The role of performance measures and incentive systems in relation to the degree of JIT implementation

Fullerton, Rosemary; McWatters, Cheryl S.

doi:10.1016/s0361-3682(02)00012-0

Cited by 173 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, Jesssop and Sum (2000) indicated the advantage of rapid respond might not unable to be sensed by the managers or clients, yet the huge value would be eventually brought for the enterprise. Based on the just in time production as research issue, Fullerton and McWatters (2002) categorized the level of features of enterprise accordance and just in time production as well as explored the relationship between JIT and enterprise performance indicator. Corry and Kozan (2004) and Geraghty and Heavey (2005) stated the differences between production strategies adopted by the enterprise and production management system would influence corporation performance.…”

Section: Production and Quality Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Evaluate the Performance of the Taiwan Biotech and Biopharmaceutical Corporations?

Tong¹

2015

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry, the most developmental mainstream, has been generally acknowledged in the 21 st century. The approach of this study surmounted the traditional DEA and SFA, combining with modified Delphi approach, ISM, FANP and performance evaluation table to build evaluation mode of operating performance precisely and completely in Taiwan biotech and pharmaceutical corporations. Considering 4 criteria and 18 sub-criteria complied to evaluate the operating performance in the enterprise. The analyzed result appeared, the significance of criteria is "Product and technology R&D", "Financial performance", "Production and quality management" and "Organization characteristics and operation management" in sequence. The top 5 key sub-criteria influence the evaluation of operating performance in Taiwan biotech and pharmaceutical corporations are "Profitability", "Efficiency of production and cost", "Innovative products and R&D strategies", "Quality management and cost control" and "Operation strategy and business mode". The last 5 key sub-criteria are "Human resources management", "Project management", "Innovation of process technology", "Competence of financial operation" and "Market share". Finally, the top 10 of conglomerate revenue in listed companies taken as the sample of empirical research on this study. According to the experts" evaluation, the total point of weighted average is 58.9020 of whole sample in complete period in all enterprises, which fell at the grade of "Slightly good" as a whole. The related results accord with the real situation in the industry. The result of this study is able to be a significant basis as the policies drawn up by government, operating performance evaluated by the enterprise and investment target measured by the investors.

show abstract

Section: Production and Quality Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Evaluate the Performance of the Taiwan Biotech and Biopharmaceutical Corporations?

Tong¹

2015

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to their empirical study, Fullerton and McWatters (2002) evaluate the relationship between the JIT practices, control system, and performance measurement and incentive system in US manufacturing firm. The result points out that the successful implementation of JIT requires a complementary decision making and control system.…”

Section: Research Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Proposed Strategic Balanced Scorecard Model: Strategic Control System and Organizational Performance in Malaysian Automotive Industry

Habidin¹,

Yusof²,

Omar³

et al. 2012

IOSRJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…La présence de critères non financiers facilite cette cohérence, soit en jouant le rôle de mécanisme incitatif (Ittner et Larcker (2002) et Chenhall (1997), soit comme composant essentiel du système de contrôle ), soit les deux à la fois (Fullerton et McWatters (2002)), soit enfin comme moyen de mieux évaluer la performance réalisée (Perera, Harrison et Poole (1997)). Ces derniers notent (pp.…”

Section: Valeur De La Firmeunclassified

“…Lorsque ces priorités sont orientées vers la satisfaction des clients, les critères non financiers permettent de mieux évaluer la performance des subordonnés. , Govindarajan et Gupta (1985), Fullerton et McWatters (2002) appuient leurs démonstrations relatives à la cohérence entre la stratégie et l'architecture organisationnelle en étudiant des entreprises qui développent respectivement des stratégies orientées vers la qualité, la différenciation ou le déploiement en juste à temps. Ces critères non financiers seraient utilisés à différents niveaux hiérarchiques (personnels d'encadrement (Govindarajan et Gupta (1985) ou exécutifs (Ittner et Larcker (2002) (Jensen et Meckling, 1992, p.115).…”

Section: Valeur De La Firmeunclassified

Utilisation des critères non financiers pour évaluer ou piloter la performance: analyse théorique

Poincelot

Wegmann

2005

Comptabilité Contrôle Audit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Résumé :Les déterminants justifiant l'utilisation des critères non financiers pour évaluer ou piloter la performance renvoient à des explications théoriques en liaison avec les approches contractuelles et cognitives. L'objectif de notre article est de proposer pour ces deux approches une analyse théorique. Pour l'approche contractuelle, nous dressons une typologie des explications du choix des critères non financiers avancées dans les travaux existants. Nous montrons également que d'autres théories auraient pu être mobilisées. Pour l'approche cognitive, nous précisons les travaux qui établissent explicitement un lien entre une lecture théorique et les critères non financiers ainsi que d'autres travaux pour lesquels nous établissons ce lien. Nous précisons enfin le référentiel théorique auquel peuvent se rattacher des outils présentant de nombreux critères non financiers comme le Balanced Scorecard ou le Capital Intellectuel. Mots clés :Critères non financiers -Théories contractuelles -Théories cognitives -Contrôle -Performance. Abstract: The Use of Non-financial Measures to Evaluate or Manage the Performance: A Theoretical AnalysisThe determinants which explain the use of non-financial measures in order to evaluate or drive the performance belong to disciplinary (contractual) and knowledge-based approaches. The aim of this paper is to propose a theoretical analysis of these explanations. For the disciplinary view, we realize a typology of the existing literature. We show that others theories explain the choice of non-financial measures too. For the knowledge-based view, we propose a synthesis of the existing literature in which the link between non-financial and theoretical explanations exists or in which we highlight it. Finally, we explain why the Balanced Scorecard can be associated to the disciplinary view and the Intellectual Capital to the knowledge-based view.

show abstract

The role of performance measures and incentive systems in relation to the degree of JIT implementation

Cited by 173 publications

References 46 publications

How to Evaluate the Performance of the Taiwan Biotech and Biopharmaceutical Corporations?

How to Evaluate the Performance of the Taiwan Biotech and Biopharmaceutical Corporations?

A Proposed Strategic Balanced Scorecard Model: Strategic Control System and Organizational Performance in Malaysian Automotive Industry

Utilisation des critères non financiers pour évaluer ou piloter la performance: analyse théorique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About