戰(zhàn)略、業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)體系與業(yè)績(jī)——對(duì)中國(guó)上市公司的研究【外文翻譯】

1、<p><b>　　外文翻譯</b></p><p><b>　　原文</b></p><p>　　Strategy, performance-measurement systems, and performance: A study of Chinese firms</p><p>　　Material Sou

2、rce: The International Journal of Accounting 44 (2009) 256–278 Author: Damon M. Fleming, Chee W. Chow, Gongmeng Chen </p><p><b>　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　Numerous studies in develope

3、d Western countries have shown that firms' strategic choices are responsive to attributes of their external environment. In turn, performance-measurement systems are used to support strategy implementation, which the

4、n affect firm performance. However, institutional factors may limit the extent to which these linkages exist in the transitional Chinese economy. We analyze survey and publicly available data for 104 listed Chinese manuf

5、acturing firms and find that, despit</p><p>　　1. Introduction</p><p>　　Numerous studies have shown that firms make strategic choices often in response to their external environment. Firms also u

6、se performance-measurement systems (PMSs) to support strategy implementation that increases their performance. This literature, however, is largely focused on firms from the more developedWestern economies (see Chenhall,

7、 2003, 2007 forreviews). Whether or not these relationships hold true for Chinese firms has not yet beenempirically tested.We believe that such an investigat</p><p>　　The remainder of this paper is organized

8、 as follows. Section 2 provides an overview of China's institutional characteristics and then develops three hypotheses based primarily on the extant (Western) literature. Section 3 explains how we collected data, an

9、d Section 4 reports the results. Section 5 concludes the paper with a discussion of the findings and their implications. China had a command economy up to the end of the 1970s, wherein business enterprises were merely un

10、its for implementing gov</p><p>　　Despite these developments, Chinese firms still face several identifiable obstacles in responding to the environment and/or emulating the management practices of the more de

11、veloped Western countries. Peng (2003) suggests that Scott's (1995) fundamental and related institutional “pillars” can be used to describe the institutional challenges facing China's business enterprises. One su

12、ch pillar is regulative, and focuses on the formal rules, systems, and enforcement mechanisms sanctioned by the gov</p><p>　　Further dampening effects may come from the government's continued activism vi

13、a direct interventions, the promulgation of regulations, and the espousal of political ideology, especially because government entities in China often have objectives that deviate from profitability, such as maintaining

14、social order and effecting wealth redistribution (Liu, 2006; Tang, Xi, Chen, & Wang, 2006).</p><p>　　Another of Scott's (1995) suggested pillars relates to the beliefs and values that are imposed on,

15、 or internalized by, the people in the institutional environment. During the centralization era, people often were appointed to managerial positions for reasons other than ability, and enterprises operated under so-calle

16、d “soft budget constraints” (Kornai, 1980) whereby the government would automatically write off debts and provide operating funds, and firms were essentially evaluated based on their</p><p>　　Finally, China&

17、#39;s national culture has distinct differences from that of many Western countries (Chow, Deng, & Ho, 2000; Hofstede, 1984), and these differences may cause Chinese managers and workers to prefer management practice

18、s that differ from those of their foreign counterparts (Chow, Shields, &Wu, 1999;Merchant, Chow, &Wu, 1995). For example, being authoritative is not a typical or well-received behavior of executives in the West,

19、but in China it is viewed as a legitimate way to behave given</p><p><b>　　譯文</b></p><p>　　戰(zhàn)略、業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)體系與業(yè)績(jī)——對(duì)中國(guó)上市公司的研究</p><p>　　資料來(lái)源：會(huì)計(jì)國(guó)際學(xué)刊 作者：達(dá)蒙?弗萊明，周琦，陳宮萌</p>

20、<p>　　摘要：西方發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的眾多研究表明，企業(yè)的戰(zhàn)略選擇是對(duì)其外部環(huán)境特性的反映。相應(yīng)的,業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)體系用以支持戰(zhàn)略的實(shí)施,而戰(zhàn)略的實(shí)施又將對(duì)公司的業(yè)績(jī)產(chǎn)生影響。然而，制度因素可能會(huì)限制存在于過渡時(shí)期中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)中的聯(lián)系的發(fā)展。通過對(duì)來(lái)自于104家上市中國(guó)制造業(yè)公司的問卷調(diào)查和公開數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行分析，盡管有一些辨識(shí)上的障礙，我們?nèi)圆浑y發(fā)現(xiàn)這些公司發(fā)展的戰(zhàn)略要點(diǎn)是對(duì)其所面對(duì)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)與不確定性的反映。至于不確定性，在西方公司的情況卻完全

21、相反。與西方的同行相比, 中國(guó)公司更注重增長(zhǎng)，也更趨向于使用平衡的，或者說綜合的業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)體系。相應(yīng)地,他們的業(yè)績(jī)也達(dá)到了一個(gè)更高的水平。</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞：中國(guó)公司；業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)體系；戰(zhàn)略；業(yè)績(jī)</p><p><b>　　1.引言</b></p><p>　　大量研究表明，企業(yè)的戰(zhàn)略選擇往往是對(duì)其外部環(huán)境的反映。企業(yè)也使用業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)體系（

22、PMSs）來(lái)支撐其戰(zhàn)略實(shí)施,進(jìn)而增加業(yè)績(jī)。然而,這種體系在很大程度上是立足于處于更發(fā)達(dá)的西方經(jīng)濟(jì)中的公司的。這些關(guān)系是否適用于中國(guó)企業(yè)尚未經(jīng)過實(shí)踐檢驗(yàn)。我們相信,這樣的調(diào)查是合理的：一方面，中國(guó)已經(jīng)成為世界上最大的進(jìn)出口國(guó)家之一；另一方面其轉(zhuǎn)型經(jīng)濟(jì)具有一些特性，這些特性可能會(huì)抑制領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人的積極性和/或其對(duì)公司所面臨的挑戰(zhàn)及機(jī)遇的反應(yīng)能力。隨著中國(guó)公司在全球市場(chǎng)的壯大，對(duì)戰(zhàn)略性質(zhì)及現(xiàn)有管理實(shí)踐的性能影響的更深入的理解，也許會(huì)有助于投資者、債

23、權(quán)人、合資伙伴、供應(yīng)商、競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手等評(píng)估其與中國(guó)公司的關(guān)系。這些發(fā)現(xiàn)在中國(guó)公司計(jì)劃改革時(shí)也是有用的。</p><p>　　本研究的數(shù)據(jù)來(lái)源于中國(guó)104家上市制造業(yè)公司的問卷調(diào)查及實(shí)際財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告。我們同時(shí)使用路徑分析來(lái)檢測(cè)企業(yè)增長(zhǎng)的戰(zhàn)略要點(diǎn)的程度是取決于其環(huán)境中的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)和不確定性, 強(qiáng)調(diào)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)與采用平衡/集成PMSs之間的關(guān)系，以及PMSs如何對(duì)業(yè)績(jī)產(chǎn)生影響。通過這些樣本公司, 我們發(fā)現(xiàn)企業(yè)增長(zhǎng)的要點(diǎn)是隨著其在經(jīng)營(yíng)環(huán)境

24、中所感知到的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)或不確定性而消長(zhǎng)的。</p><p>　　值得注意的是,這種與不確定性之間的關(guān)系跟在西方所發(fā)現(xiàn)的是相反的：經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的戰(zhàn)略要點(diǎn)越大，隨之就會(huì)較多的使用平衡/集成PMSs,而這些PMSs與公司業(yè)績(jī)有著重大的、積極的聯(lián)系。這些研究結(jié)果表明,盡管存在著許多制度障礙, 中國(guó)企業(yè)仍在應(yīng)對(duì)其經(jīng)營(yíng)環(huán)境中的機(jī)遇和挑戰(zhàn), 雖然與他們的西方同行所采用的方式不同。此篇文章的其余組成部分如下：第二部分概述中國(guó)的制度特征,進(jìn)

25、而形成三個(gè)主要基于現(xiàn)存(西方)文學(xué)的假設(shè)；第三部分,解釋我們?nèi)绾问占瘮?shù)據(jù)；第四部分陳述研究結(jié)果；第五部分通過對(duì)他們的發(fā)現(xiàn)及其意義進(jìn)行討論來(lái)對(duì)全文作一個(gè)總結(jié)。</p><p>　　中國(guó)的計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)體制一直持續(xù)到20世紀(jì)70年代末, 使得企業(yè)僅僅局限于實(shí)施政府計(jì)劃,而缺乏自主性。盡管民營(yíng)化在1978年就開始作為一種官方政策施行，中國(guó)政府卻選擇逐步從中央計(jì)劃中脫離出來(lái),而不是像俄羅斯一樣采用戲劇性的政策轉(zhuǎn)變方式。其結(jié)果是

26、，中國(guó)政府在指導(dǎo)經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型的過程中一直處于中心地位。直到上世紀(jì)九十年代，一系列支持這一改革的政策和制度(例如成立上海和深圳證券交易所，及終止對(duì)大多數(shù)國(guó)有企業(yè)的財(cái)政扶持)才開始形成。自此，持續(xù)的市場(chǎng)開放和私有制的優(yōu)勢(shì)帶來(lái)了以提高效率為目的的經(jīng)營(yíng)自主權(quán)及對(duì)科學(xué)管理體系的需求的空前膨脹。盡管有了這些發(fā)展， 在應(yīng)對(duì)環(huán)境及仿效西方發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的管理實(shí)踐時(shí)中國(guó)仍面臨著一系列明顯的障礙。彭指出斯科特的基本原理及相關(guān)的制度“支柱” 可以用來(lái)描述中國(guó)企業(yè)所面臨

27、的制度挑戰(zhàn)。這樣的一個(gè)支柱是受管制的, 著重于正式的規(guī)則，制度和經(jīng)政府批準(zhǔn)的強(qiáng)制機(jī)制的（例如法定的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施及收購(gòu)市場(chǎng)）。對(duì)發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)的研究表明,像這樣的內(nèi)外結(jié)合的管理機(jī)制有助于外部人員對(duì)其進(jìn)行監(jiān)管。艾倫、黔、倩(2005)和皮斯特、徐(2005)發(fā)現(xiàn)，就中國(guó)而言其包括投資者保護(hù)體系,企業(yè)管制及會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則等在內(nèi)的法律制度遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)落</p><p>　　斯科特(1995年)提出的另一個(gè)支柱涉及到一些信仰和價(jià)值觀，這些信仰和價(jià)

28、值觀被強(qiáng)加于處于制度環(huán)境中的人們身上，或被其內(nèi)化。在集權(quán)時(shí)代,人們往往不是因?yàn)槟芰Χ晃蔚焦芾砺毼? 企業(yè)是在所謂的“預(yù)算軟約束”(Kornai,1980年)下運(yùn)營(yíng)。在這種情況下，政府就會(huì)自動(dòng)地勾銷債務(wù)并為企業(yè)提供營(yíng)運(yùn)資金。從本質(zhì)上來(lái)說， 公司的評(píng)價(jià)是基于其輸出而不是盈利能力。這一最近的時(shí)代所遺留下來(lái)的是有決策經(jīng)驗(yàn)的管理人員的匱乏。最近的證據(jù)表明這一問題持續(xù)困擾著中國(guó)企業(yè)。因此,許多中國(guó)公司可能仍在委任這樣一些高層，他們不能從現(xiàn)代的管

29、理實(shí)踐中發(fā)現(xiàn)潛在的利益，或者為了保障自身的地位或影響而抵制其實(shí)行。在普通員工心目中可能仍留有“鐵飯碗”的心態(tài)，他們可能會(huì)抵制那些威脅到“中國(guó)做事方式”的創(chuàng)新。</p><p>　　最后, 中國(guó)的民族文化與許多西方國(guó)家之間存在明顯的差異, 而這些差異可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致中國(guó)的管理人員和員工更趨向于有別于其外國(guó)同行的管理措施。例如,獨(dú)斷專行在西方不是一個(gè)典型的或受決策者們歡迎的管理方式, 而在中國(guó)，在傳統(tǒng)的等級(jí)制度的前提下卻被