Das strategische Planungs- und Kontrollsystem der Siemens AG

Mirow, Michael

doi:10.1007/978-3-663-05965-3_19

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In academic literature as well as in management practice, conflicting statements concerning the standardization and differentiation of performance evaluation can be found. On the one hand, researchers and managers argue that standardization of performance evaluation of foreign subsidiaries can be beneficial (Ernst 2000, 140; Melching 1997, 247; Mirow 1996, 354–355; Müller 1996, 120–122; Pausenberger 1996, 194). On the other hand, they present arguments for differentiating performance evaluation according to context and/or strategy at corporate and/or subsidiary level (Appleyard et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Evaluation of Foreign Subsidiaries: A Review of the Literature and a Contingency Framework

Schmid

Kretschmer

2010

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During recent years, the literature on the international dimension of business has grown. In particular, the literature on headquarters-subsidiary relationships has expanded. This paper aims to review the literature on performance evaluation and elaborate an integrative contingency framework. This contingency framework helps to clarify the concept of performance evaluation and to classify existing contributions. Furthermore, the framework serves as a tool to identify potential influencing factors on performance evaluation at corporate and at subsidiary level. By reviewing existing studies, the paper analyses the impact of these influencing factors on performance evaluation and reveals mostly contradictory results or no significant impact at all. Based on the findings, more research outside the classical tradition of contingency approaches is suggested.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%