绩效管理毕业论文外文翻译

《绩效管理毕业论文外文翻译》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《绩效管理毕业论文外文翻译（22页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。

1、本科毕业设计（论文）外文翻译译文学生姓名： 贾薪钺 院 （系）： 经济管理学院 专业班级： 人力1104班 指导教师： 刘笑明 完成日期： 2015 年 3 月 17 日 要 求1、外文翻译是毕业设计（论文）的主要内容之一，必须学生独立完成。2、外文翻译译文内容应与学生的专业或毕业设计（论文）内容相关，不得少于15000印刷符号。3.外文翻译译文用A4纸打印。文章标题用3号宋体，章节标题用4号宋体，正文用小4号宋体，20磅行距；页边距上、下、左、右均为2.5cm，左侧装订，装订线0.5cm。按中文翻译在上，外文原文在下的顺序装订。4、年月日等的填写，用阿拉伯数字书写，要符合关于出版物上数字用法

2、的试行规定，如“2005年2月26日”。5、所有签名必须手写，不得打印。社会企业的绩效管理Performance management for social enterprises作者： MaureenMeadowsMatthewPike起止页码： P127P131出版日期（期刊号）：2010,Volume 23,Number 2出版单位：Systemic Practice and Action Research社会企业的绩效管理莫琳 梅多斯马修 派克摘 要 所有企业正面临着如何评价超出当前财务指标的绩效的挑战。运用商业手段来实现社会目标的社会企业都特别强烈地感受到了这些挑战。社会企业需要显示

3、出较好的社会成果，通常对各种复杂的利益相关者负责，可是就企业能力而言社会企业经常被认定成中下等因此，当它们急迫的需要一个全面的评估时，在实践中它们可能缺乏使用可行的各种方法的能力。本文通过社会企业来探讨常规的平衡计分卡模型的存在的以及潜在的用处。风险资本基金提供了改进的平衡计分卡有广泛用处的案例研究证据。使用的模型是动态，综合反映了企业的当前状况、短期问题和长期问题。它的目的是对社会企业的管理采取全面和一致的观点。迄今为止的经验表明，平衡计分卡提供的中期快照是最宝贵的，它允许企业和特别委员会和高级管理人员在一个迅速变化的时期保持着战略控制，同时也关注那些有着最好的机会来全面改变绩效的行动。关键

4、词：绩效评价，绩效管理，平衡计分卡，社会企业1.简介：什么是社会企业？ 社会企业是运用商业手段来实现社会目标的组织。社会企业可能采取不同的宪法或法律形式。在英国，它们可能是担保有限公司或股份有限公司；它们可能是共同组织（工业及公积金社团）或者它们可能甚至是慈善机构。虽然法律的形式可能会有所不同，但是它们不同于传统的私营部门企业，因为它们最终给社会回报超额利润，同时它们可以最大化社会效益的成就所产生的利益的再投资。 社会企业这个词意味着交易的形式。在实践上，这种交易可以采取结合两种基本方法的形式：以承包的方式给政府提供服务或进行市场基础交易。在英国和其他类似的西方国家，许多社会企业可能会严重依赖

5、政府合同来资助它们的活动，这些活动占了由国家使用的为了实现一定的社会目标的GDP的较高比例。然而，即使在这些情况下，在对志愿部门提供的补助的依赖和能产生有效的价值(成果和结果)的社会福利的合同两者之间存在明显的差别。因此，一个社会企业通常被定义为补贴收入是否少于50%。在这个定义中，可以认为大部分的志愿部门正在转向社会经济社会企业的集体交易领域。 从补助到合同和市场基础交易方式的转变明显给处在不同过渡时期的企业施加较多的压力。补贴收入有许多先天的不足：由于从来没有足够的补贴，因此社会企业广泛地遭受着资本不足的痛苦；它们无法建立储备和更大的资产负债表，这使得它们抵抗冲击的能力减弱；它们因此不能很

6、好的控制它们未来的战略方向，与发展和壮大相比它们更关注生存。然而，补贴可以使得社会企业保护他们眼中的完整的独有的服务，这些服务是外部承包商未必会看重的特性或质量。因此在这个转变的过程中，一些社会企业继续运用补贴，以缓解新兴市场残酷的冲击，但这个战略的危险在于它们不能培养并改变它们运作的市场。如果他们能专注于做出卓越的价值而不是替代方案，那么他们就会能够既实现足够的经济回报和也能最大化社会效益。尽管如此，但还是可以出管理转变的过程远远不是这么简单的。 事实上，增加筹集资金和经费的途径的要求进一步加大了社会企业的挑战，而这些资金和经费能使企业建立起自己的综合能力。2.社会企业的资金和金融服务 在英

7、国，社会企业的金融产品出现了新兴的市场，它可以与组织成长和转变的不同阶段联系起来。这样的一个产品是社会风险资本，它遵守使社会效益最大化的原则，但它也寻求一定程度的经济回报。这样的投资市场在英国正迅速扩大，远离补助走向承包与和市场（以上述的交易为基础）相结合。牵头投资者之一是风险资本基金(ACF)案例研究的主题在下面给出。ACF是一个基金，由第三方于2002年12月创办，与三个政府部门和五个区域发展机构有合作。它在英国是此种类型中的第一个，也是世界上首次由中央政府发起的来应对社会企业中需要将资源由补助转向投资的一个战略。ACF以200万英磅1年的时间倡议发起，由社区的基层组织的一个合作伙伴传递，

8、集中在多个贫困社区。到2008年，它已经发展成为有1250万英镑、由一个5名工作人员(Thake和Lingayah 2008)组成的独立组织运营的多年项目。自2008年4月1日，未来建设者基金(该基金从2003年2007年由一个财团运营，该财团由慈善银行，统一信托银行，全国委员会志愿组织和北岩银行基金会组成）也开始由ACF管理。 ACF和未来建设基金都是在一个和社区发展金融中介机构截然不同的利基市场中运营，他们提供接近市场利率或风险高于市场利率的贷款，这些贷款适合那些接近盈利和强壮的企业。3.私营部门以外的绩效管理 我们可能以询问“在公共的和非营利性组织中绩效管理是什么，绩效管理和绩效测评又有

9、什么不同？”开始，Halachmi (2005)认为绩效管理是一种比简单的性能度量更广泛和更有意义的概念。绩效管理可以采取多种形式，从处理组织内部问题到满足利益相关者或者处理外部环境中的问题。绩效管理涉及到定量和定性的技术的使用和对企业人力(行为)方面的注意。绩效测评可以看成是绩效管理的一个可能的子系统。 Johnston (2005)认为绩效不一定是由正式的标准和技术措施所决定。她指出“绩效也是易变的和机会主义的，它被更为主观和基本关系所影响。绩效管理系统大部分都是社会性的而不是技术性上的构造及操作。这样的话他们将继续给公共部门经理带来困境，而且这些困境将难以解决。” 在文献中已经描述了一些

10、公共部门机构的绩效管理的例子，如卫生部门，警察机关，英国当地权威部门，市议会和国防部门。Radnor和Lovell(2003)指出，自1997年以来卫生部门就一直在强调绩效评价。在基层医疗信托基金(PCT)讨论使用其中一种名叫平衡计分卡的绩效评价工具之前，他们就在这篇文章中诠释和描述绩效评价/管理。 Chang(2007)研究了在英国国民健康保险制度（NHS）中绩效评估框架(PAF)作为平衡计分卡的一个方法的局限性和影响。这项研究表明，使用绩效评价系统时应该考虑一个企业所面临的政治和权力。在英国国民健康保险制度下，一些当地国民保健机构可能将绩效评价视为展示他们寻求合法性目的的象征性承诺的一种正

11、式手段。 Wisniewski和Dickson(2001)用在苏格兰邓弗里斯和盖洛韦平衡计分卡作为战略性监控手段的一部分来说明如何使用平衡计分卡。Wisniewski和Olafsson(2004)讨论了当地政府以平衡计分卡来提高绩效的经验，并展现出通过有效的绩效评价方法得到的改进。McAdam等(2005)探讨了关于在一个大型英国公共部门开发和应用绩效管理方法所涉及到的问题。他们发现各级人员已经了解了新系统并且一致认为这是有益的。然而，有些人担心此举不能全年持续地进展开来，而且会有危险成为一个年度事件，而不是一个持续的过程。此外，这一先进的转变过程似乎没有相应更改评价、奖励和识别系统。因此，业

12、务目标与企业内的激励因素并不一致。对案例研究企业来说，利益相关者的绩效指标与平衡计分卡的战略整合对产生一个利益相关者驱动的总体战略而言是必不可少的。 Greatbanks和Tapp(2007)评估在一个公共服务城市议会的环境下实行和使用平衡计分卡的影响。纵向案例研究方法的采用是为了评估平衡计分卡在以下三个标准的影响：战略规划、团队管理及员工个人绩效。有证据表明，使用平衡计分卡能使员工去欣赏他们的角色，并且关注支持公司战略提供的相关的绩效措施，。清晰明确的角色似乎对企业的商业计划的成就和关于客户服务交付的卓越目标有着积极的作用。 Lindholm和Suomala(2007)提出了一个研究芬兰国防

13、部队的生命周期成本管理的案例。这个案例突出了在一个不确定的环境下，涉及到收集足够的数据和从事长期成本管理的实际挑战。绩效管理系统的例子比如平衡计分卡在第三部门的使用依然在文献很罕见。其中一个例子就是Manville (2007) 所探讨的在一个非盈利性的中小型企业(SME)中通过使用平衡计分卡来实施绩效管理系统，并指出采用计分卡的动机都是归结于企业严重的管制本质。 这么稀缺的例子，是因为他们的关注点在其他地方吗？Kong(2007) 在非盈利的环境下探讨五个关键战略管理概念 ( 工业组织(IO)、基于资源的视图(RBV)、基于知识的视图(KBV)、平衡计分卡(BSC)和智力资本(IC) )，并

14、得智力资本对非盈利企业而言是最适用和最有效的这一结论，因为智力资本是非盈利性组织为了获得持久的战略优势而需要开发的一种重要的资源。 关于绩效评价过程的方面，Irwin(2002)研究了在一个公共部门机构使用战略规划(这表明平衡计分卡视角之间的联系)作为一种工具来发展战略，并表明一个简化的平衡计分卡可以在组织内外将战略有效地传达出去。Papalexandris等人(2005) 为综合实施平衡计分卡提出了一个“综合紧凑”方法论框架。这个方法论体现了与项目管理、变更管理、风险管理、质量保证和信息技术有关的活动，指出了实施平衡计分卡后获得成功的领域。 Lawrie和Cobbold(2004)描述了自2

15、0世纪90年代初以来平衡计分卡框架的定义所发生的变化，意识到在这些变化中存在三代截然不同的平衡计分卡的设计，并发现这些变化已经改进了平衡计分卡框架作为战略管理工具的功效。Lawrie、Cobbold和Mashall(2004)提出一个基于第三代平衡计分卡过程的最佳实践，为英国政府机构、英国环境局探索设计一个全新企业绩效管理(CPM)系统的案例。Andersen等人(2004)认为有效的质量管理需要明确联系战略和运营计划，并且表明第三代平衡计分卡可以支持许多流行的质量管理工具的应用。 总之， 超出私营部门的在绩效管理和绩效评价方面的文献提供了许多在许多公共部门环境下如英国卫生服务，平衡计分卡的使

16、用方法的例子。然而，对于那些参与了社会企业的管理的部门，小的指导还是可行的。4.案例介绍：ACF 在第一期，ACF(成立于2002年12月)提供了一个360000英镑的财务基金，设立在大约20个财务收入项目上，其中每个高达15000英镑，同时也提供了一个200英镑万的患者资本基金，设立在10个上限为400000英镑的资本投资项目上。设立这些奖学金的目的是增强企业能力，并协助发展它的投资意愿，而设立病人资本投资项目是为了建立和加强资产基础和增大投资的社会企业运营规模。因为在年底政府需要有承诺支出导致时间非常紧张，所以第一期ACF成立得非常快。用两周的时间来答复，而用三周的时间进行访问。早在200

17、3年， 已经决定了建立ACF的第一个投资。10个组织收到了从病人资本基金得到的贷款、赠款或者两者都有，同时另外19个组织收到了财务基金。 紧张的时间安排给新系统的开发带来了一些限制。这强迫着ACF使用一些方法来测试它有能力满足四个基本需求。 首先， 在对一个组织投资之前，投资者比如ACF必须对潜在投资项目进行严格的评估。ACF必须仔细检查企业的维度、金融和非金融和必需的组织化方法。然后，它必须能够评判可能影响投资的突发事件的能力。虽然用一个单一的标准往往不容易比较不同企业，但是至少能够清楚地知道突发事件的类型以及在每种情况下导致的不同的结果。 第二，当一个投资项目建立后， 需要提供给投资者与被

18、投资者一个监测和评价投资的工具。对ACF来说，很有必要提供证据来证明不同的投资是否会真实地带来改变和价值。投资对象对证明进展和效益十分有兴趣，这样他们才会维持并扩大投资和资金资助。 第三，一个有效的绩效评估框架可以用来确定投资对象需要在哪里付出他们最大的努力，事实上这些地方也就是投资者应该集中支持的地方。 最后，在企业管理下的员工个人肯定会看重一个能帮助他们完成任务的工具，这个工具就是让他们成为主要任务目标的管理者而不是最大限度地增加社会效益，而且他们一定会关心他们在企业中长期发展中的稳定性(同时提高收入水平通常也是一个至关重要的因素)。一个有效的绩效评价框架应该是企业战略反馈框架的一部分，也

19、许它可以使企业把组织转型的不同阶段当作机会来展示它们自己。Performance management for social enterprisesAbstract All organisations face the challenge of how to assess performance beyond current financial metrics. These challenges are felt especially strongly by social enterprises, organisations that use business methods to achie

20、ve social goals. Social enterprises need to evidence superior social outcomes, are normally accountable to a complex range of stakeholders and yet are often rated low to medium in terms of organisational capacity thus whilst they have a great need for rounded measurement, theymay in practice lack th

21、e ability to make use of the different approaches on offer. This paper examines the current and potential use of the conventional Balanced Scorecard model, by social enterprises. The Adventure Capital Fund provides case study evidence of extensive use of a modified Scorecard. The model used isdynami

22、c, combining reflection on the organisations current position, near termand long term issues. Experience to date suggests that the medium term snapshot provided by theScorecard is the most valuable, allowing organisations and especially boards and senior executives to keep a strategic grip in a peri

23、od of rapid change and focus onthose actions that have best chance of changing performance in the round. Key words Performance Measurement; Performance Management; BalancedScorecard; Social Enterprises 1 Introduction: What is a Social Enterprise? Social enterprises are organisations that use busines

24、s methods to achieve social goals. Social enterprises may take different constitutional or legal forms. In the UK they may be companies limited by guarantee or by shares; they may be mutual organisations (industrial and provident societies) or they may even be charities. Whilst the legal form may va

25、ry, they differ from conventional private sector businesses, in that they ultimately place social return above profit and they maximise the re-investment of any profit generated back into the achievement of social impact. The term social enterprise implies forms of trading. In practice this trading

26、can take a combination of two basic approaches: contracting to deliver services to government, or conducting market based trading. In the UK and other similar western nations, many social enterprises are likely to rely heavily upon government contracts to fund their activity, given high levels of GD

27、P spent by the state on achieving certain social goals. Nevertheless, even in these cases, there is a clear difference between reliance upon grants the traditional preserve of the voluntary sector - and contracts, what are effectively social payments for value (outputs and outcomes) produced. Theref

28、ore one common definition of a social enterprise is whether they are funded less than 50% by grant revenues. Under this definition, a large majority of the voluntary sector can be seen to be shifting into the social economy the collective trading space of social enterprises. The shift away from gran

29、ts and towards forms of contracting and market based trading clearly places major stress upon organisations that are in different phases of transition. Grant revenue had many historical disadvantages: there was never enough grant to go around and thus organisations suffered from wide under-capitalis

30、ation; they were unable to build reserves and wider balance sheet making them lessresistant to shocks; and they were thus less in control of their future strategic direction, often more focussed on survival than growth or replication. Nevertheless grants had the major virtue of allowing organisation

31、s to protect what they saw as the integrity of theirparticular service special features or qualities that an outside contractor would not necessarily value. In the process of transition therefore, some organisations have continued to use grants to cushion the impact of new market rigours, but the da

32、nger in this strategyis that the organisation fails to educate and change the market within which they operate. If they could focus instead upon proving the superior value of alternative approaches then theymight be able to both achieve sufficient financial return and maximise social impact. Despite

33、 this, it can be seen that the process of managing transition is far from straightforward. Indeed the challenges are further increased by the need to raise forms of funding and finance that can equip the organisation to build its generalcapacity to deliver. 2 Funding and Financial Services for Socia

34、l Enterprises There is an emerging market of financial products for social enterprise in the UK, which can be related to different phases of organisational growth and transition. One such product is social venture capital, a term that respects the prime investment as being the maximisation of social

35、 impact, but which also seeks a degree of financial return. The market for such investment is expanding rapidly in the UK, coinciding with the move away from grants and towards combinations of contracting and market based trading outlined above. One of the leading investors is the Adventure Capital

36、Fund (ACF) the subject of the case study set out below. The ACF is a fund established in December 2002 by third sector partners in collaboration with three government departments and five regional development agencies. It is the first of its type in the UK, and the first in the world to be initiated

37、 by central government as a strategic response to the need to shift resources away from grants and towards investment in social enterprise. The ACF was launched as a 2 million, one-year initiative, delivered by a partnership of communityorientated infrastructure organisations and focused in multiply

38、 deprived communities. By 2008 it had grown to become a 12.5 million, multi-year programme run by an independent organisation with five staff (Thake and Lingayah, 2008).Since 1 April 2008, the Future Builders Fund (a fund run from 2003 2007 by a consortium made up of Charity Bank, Unity Trust Bank,

39、National Council for Voluntary Organisations and Northern Rock Foundation) has also been under the management of the ACF. Both of these funds ACF and Futurebuilders - operate in a quitedistinct market niche from Community Development Finance Intermediaries, which offer nearer market rate or riskier

40、above market rate loans suitable for organisations that are close to being profitable and strong. 3 Performance Management beyond the private sector We might begin by asking what is performance management in the context of public and not-for-profit organisations, and what is the difference between p

41、erformance management and performance measurement? Halachmi (2005) argues that performance management is a broader and more meaningful concept than simple performance measurement. Performance management can take many forms from dealing with issues internal to the organisation to catering to stakehol

42、ders or handling issues in its environment. Performance management involves the use of both quantitative and qualitative techniques and paying due attention to the human (behavioural) side of the enterprise. Performance measurement can be identified as a possible sub-system of performance management

43、. Johnston (2005) argues that performance is not necessarily determined by formal standards and technical measurements. She points out that “performance is also situational and opportunistic and mediated by more subjective and basicconcerns performance management systems are largely socially rather

44、than technically constructed and operated. As such they will continue to posedilemmas for public sector managers that will be difficult to resolve”. Examples of performance management in a range of public sector organisations have been described in the literature, such as the health sector, the poli

45、ce force, UK local authorities and city councils, and the defence sector. Radnor and Lovell (2003) show that there has been a continuing emphasis on Performance Measurement within the health sectorsince 1997. They define and describe Performance Measurement/Management in this context, before discuss

46、ing the use of one performance measurement tool, the Balanced Scorecard by a Primary Care Trust (PCT). Chang (2007) explores the limitations of, and implications for, the Performance Assessment Framework (PAF) as a Balanced Scorecard approach in the NHS. The study suggests that the use of performanc

47、e measurement systems should take into account politics andpower faced by an organisation. In the NHS, performance measurement might be used by local NHS organisations primarily as a ceremonial means of demonstrating their symbolic commitment for legitimacy seeking purposes. Wisniewski and Dickson (

48、2001) illustrate the use of the Balanced Scorecard by Dumfries and Galloway Constabularyin Scotland as part of a strategic policing initiative. Wisniewski and Olafsson (2004) discuss the experience of local authoritiesin using the Balanced Scorecard to improve performance, and to demonstrate such im

49、provement through effective performance measurement. McAdam, Hazlett and Casey (2005) explore issues involved in developing and applying performance management approaches within a large UK public sector department.They found that staff at all levels had an understanding of the new system and perceiv

50、ed it as being beneficial. However there were concerns that the approach was not continuously managed throughout the year and was in danger of becoming an annual event, rather than an on-going process. Furthermore, the change process seemed to have advanced without corresponding changes to appraisal

51、 and reward and recognition systems. Thus, the business objectives were not aligned with motivating factors within the organisation. The strategic integration of the stakeholder performance measures and scorecards was found to be essential to producing an overall stakeholder-driven strategy within t

52、he case study organisation. Greatbanks and Tapp (2007) consider the impact of implementing and using the Balanced Scorecard within a public service city councilenvironment. A longitudinal case study approach is adopted in order to evaluate the impact of scorecards at three levels: strategic planning

53、, team management and individual staff performance. Evidencesuggests that the use of scorecards enabled employees to appreciate their role, and focus on delivery of performance-related measures which support organisational strategy. Clarity of role appears to have a positive influence on the achieve

54、ment of the organisations business plan and excellence goals regarding the delivery of customer service. Lindholm and Suomala (2007) present a case study of life cycle cost management in the Finnish Defence Forces. The case highlights practical challenges relating to collecting adequate data and pra

55、ctising long term cost management in an uncertain context. Examples of performance management systems such as Balanced Scorecard in the third sector are still relatively rare in the literature. One example is the exploration by Manville (2007) of the implementation of a performance management system

56、 using the Balanced Scorecard within a not for profit small and medium sized enterprise(SME), noting that the motivationfor adopting the scorecard were both internal and external due to the heavily regulated nature of the organisation. Is this paucity of examples because their focus lies elsewhere?

57、Kong (2007) examines five key strategic management concepts (industrial organisation (IO), resource-based view (RBV), knowledge-based view (KBV), Balanced Scorecard (BSc) and intellectual capital (IC) within the non-profit context, and concludes that the IC concept is the most applicable and effecti

58、ve in the non-profit sector, as IC is an important resource that non-profit organisations need to develop in order to gain sustained strategic advantage. Turning to issues of the process of performance measurement, Irwin (2002) explores the use of strategy mapping (which demonstrates links between s

59、corecard perspectives) as a tool to develop strategy in a public sector agency, and suggests asimplified version which can communicate that strategy effectively, both inside and outside the organisation. Papalexandris et al (2005) put forward a “compact and integrated” methodological framework for B

60、alanced Scorecard synthesis and implementation. The methodology embodies activities related to Project Management, Change Management, Risk Management, Quality Assurance and Information Technology,areas that contribute considerably to the successful implementation of the Balanced Scorecard. Lawrie an

61、d Cobbold (2004) describe changes to the definition of the Balanced Scorecard framework that have occurred since the early 1990s, recognising within these changes three distinct generations of Balanced Scorecard design, and observing that these changes have improved the utility of the framework as a

62、 strategic management tool. Lawrie, Cobbold and Marshall (2004) present a case study exploring the design of a new corporate performance management (CPM) system for a UK government agency, the UK Environment Agency, based on best practice third-generation Balanced Scorecard processes. Andersen and L

63、awrie (2004) argue that effective quality management requires explicit links between strategy and operational initiatives, and suggest that a third generation Balanced Scorecard can support the application of a number of popular quality management tools. In summary, the literature on performance man

64、agement and performance measurement beyond the private sector provides examples of the use of approachesbased on the Balanced Scorecard in a number of public sector contexts, such as the UK health service. However, for those involved in the management of social enterprises, little guidance is available. 4 Introducing the Case Study The ACF In its first ro