Organizational performance measurement and corresponding metrics have recently received courtesy from the underlying researchers and the practitioners (Rajiv, 2013, 90). The performance measurement and metrics possess a significant role in the process of setting goals, assessing performance and determination of prospects courses of engagements. Companies normally focus on the measuring of the returns on invested capital (ROIC) at the expense of measuring the individuals’ contributions. Numerous modern companies such as Wal-Mart, Intel, General Motors, and Mobil normally gauge their performance via application and utilization of systems that mainly measure internal financial outcomes systems (Epstein, 2008, 50-51). These systems are mainly based on the metrics does not take into consideration adequate notice of the actual engines of the wealth creation such as knowledge, associations, reputations and other supplementary intangibles developed by talented populace (Gordon, 2008, 62). Increasingly, companies develop wealth by converting raw intangibles into the corresponding organized skills, copyrights, brands, software, buyer bases, knowledgeable capital and modern networks that advance profit for every worker and ROIC. These intangibles represent real capital in regard to the delivering cash returns though the prevailing sources of the returns are normally intangible.
Most of the appreciated capital that companies own today is exactly intangible rather financial. Companies have resorted redesign in their financial performance metrics for the present metrics for this new age. Moreover, companies that are incapable to measure the underlying performance of their underlying product advancement procedures have little coincidental of efficaciously competing with today’s best-in-class product makers (Nambiar & Poess, 2009, 258). Metric-driven development programs distinguish industry leaders from the rest of the underlying pack. Companies must thus be in the position to comprehend their performance and the corresponding performance impacts on their financial bottom most line incase their development initiatives delivering an expressive return on the investment (Gordon, 2008, 88). Most companies have a problem of gearing away in the measurement of the financial performance that is fundamental in earlier industrial stage when the corresponding capital is enjoyed by the strategists and investors (Rajiv, 2013, 96). Black Dust Software is presently experiencing with the old method of performance measurement as the system is mainly measuring internal financial outcomes (Ravenscraft, &. Scherer. 2009, 105). Moreover, this kind of system that is utilized within the Black Dust Software company is based on the metrics that do not take into consideration adequate notice of the actual engines of the wealth creation such as knowledge, associations, reputations and other supplementary intangibles developed by talented populace (Gordon, 2008, 62). Conversely, General Motors metrics in of develop wealth by converting raw intangibles into the corresponding organized skills, copyrights, brands, software, buyer bases, knowledgeable capital and modern networks that advance profit for every worker and ROIC.
Nevertheless, companies normally fill their yearly reports within the underlying information concerning the utilization of the capital but failing to reflect adequately on their prevailing utilization of escalated drive wealth generation within the current digital economy. The advancement of the external financial reports in regard to the generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) ranks amidst the existing principle foundations of the modern global capital marketplace (Nambiar & Poess, 2009, 265).
Performance measurement systems were mainly advanced as the sole means of monitoring and maintaining organizational control, which is the process of ensuring that an organization aims at strategies that result to the accomplishment of its entire objectives and aims (Gordon, 2008, 80-82). Performance measures, the chief tools for performance measurement systems, play a vital role in each organization as they frequently viewed as forward looking indicators that aid management to predict a company’s economic performance, and numerous times depict the need for probable alterations within operations (Epstein, 2008, 58).
Nevertheless, the choice of performance measures is one of the most fundamental challenges encrustation organizations. Poorly chosen performance measures routinely develop the wrong signals for managers resulting to poor decisions and undesirable outcomes (Gregory, 1997, 989). There are massive concealed costs in incorrect method of performance measures. Stakeholders pay the underlying bill in the form of the overinvestment and acquisitions that are not profitable (Rajiv, 2013, 102). Moreover, it is not the amateur management but the incorrect chosen performance measures, which in turn push management to take inappropriate decisions (Gregory, 1997, 1001). Performance measures might be characterized as the financial and corresponding non-financial. The study mainly concerns the financial performance measures.
The perceived inadequacies within the traditional accounting performance measures have recently motivated a variety of the measurement innovations, which mainly entails economic value measures (Epstein, 2008, 86-88). In the last past years, an accounting number of the underlying consultants, corporate executives, institutional investors and corresponding scholars have taken part in regard to the debate on most suitable means of measuring performance. Prevailing consultants are normally willing to demonstrate mastery of their existing recommended performance models. Moreover, corporate managers depict distinctly that the performance models approved by the underlying companies are the most suitable and successful (Gordon, 2008, 75-76). Institutional investors debate the recompenses of alternative performance models for transmission underperforming companies within their portfolios. The development of performance measurement models and corresponding test the required degree to which the prevailing performance examination and incentive reimbursement systems that stimulate management pronouncements and the performance itself (Ravenscraft, &. Scherer, 2009, 102).
Traditional performance measurement systems were developed at the period when decision making was focused at the center of the organization coupled with responsibilities for decision making were extremely undoubtedly defined (Rajiv, 2013, 155-157). These performance measurement systems were mainly designed to measure accountability to confirm with people’s budget. Nevertheless, during the last dual decades it was extensively depicts that the majority of the performance systems disastrous to capture and enhance a corporation’s policy, producing underprivileged information resulting to mistaken decisions (Gregory, 1997, 998). VBM approach is mainly based on the NPV techniques, FCF, and corresponding cost of capital has its main impartial the intensification of the shareholder value. In the past years, SHV approach and corresponding VBM approach have become extremely popular in both decision making tool coupled with enticement compensation system (Gordon, 2008, 92-94). Therefore, value-based performance measures such as Economic Value Management have recently spread in the entire Europe gaining acceptance by numerous companies.
Empirical evidence on earnings mainly entails association amidst the capital markets and financial statements in regard to the earning and stock prices (Rajiv, 2013, 88-90). Previously large amount of relevant research depicts that association for the international market. Utilization of diverse methodologies; a considerable number depicts that the documented from 1950 to1988 in the US market displays alterations within the earning have methodical economic determinants that are probable association with variation within the securities expected returns especially since the earning is the main accounting ROE (Nambiar & Poess, 2009, 245-246). The evaluation of the usefulness of the operating income, net income and corresponding comprehensive income, which measure the usefulness in the form of the relative information content and incremental information content. Based on the underlying sample that averaged 922 firms annually for eighteen years the operating income feebly subjugated the net income and both of the OI and corresponding NI subjugated CI in information content German market investigated the association amidst the stock returns, earnings and a variant mainly called DVFA thus concluding that both kinds of earning relates with the stick returns with the latter being more important (Gregory, 1997, 981-2). Moreover, the evidence for the underlying Cyprus stock market suggest that earning levels and alteration in earnings are fundamental in the elaboration of the stock return within an emerging stock market (Gordon, 2008, 96). Assessment of accounting figures across Germany, Norway and UK suggestively associates to the present stock prices across all three countries with Germany scoring the relative and UK reaching the uppermost one (Rajiv, 2013, 152).
Empirical evidence on the underlying value based performance measures encompass whole results of the prevailing value relevance literature, which suggest that accounting based on the corresponding information can theoretically influence stock prices (Gordon, 2008, 86-87). The empirical literature also depicts that earnings generally control most other measures in explaining stock returns. Nevertheless, the most recent literature suggests that the prevailing earnings ought not to be relied upon since they possess little direct association to wealth creation (Nambiar & Poess, 2009, 265). Therefore, research into the information content of other supplementary variables that entail cash flows has escalated largely for dual reasons in regard to the ostensible limitations within earnings numbers and the increased require and demand the forecasters and corresponding investors to appropriately classify the prevailing value of the companies (Graves, & Waddock, 2004, 87).
Nevertheless, whilst the prevailing traditional accounting performance measures are popular measures for the financial performance measurement, they are frequently under the austere critique since they do not take into contemplation the cost of the capital thus influencing the accrual based accounting agreements (Rajiv, 2013, 175). Conversely, modern value based measures are encouraged as the measures of the company’s actual productivity. Because the value has become of principal concern to the corresponding investors, supporters of value based on the underlying measures entitlement that those measures are the solely performance measures tied unswervingly to the stock’s intrinsic value (Gordon, 2008, 98). EVA supporters normally argue that EVA and corresponding stock prices appear to possess trend to move together. In addition, they assert that the underlying preeminence of the information contained within the EVA when compared to the traditional accounting figures (Epstein, 2008, 105-106). The claims have been empirically tested by majorly scholars but with self-contradictory and diverse outcomes.
Performance measurement systems mainly emphasis on substantial attention and realization of effective management performance of the organizations, nevertheless; it is fundamental that the underlying measure of administration systems utilized that are applicable and appropriate for the environment and approaches of the organization (Mahoney, T. 2011, 144-5). With the dynamic and speedily altering of environment in most of organizations, it is significant that every organization efficiently administers their measurement system in order to remains appropriate and offer vital information that is relevant to the issues that are of the present significance (Karl, 2007, 234-5).
As asserts Ravenscraft and Scherer (2009, 104), the performance measurement metrics distinctly connect to the operational and individual performance to the corporate strategy and permit operations executives to accurately designate the contributions to the corresponding business objectives. The clarification enhances operations administrators to make better communicative their individual values within the C-suite or corresponding companies that offer operations services to their underlying customers (Gordon, 2008, 80-112). Moreover, the shareholders normally gain insight into the prevailing performance of the critical operations. The establishment of the all-inclusive performance measurement program that does advance performance, but permitting managers to better eloquent their value. According to Graves and Waddock (2004, 67), the performance measurement program of the corporate performance examination and evaluation mainly pertains to inclusive coupled with metric driven that aids in financial services companies that meet the encounters.
The program characteristics scorecards for every operations subdivision and encompasses fundamental financial and corresponding non-financial performances metrics, objectives and a proper map that connects every prevailing metric to an inclusive premeditated business objective (Nambiar & Poess, 2009, 245-246). Moreover, the program normally grants operations administrators’ actionable measures at their disposal to realize performance to the underlying business managers. Advancement of the best metrics of performance measurement programs for the corresponding companies operations entails numerous complex stages (Graves, & Waddock, 2004, 1045). The top line development program is more challenging as the underlying performance measurement within the organizations is seen as the main differentiator (Gordon, 2008, 80-82).
The most popular metrics utilized in the analysis entail activity based metrics that entail mathematical counting and corresponding reporting (Rajiv, 2013, 108). Business results such as the marketplace, share, and customer value accompanied new product implementation offer improved correlation. MPM mainly focuses on the measuring the gathered usefulness and proficiency of the marketing organization. Common categories of the particular metrics that encompass marketing’s effect on share of the reference, rate of customers achievement, mean order value, rate of new commodity and corresponding services acceptances and development within customer purchasing frequency (Epstein, 2008, 112). Moreover, MPM is utilized to measure the monitoring of the functioning proficiency and exterior performance (Gordon, 2008,
106). Operational performance metrics principally offer the organizational with the mean to justification marketing investments thus not correlating marketing to business stratagem and occupational performance (Graves, & Waddock, 2004, 1045).
Fortier, P. J., & Michel, H. E. 2003. Computer Systems Performance Evaluation and Prediction.Burlington, MA, Digital Press.
Gordon, S. 2008. Supplier Evaluation and Performance Management Excellence. Boca Raton, Fla, J. Ross.
Graves, S. & Waddock, S. 2004. Institutional Owners and Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1034-1046.
Gregory, A. 1997. ‘An Examination of the Long-Run Performance of the UK Acquiring Firms’, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 24, pp. 971-1002.
Holler, A. 2009. New Metrics for Value-Based Management. Wiesbaden, Gabler.
Janicak, C. A. 2010. Safety Metrics Tools and Techniques for Measuring Safety Performance. Lanham, MD, Government Institutes.
Karl, Erik S. 2007. The New Organization Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets. San Franscisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers.
Madhavan, R., Tunstel, E. W., & Messina, E. R. 2009. Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking of Intelligent Systems. New York, Springer.
Mahoney, T. 2011. ‘Managerial Perceptions of Organizational Effectiveness’, Management Science, 14, pp. B76 -B91.
Nambiar, R., & Poess, M. 2009. Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking First TPC Technology Conference, TPCTC 2009, Lyon, France, August 24-28, 2009: revised selected papers. Berlin [etc.], SpringerLink.
Obaidat, M. S., & Boudriga, N. 2010. Fundamentals of Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunications Systems. Hoboken, N.J., John Wiley & Sons.
Rajiv Rajendra. 2013. The Handbook of Global Corporate Treasury. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley. Epstein, M. J. 2008. Making Sustainability Work: Best Practices in Managing and Measuring Corporate Social, Environmental and Economic Impacts. McGraw.
Ravenscraft, D. and F. Scherer. 2009. ‘The Profitability of Mergers’, International Journal of Industrial Organisation, Vol.7, 101-106.
Sheffield, UK, Greenleaf Pub. 2009. Encyclopedia of Biometrics 2. 2. New York, NY, Springer.
Snell, S., & Bohlander, G. W. 2013. Managing Human Resources. Mason, Ohio, South-Western.