应用战略业绩评价体系的环境研究。本文全面分析了中国企业战略管理外部和内部环境的特点，对企业在变化的政策环境、不确定的市场环境和各种组织内部挑战面前如何制定和实施战略进行了综合的论述。战略制定的关键在于把握SWOT分析、品牌定位和价值定位三个关键因素，战略实施的关键在于解决好组织构架的整合，消除组织壁垒、改进业务流程，并注重企业文化建设和员工技能的开发。研究的结论是，依据战略业绩评价体系整合战略管理框架，能够优化战略制定过程，协助战略的有效实施，并将战略制定与战略实施有效结合起来。
第九，战略业绩评价体系在中国企业应用的建议。本文对战略业绩评价体系在中国的应用提出了以下几个方面的建议。（1）处于不同生命周期的、不同类型的中国企业，应根据自身生命周期的特点，选择评价指标，并根据需要调整指标的权重；（2）公司治理结构对企业战略业绩的提高的影响体现在两个方面：一是经理人的激励问题和社会责任；二是如何构建合理的企业内部领导体系，确保关键人事安排和重大决策的正确性和有效性。企业应充分认识各公司治理主体对战略经营业绩的各种影响，力图改善公司治理结构，利用激励报酬机制，提升经理人业绩；（3）新时期的组织结构设计更加重视增强组织对环境的适应性和应变能力，作为战略管理系统中信息反馈机制的业绩评价系统也必须由提供事后的财务信息为主转向提供事前、事中和事后的财务与非财务综合信息。运用战略业绩评价体系在企业内部建立协调的纵向和横向联系，在不同的组织结构下都有获得成功的机会；（4）企业文化的四大特征——适应性、使命、参与性和一致性，对企业的业绩影响重大。利用企业文化测评的结果可以达到很多有价值的目的，企业文化测评能够揭示组织文化变革与企业战略经营业绩之间的联系，有助于企业建设以人为本、积极向上的企业文化，因而成为一项重要的战略管理工具。
本文对企业战略业绩评价系统进行了探索性研究，有许多问题还有待于进一步的研究和探讨，包括：（1）对于评价结果的分析进行深入的研究，以提升战略业绩评价体系在企业的实用价值。（2）在运用粗糙集法和熵权法建立综合评价模型并对模型进行验证方面，应进一步扩大样本公司指标的范围，并通过对企业进行实地考察，以获取更多的第一手资料，尝试将客观方法与主观方法有机地结合起来，争取推出实用性更强、更具说服力的综合评价模型。（3）鉴于知识经济时代无形资产在企业价值创造中的作用正在日益增强，未来的研究应在将智力资本纳入战略业绩评价体系的同时，考虑如何将其量化，并运用对智力资本的评价揭示价值创造的过程，体现以人的发展为主体的战略管理思想。（4）对于如何将战略业绩评价与企业的激励机制相结合，特别是如何解决特定评价标准下的激励机制设计问题，仍存在着很大的研究空间。（5）对于建立以可持续发展为指导思想的业绩评价体系的研究方兴未艾。如何使企业战略业绩评价体系的设计符合可持续发展目标的内涵，建立以可持续发展为导向的多目标评价体系，也将是一个前景广阔的研究领域。
关键词：企业战略 战略业绩评价 评价体系 评价指标 综合评价模型
ABSTRACT
Competition among business entities has become more and more severe since 1970s. Beside the concern over current existence, companies must focus more upon future development and have a strategic vision to the long-term strategic objectives. This has accelerated the transformation of strategic management from theory to practice. The key factors that determine the survival and development of modern business entities include both the exactitude of the strategy and the proper implementation of that strategy by managements. Strategic performance measurement plays an important role in implementing business strategies. Through information feedback, managements can make proper adjustments and modifications to organizational strategy in time. It has been difficult for those conventional financial measures, which acted as a core of performance measurement system, to meet the new requirements of modern business strategic control. An updated performance measurement system that closely combines key performance indicators with strategic planning process must be established in order to beat the challenge. It is also important to match the performance measurement system with the organization’s strategic objectives, and take the organization’s entire future vision into account, in order to support the realization of value-maximizing goal and improve the core competence of the organization.
The evolution of performance measurement theory and practice in western countries has experienced three phases: cost performance measurement, financial performance measurement, and strategic performance measurement period. The establishment of Standard Cost System and Variance Analysis System symbolizes the top development of cost performance measurement. For the first time costing is combined with forecast and control by performance measurement system and cost control is realized. This has improved productivity greatly. The most representative measurement system during financial performance measurement period is DuPont System, and financial measures play a leading role. New creative models arise during strategic performance measurement period. Performance Pyramid, Balanced Scorecard, Economic Value-added, and Performance Prism are still being taken into effect among business organizations in practice. Theorists and practitioners have been striving to make better use of these models.
The performance measurement practice in China has experienced an environmental transition from planned economy to market economy. Accordingly, the major concerns of performance measurement have been focused on product volume and product value, profit margin, economic structure and efficiency, social contribution, and the entire performance of an organization. However, there are still unsolved problems. This include: (1) Departure of strategy setting and strategy performing. (2) Lack communication between business units or departments. (3) Focusing only on financial measures and short-term effects, hence ignoring the effect of non-financial measures. (4) Use of information technology and quantitative measures could not ensure satisfactory operating results. The construction of organizational culture needs to be enhanced. (5) Lack unified information as to the entire organization’s performance and proper analytic approach, hence the usefulness of performance information is weakened.
This research aims at establishing a Strategic Performance Measurement System that is efficient for use in the reforming organizations in China. This performance measurement system is intended to provide information for the designers and conductors of an organization’s strategy. It also helps to execute strategy-oriented management control and parallels the goals and actions of strategy designers, conductors, internal business units, and employees. This will improve and sustain the core competence of an organization.
Strategic performance measurement is a component of Management Accounting. It also involves other disciplines such as Economics, Management, Accounting, Marketing, and Human Resource Management. The methodology of this research include literature review, comparative and taxonomic method, analytical and integrative method, epagogic and deduction method, and empirical research. The approach, main conclusions and innovations are presented as follows.
First, definitions and recent research status of strategic performance measurement. The related concepts include Performance, Business Performance and Strategic Performance Measurement. The role of strategic performance is to link strategic planning and strategy implementation. The context from which strategic performance measurement arises is also discussed. By literature review three areas about strategic performance measurement are found. They are: (1) Research about the role and function of performance measurement information; (2) Performance measurement models that mainly contain financial measures---cybernetic view; (3) Strategic performance measurement models that integrate financial and non-financial measures---Holistic view. Both research fields come down to the role of performance measurement, measurement system design, performance measurement models and their effects to the organization. Based upon the latest research results of western countries, academics research about performance measurement in China has been keeping in line with international level.
Second, theoretic basis of this research. Strategic performance measurement system is established upon a series of economics and management theories. Agency theory portrays the aim of performance measurement. Stakeholder theory forms the standpoints of measurement. Cybernetic theory states that business strategic performance measurement system plays an important part in management control system, yet it poses a complete control process by itself. It is a combination of feedback control, synchronic control and pre-feedback control. Contingency theory acquires strategic performance measurement system break the limitation of traditional static state of performance measurement pattern. Behavioral theory demands a more important status for human factor in strategic performance measurement system. Incentive theory lodges further requirements to the scientific nature of strategic performance measurement system. Finally, strategic management theory forms the theoretic basis of strategic performance measurement on the one hand, and leads business organizations to bring performance measurement system into strategic management course on the other hand. The long-term objectives of the organization can be realized by putting performance measurement mechanism in force.
Third, the subject, object, and objectives of strategic performance measurement. Strategic performance measurement system is composed of subject of measurement, object of measurement, objectives of measurement, evaluation indicators, evaluation standards, evaluation methods, and measurement reports. By comparing the context of solo-subject view which concentrates only on stockholders and the multi-subject view which involves different classes of stakeholders, the necessity of narrowing down subject of measurement is revealed. With the consideration of the strategic characteristics, strategic performance measurement should belong to one of the internal business management activities with an aim of realizing strategic goal of the organization. Therefore, the subject of strategic performance measurement should be oriented as the designers and conductors of strategy inside a business organization. In other words, they are internal subjects who concern the demands of other stakeholders. When it comes to object of measurement, the distinction and relationship among performance of organizational level, department (or unit, group) level, and staff level must first be analyzed. The object of measurement in this research is addressed as the operating process and results of business strategy at both organizational level and strategic unit level. Furthermore, the characteristics of strategic units as carriers of business strategy are analyzed in detail. The objectivities of strategic performance measurement include the determination of Critical Success Factors and providing information about the comparative performance accomplishment indicator, and information about strategic control and strategic congruence.
Fourth, designing the framework of strategic performance evaluation index system. The quality characteristics of strategic performance indictors include relevance, objectivity, understandability and timeliness. The basic principles of index system design, which ensure the quality characteristics of performance indicators, include goal congruence, contingency, feasibility and equilibrium. The equilibrium between financial and non-financial indicators, quantitative and qualitative indictors, leading and lagging indicators, internal and external indicators is newly addressed by this research based on previous works of this area. The general framework of strategic performance evaluation index system should meet the needs of controllability and integrality, and break down to different levels according to the control structure. The general framework designed by this research includes financial and non-financial measures. Financial measures start with Economic Value Added. Combined with traditional financial measures there are 22 indicators in total. Non-financial measures indicate customer and market ability, internal business process, employee and innovation ability, corporate governance ability, the relations with government and community, and the relations with suppliers. For the six dimensions there are 46 non-financial indicators totally. Companies can choose indicators that suit their own characters by referring to this framework. The definitions of indicators and their pros and cons are also illustrated in this research.
Fifth, setting strategic performance evaluation standards. The basic principles of standard setting include action-leading, acceptability, incentive, relative accuracy and dynamic. The accessible performance evaluation standards include historical standard, budget/forecast standard, industry standard and competitive standard. The standard setting should start with an understanding of organization’s strategic goal and strategic plans, base on the key performance indicators from the evaluation index system, analysis the historical data of the organization and related data from the same industry and competitors. The forecasted standard that affects the organization’s performance should also be generated through analysis to the organization’s operating context, resources, and capability. The strategic performance measurement standard system should be one that is strategic goal-oriented, forecast-based, and adjusted according to any changes in competition environment and operation context.
Sixth, choosing performance evaluation methods. Comprehensive evaluation methods that based on multiple index system should be chosen. A function among evaluation indicators, standards and results should be set, and a conclusion made through calculation of indicators. Quantitative measures can be scored by Comprehensive Index Method or Effective-Coefficient Method. Qualitative measures can be scored by Factor Weight-Making Method. The difficulties in comprehensive evaluation methods include data assimilation, non-measurement treatment, and weight-making. A comprehensive evaluation model that integrates Rough Set Theory and Entropy Method is established for strategic performance measurement. The common advantage of rough set and entropy methods is that both of them have overcome the subjectivity of evaluation in previous methods. They abandon expert-scoring method, which is a typical subjective approach and the result might be distorted by personal prejudice when selecting indicators and making weights for different measures. This model, to some extent, ensures an objective reflection to the real relations between measures and enhances the effectiveness of the comprehensive evaluation methods. Rough set method has a strong power in the deduction of data attributes, but is not good enough at weight-making. Entropy method has ready-for-use calculation techniques and the evaluation results can be easily accessed by using electronic software. Errors can also be easily estimated and accuracy of evaluation results can be sized-up. The shortage of entropy method is that it makes no indicator deduction. In this research, the comprehensive evaluation model uses rough set method to deduct measures in order that some measures of little effect can be deleted and the controllability of the measuring system can be improved. The weight-making task is then left to entropy method to complete the evaluation process.
Seventh, an empirical research using comprehensive evaluation model of rough set and entropy methods. 50 listed companies from electronic and information industry have been chosen for the study. The steps that followed are: calculating financial and non-financial measures according to the 2005 published annual reports, dispersing them with SPSS software, deducting indicators with rough set software named ROSETTA, making weights to the deducted indicators using entropy method by EXCEL, rating 50 listed companies based on the results to validate the effectiveness of this model. Calculation and analysis show that this comprehensive evaluation model is reasonable and feasible. Combining rough set and entropy methods and take non-financial measures into the model are both innovations of this research.
Eighth, an analysis to the environment of implementing strategic performance measurement system in China. Both external and internal environmental characters have been analyzed for the strategic management in business organizations of China. The issues of how to frame and implement strategy under changing policies, uncertain markets and various internal challenges are discussed. Three important factors must be emphasized. They are SWOT analysis, brand orientation, and value orientation. The keys to the strategic implementation are integrating organizational structure, removing organizational barriers, improving business processes, and paying more attention to the construction of organizational culture and the development of staff ability. It is concluded that an integrated strategic management framework based upon strategic performance measurement system can optimize the strategy setting process, help to implement strategies efficiently, and link strategy setting with strategy implementation.
Ninth, suggestions to the implementation of strategic performance measurement system in China. Four suggestions are addressed in this research. They are: (1) For business entities of different life cycles, different evaluation indicators should be chosen and weights of indictors adjusted accordingly. (2) Corporate governance structure influences the improvement of strategic performance in two ways: management incentives and social responsibilities, and how to compose the internal leadership system to ensure the validity and effectiveness of critical personnel appointment and other important decisions. Companies should figure out the various effects by different corporate governance principals in order to refine the corporate governance structure, and make good use of incentive compensation mechanism to improve managements’ performance. (3) The new organizational structure design focuses more on the enhancement of the adaptability to the environment. As an information feedback mechanism in strategic management system, strategic performance measurement system must provide both beforehand, in-course and ex post financial and non-financial information. Establishing coherent transverse and vertical relations inside organizations helps to gain success at differently structured organizations. (4) The characteristics of organizational culture have significant influence to an organization’s performance. The result of cultural assessment contributes to various valuable aims. It insights out the relationship between the change of organizational culture and strategic performance, thus helps to build people-oriented, positive organizational culture.
Further research can be cited amongst the following topics: (1) Research on result analysis which improves the practicality of strategic performance measurement system. (2) Sample data should be broadened when using comprehensive evaluation model based on rough set and entropy methods in future empirical research. More on-the-spot investigation should be conducted to gain first-hand information. Objective methods should be combined with subjective methods to pursue more feasible and persuasive comprehensive evaluation models. (3) At a time of knowledge economy, intangible asset plays an important role in the value creation of business entities. Intellectual capital should be included in the strategic performance measurement system, and future study should focus on its quantitative measurement. The evaluation of intellectual capital could reveal more facts in the value creation procedure, and reflect the strategic management idea of regarding human development as the core conduct. (4) Research on combining incentive mechanism and strategic performance measurement, especially the incentive system design based on specific evaluation standards. (5) Research on establishing sustainable development oriented strategic performance measurement system has emerged. This topic has a broad research vision. How to make the strategic performance measurement system design be in line with the sustainable development goal, and how to establish a sustainable development oriented multiple-objective performance measurement system, further studies are still under way.
Key words: Business Strategy Strategic Performance Measurement Measurement System Evaluation Indicators Comprehensive Evaluation Model
查看更多内容请登录“资料库”->“论文资料库”
