- Teks
- Sejarah
Thus, the second step of BSC implem
Thus, the second step of BSC implementation requires many people in
units throughout the organization to develop scorecards for their particular segments of the
business.
In the remaining steps of BSC implementation, managers set targets and budgets (step
three), and over time, receive feedback on the strategies of the business units and the firm
by evaluating performance relative to the scorecard measures (step four). These activities
parallel those performed in non-BSC firms so we do not discuss them in detail. We now
describe the types of performance measures included in the BSC.
Dependent Measure
All subjects evaluated the manager of RadWear as well as the manager of WorkWear.
We want to determine whether performance on common and unique measures affects subjects’
evaluations of the division managers. If common measures affect these evaluations,
we will observe an interaction of division and common measures. If unique measures affect
these evaluations, we will find an interaction of division and unique measures.
This study shows that unique measures in a business unit’s BSC may be underweighted
in performance evaluation. This section describes implications of this result, acknowledges
some limitations of the study, and discusses special research challenges arising in studies
of real-world accounting and management phenomena.
Our experimental design has limitations. First, our experimental participants were not
involved in development of the units’ scorecards. Thus, we are unable to investigate the
effect of such involvement, although greater involvement might increase reliance on all the
BSC measures, including the unique measures. However, our experiment captures the hierarchical
nature of business organizations where higher-level managers evaluate lower-level
unit managers, and these higher-level managers are not directly involved in unit BSC development.
A second limitation is that our participants may have been novices in the use
of the BSC, and they did not necessarily have business experience in the retail and apparel
sector from which we developed our case materials. Third, although our experiment carefully
controlled performance on common and unique measures, it is possible that the perceived
performance relative to the targets differed for the various groups of measures. While
our pilot tests and manipulation checks did not reveal any such problems, this possibility
cannot be ruled out.
Our evidence concerning the disregard or underuse of unique measures in evaluating
business unit performance has two major implications. First, our evidence that unique
measures are disregarded in the ex post performance evaluation of a business unit’s manager
has significant implications for the unit manager’s ex ante decision-making strategy.
Holmstrom and Milgrom (1991) show analytically that agents’ decisions are affected by
items that are included in their performance evaluation and compensation. They also show
that items not included in evaluation and compensation of an agent will have little effect
on the agent’s decisions. Psychological research (e.g., McNamara and Fisch 1964) has
shown this same result experimentally. Thus, our results suggest that common measures
that drive the unit managers’ evaluations will have more effect on unit managers’ decisions
than will the unique measures that are not used in the evaluations.8
units throughout the organization to develop scorecards for their particular segments of the
business.
In the remaining steps of BSC implementation, managers set targets and budgets (step
three), and over time, receive feedback on the strategies of the business units and the firm
by evaluating performance relative to the scorecard measures (step four). These activities
parallel those performed in non-BSC firms so we do not discuss them in detail. We now
describe the types of performance measures included in the BSC.
Dependent Measure
All subjects evaluated the manager of RadWear as well as the manager of WorkWear.
We want to determine whether performance on common and unique measures affects subjects’
evaluations of the division managers. If common measures affect these evaluations,
we will observe an interaction of division and common measures. If unique measures affect
these evaluations, we will find an interaction of division and unique measures.
This study shows that unique measures in a business unit’s BSC may be underweighted
in performance evaluation. This section describes implications of this result, acknowledges
some limitations of the study, and discusses special research challenges arising in studies
of real-world accounting and management phenomena.
Our experimental design has limitations. First, our experimental participants were not
involved in development of the units’ scorecards. Thus, we are unable to investigate the
effect of such involvement, although greater involvement might increase reliance on all the
BSC measures, including the unique measures. However, our experiment captures the hierarchical
nature of business organizations where higher-level managers evaluate lower-level
unit managers, and these higher-level managers are not directly involved in unit BSC development.
A second limitation is that our participants may have been novices in the use
of the BSC, and they did not necessarily have business experience in the retail and apparel
sector from which we developed our case materials. Third, although our experiment carefully
controlled performance on common and unique measures, it is possible that the perceived
performance relative to the targets differed for the various groups of measures. While
our pilot tests and manipulation checks did not reveal any such problems, this possibility
cannot be ruled out.
Our evidence concerning the disregard or underuse of unique measures in evaluating
business unit performance has two major implications. First, our evidence that unique
measures are disregarded in the ex post performance evaluation of a business unit’s manager
has significant implications for the unit manager’s ex ante decision-making strategy.
Holmstrom and Milgrom (1991) show analytically that agents’ decisions are affected by
items that are included in their performance evaluation and compensation. They also show
that items not included in evaluation and compensation of an agent will have little effect
on the agent’s decisions. Psychological research (e.g., McNamara and Fisch 1964) has
shown this same result experimentally. Thus, our results suggest that common measures
that drive the unit managers’ evaluations will have more effect on unit managers’ decisions
than will the unique measures that are not used in the evaluations.8
0/5000
Dengan demikian, langkah kedua pelaksanaan BSC membutuhkan banyak orang dalam
unit seluruh organisasi untuk mengembangkan scorecard untuk mereka segmen
bisnis.
dalam langkah-langkah yang tersisa pelaksanaan BSC, manajer menetapkan target dan anggaran (langkah
tiga), dan dari waktu ke waktu, menerima umpan balik pada strategi unit bisnis dan perusahaan
dengan mengevaluasi kinerja relatif terhadap langkah-langkah scorecard (langkah empat). Kegiatan ini
paralel mereka dilakukan di perusahaan non-BSC sehingga kita tidak membahas secara rinci. Kita sekarang
menggambarkan jenis-jenis ukuran kinerja yang termasuk dalam BSC.
tergantung ukuran
semua mata pelajaran dievaluasi manajer RadWear serta manajer WorkWear.
Kami ingin menentukan apakah kinerja pada langkah-langkah Umum dan unik mempengaruhi subyek
evaluasi dari manajer Divisi. Jika langkah-langkah umum mempengaruhi evaluasi ini,
kita akan mengamati interaksi Divisi dan langkah-langkah umum. Jika langkah-langkah yang unik mempengaruhi
evaluasi ini, kita akan menemukan interaksi Divisi dan langkah-langkah unik.
Studi ini menunjukkan bahwa langkah-langkah yang unik di sebuah unit bisnis BSC mungkin underweighted
dalam evaluasi kinerja. Bagian ini menjelaskan implikasi dari hasil ini, mengakui
beberapa keterbatasan penelitian, dan membahas tantangan-tantangan khusus yang timbul dalam studi
dunia nyata akuntansi dan manajemen fenomena.
desain eksperimental kami memiliki keterbatasan. Pertama, peserta percobaan kami bukanlah
terlibat dalam pengembangan unit-unit Scorecard. Dengan demikian, kita tidak mampu menyelidiki
efek keterlibatan tersebut, meskipun keterlibatan mungkin meningkatkan ketergantungan pada semua
BSC langkah-langkah, termasuk langkah-langkah yang unik. Namun, percobaan kami menangkap hirarkis
sifat organisasi bisnis mana tingkat yang lebih tinggi manajer mengevaluasi tingkat rendah
Manajer unit, dan manajer tingkat yang lebih tinggi ini tidak secara langsung terlibat dalam unit pengembangan BSC.
pembatasan kedua adalah bahwa peserta kami mungkin telah pemula dalam penggunaan
BSC, dan mereka tidak selalu memiliki pengalaman dalam ritel dan pakaian bisnis
sektor yang kami mengembangkan bahan-bahan kasus kami. Ketiga, meskipun percobaan kami dengan hati-hati
dikendalikan kinerja pada langkah-langkah Umum dan unik, sangat mungkin yang dirasakan
performa relatif terhadap sasaran yang berbeda untuk berbagai kelompok tindakan. Sementara
tes pilot dan manipulasi cek kami tidak mengungkapkan masalah tersebut, kemungkinan ini
tidak dapat memerintah out.
bukti-bukti kami tentang mengabaikan atau underuse langkah-langkah yang unik dalam mengevaluasi
kinerja unit bisnis yang memiliki dua implikasi yang besar. Pertama, bukti-bukti kita unik
langkah-langkah yang dihitung dalam ex posting evaluasi kinerja dari manajer unit bisnis
memiliki implikasi signifikan untuk manajer unit di ex ante pengambilan keputusan strategi.
Holmstrom dan Milgrom (1991) menunjukkan analitis bahwa agen keputusan dipengaruhi oleh
item yang termasuk dalam evaluasi kinerja dan kompensasi. Mereka juga menunjukkan
bahwa barang-barang yang tidak disertakan dalam evaluasi dan kompensasi agen akan memiliki sedikit efek
agen keputusan. Penelitian psikologis (misalnya, McNamara dan Fisch 1964) telah
menunjukkan hasil yang sama ini secara eksperimental. Dengan demikian, hasil kami menunjukkan langkah-langkah umum bahwa
yang mendorong unit evaluasi manajer akan memiliki efek lebih pada unit manajer keputusan
daripada langkah-langkah yang unik yang tidak digunakan dalam evaluations.8
unit seluruh organisasi untuk mengembangkan scorecard untuk mereka segmen
bisnis.
dalam langkah-langkah yang tersisa pelaksanaan BSC, manajer menetapkan target dan anggaran (langkah
tiga), dan dari waktu ke waktu, menerima umpan balik pada strategi unit bisnis dan perusahaan
dengan mengevaluasi kinerja relatif terhadap langkah-langkah scorecard (langkah empat). Kegiatan ini
paralel mereka dilakukan di perusahaan non-BSC sehingga kita tidak membahas secara rinci. Kita sekarang
menggambarkan jenis-jenis ukuran kinerja yang termasuk dalam BSC.
tergantung ukuran
semua mata pelajaran dievaluasi manajer RadWear serta manajer WorkWear.
Kami ingin menentukan apakah kinerja pada langkah-langkah Umum dan unik mempengaruhi subyek
evaluasi dari manajer Divisi. Jika langkah-langkah umum mempengaruhi evaluasi ini,
kita akan mengamati interaksi Divisi dan langkah-langkah umum. Jika langkah-langkah yang unik mempengaruhi
evaluasi ini, kita akan menemukan interaksi Divisi dan langkah-langkah unik.
Studi ini menunjukkan bahwa langkah-langkah yang unik di sebuah unit bisnis BSC mungkin underweighted
dalam evaluasi kinerja. Bagian ini menjelaskan implikasi dari hasil ini, mengakui
beberapa keterbatasan penelitian, dan membahas tantangan-tantangan khusus yang timbul dalam studi
dunia nyata akuntansi dan manajemen fenomena.
desain eksperimental kami memiliki keterbatasan. Pertama, peserta percobaan kami bukanlah
terlibat dalam pengembangan unit-unit Scorecard. Dengan demikian, kita tidak mampu menyelidiki
efek keterlibatan tersebut, meskipun keterlibatan mungkin meningkatkan ketergantungan pada semua
BSC langkah-langkah, termasuk langkah-langkah yang unik. Namun, percobaan kami menangkap hirarkis
sifat organisasi bisnis mana tingkat yang lebih tinggi manajer mengevaluasi tingkat rendah
Manajer unit, dan manajer tingkat yang lebih tinggi ini tidak secara langsung terlibat dalam unit pengembangan BSC.
pembatasan kedua adalah bahwa peserta kami mungkin telah pemula dalam penggunaan
BSC, dan mereka tidak selalu memiliki pengalaman dalam ritel dan pakaian bisnis
sektor yang kami mengembangkan bahan-bahan kasus kami. Ketiga, meskipun percobaan kami dengan hati-hati
dikendalikan kinerja pada langkah-langkah Umum dan unik, sangat mungkin yang dirasakan
performa relatif terhadap sasaran yang berbeda untuk berbagai kelompok tindakan. Sementara
tes pilot dan manipulasi cek kami tidak mengungkapkan masalah tersebut, kemungkinan ini
tidak dapat memerintah out.
bukti-bukti kami tentang mengabaikan atau underuse langkah-langkah yang unik dalam mengevaluasi
kinerja unit bisnis yang memiliki dua implikasi yang besar. Pertama, bukti-bukti kita unik
langkah-langkah yang dihitung dalam ex posting evaluasi kinerja dari manajer unit bisnis
memiliki implikasi signifikan untuk manajer unit di ex ante pengambilan keputusan strategi.
Holmstrom dan Milgrom (1991) menunjukkan analitis bahwa agen keputusan dipengaruhi oleh
item yang termasuk dalam evaluasi kinerja dan kompensasi. Mereka juga menunjukkan
bahwa barang-barang yang tidak disertakan dalam evaluasi dan kompensasi agen akan memiliki sedikit efek
agen keputusan. Penelitian psikologis (misalnya, McNamara dan Fisch 1964) telah
menunjukkan hasil yang sama ini secara eksperimental. Dengan demikian, hasil kami menunjukkan langkah-langkah umum bahwa
yang mendorong unit evaluasi manajer akan memiliki efek lebih pada unit manajer keputusan
daripada langkah-langkah yang unik yang tidak digunakan dalam evaluations.8
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Thus, the second step of BSC implementation requires many people in
units throughout the organization to develop scorecards for their particular segments of the
business.
In the remaining steps of BSC implementation, managers set targets and budgets (step
three), and over time, receive feedback on the strategies of the business units and the firm
by evaluating performance relative to the scorecard measures (step four). These activities
parallel those performed in non-BSC firms so we do not discuss them in detail. We now
describe the types of performance measures included in the BSC.
Dependent Measure
All subjects evaluated the manager of RadWear as well as the manager of WorkWear.
We want to determine whether performance on common and unique measures affects subjects’
evaluations of the division managers. If common measures affect these evaluations,
we will observe an interaction of division and common measures. If unique measures affect
these evaluations, we will find an interaction of division and unique measures.
This study shows that unique measures in a business unit’s BSC may be underweighted
in performance evaluation. This section describes implications of this result, acknowledges
some limitations of the study, and discusses special research challenges arising in studies
of real-world accounting and management phenomena.
Our experimental design has limitations. First, our experimental participants were not
involved in development of the units’ scorecards. Thus, we are unable to investigate the
effect of such involvement, although greater involvement might increase reliance on all the
BSC measures, including the unique measures. However, our experiment captures the hierarchical
nature of business organizations where higher-level managers evaluate lower-level
unit managers, and these higher-level managers are not directly involved in unit BSC development.
A second limitation is that our participants may have been novices in the use
of the BSC, and they did not necessarily have business experience in the retail and apparel
sector from which we developed our case materials. Third, although our experiment carefully
controlled performance on common and unique measures, it is possible that the perceived
performance relative to the targets differed for the various groups of measures. While
our pilot tests and manipulation checks did not reveal any such problems, this possibility
cannot be ruled out.
Our evidence concerning the disregard or underuse of unique measures in evaluating
business unit performance has two major implications. First, our evidence that unique
measures are disregarded in the ex post performance evaluation of a business unit’s manager
has significant implications for the unit manager’s ex ante decision-making strategy.
Holmstrom and Milgrom (1991) show analytically that agents’ decisions are affected by
items that are included in their performance evaluation and compensation. They also show
that items not included in evaluation and compensation of an agent will have little effect
on the agent’s decisions. Psychological research (e.g., McNamara and Fisch 1964) has
shown this same result experimentally. Thus, our results suggest that common measures
that drive the unit managers’ evaluations will have more effect on unit managers’ decisions
than will the unique measures that are not used in the evaluations.8
units throughout the organization to develop scorecards for their particular segments of the
business.
In the remaining steps of BSC implementation, managers set targets and budgets (step
three), and over time, receive feedback on the strategies of the business units and the firm
by evaluating performance relative to the scorecard measures (step four). These activities
parallel those performed in non-BSC firms so we do not discuss them in detail. We now
describe the types of performance measures included in the BSC.
Dependent Measure
All subjects evaluated the manager of RadWear as well as the manager of WorkWear.
We want to determine whether performance on common and unique measures affects subjects’
evaluations of the division managers. If common measures affect these evaluations,
we will observe an interaction of division and common measures. If unique measures affect
these evaluations, we will find an interaction of division and unique measures.
This study shows that unique measures in a business unit’s BSC may be underweighted
in performance evaluation. This section describes implications of this result, acknowledges
some limitations of the study, and discusses special research challenges arising in studies
of real-world accounting and management phenomena.
Our experimental design has limitations. First, our experimental participants were not
involved in development of the units’ scorecards. Thus, we are unable to investigate the
effect of such involvement, although greater involvement might increase reliance on all the
BSC measures, including the unique measures. However, our experiment captures the hierarchical
nature of business organizations where higher-level managers evaluate lower-level
unit managers, and these higher-level managers are not directly involved in unit BSC development.
A second limitation is that our participants may have been novices in the use
of the BSC, and they did not necessarily have business experience in the retail and apparel
sector from which we developed our case materials. Third, although our experiment carefully
controlled performance on common and unique measures, it is possible that the perceived
performance relative to the targets differed for the various groups of measures. While
our pilot tests and manipulation checks did not reveal any such problems, this possibility
cannot be ruled out.
Our evidence concerning the disregard or underuse of unique measures in evaluating
business unit performance has two major implications. First, our evidence that unique
measures are disregarded in the ex post performance evaluation of a business unit’s manager
has significant implications for the unit manager’s ex ante decision-making strategy.
Holmstrom and Milgrom (1991) show analytically that agents’ decisions are affected by
items that are included in their performance evaluation and compensation. They also show
that items not included in evaluation and compensation of an agent will have little effect
on the agent’s decisions. Psychological research (e.g., McNamara and Fisch 1964) has
shown this same result experimentally. Thus, our results suggest that common measures
that drive the unit managers’ evaluations will have more effect on unit managers’ decisions
than will the unique measures that are not used in the evaluations.8
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.
- If only I dared to say love. Now I am fe
- menerimanya dan terus memikirkannya
- Good night have nice dreams darl
- 1.What is your brother2.He is playing fo
- Repent and believe!
- 1.What is your grandma doing2. She is se
- Apa masih banjir
- CadetMarksmanSniper eliteAuthenticCustom
- you are my everything for me
- I just wanna be with you, not without yo
- Fear God and depart from evil!
- 1. What is lika doing2.She is swimming 3
- 1.What is yulinda doing 2.She is sleepin
- Apa yang ingin kamu tanyakan
- Aku prihatin melihat kondisinya
- immer jegek gati
- My relatif
- CampaignChallenges
- bee yun su kalau ada salah saya minta ma
- Solo survival
- kalau ada salah saya minta maaf yang seb
- HellfireBeachhead
- Getting sick
- 1.What is your brother2.He is playing fo
