利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系研究
|
摘要
随着生产力的发展,市场竞争的加剧,股东价值最大化所引发的环境污染、资源浪费、产品质量低下、员工权益得不到有效保护等问题也越来越多,这些都极大地妨碍了企业的长期稳定发展。20世纪60年代在西方发展起来的利益相关者理论认为,任何一个企业都有众多利益相关者,他们都对公司进行了专用性投资并承担由此所带来的风险,企业的生存和发展取决于它能否有效地处理与各种利益相关者的关系,而股东只是其中之一。理论界和实务界在对这些问题的思索过程中逐步意识到,企业在生产经营过程中如单纯的以股东价值为目标,而不考虑其他利益相关者的利益要求,是一种“短视”的行为,企业能够长期生存和繁荣的最好途径是考虑并且努力满足所有重要的利益相关者的利益要求,企业和利益相关者的关系是一种互惠的关系。而利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价体系作为企业的监管制度和管理系统,不仅是企业自我监督、自我约束、自我评价的重要手段,而且是企业与利益相关者进行有效沟通、协调利益相关者各方利益,实现企业战略管理目标的重要手段。在此背景下,本文的研究意义主要体现在以下两个方面：
(1)从理论意义来说,利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系的研究对于完善企业绩效评价理论具有重要作用。在经济全球化和竞争白热化的形势下,企业的经营环境发生了深刻的变化,越来越多的利益相关者加强了与企业的关系,他们将不同的资源以不同的方式投入企业,必然有各自的利益所在,其利益要求也都需要通过一定的方式和构架得到传达和反映。因而基于约束和激励机制的要求,以及利益相关者需求的差异性,作为多边契约关系总和的企业,战略目标应紧贴企业利益主体,各个利益主体的目标都可以折衷为一个统一目标——企业长期稳定发展和企业总价值的不断增长。围绕这一目标,从利益相关者视角下设计和评价企业的绩效切实可行。作为20世纪60年代以后逐步发展起来的利益相关者理论,其核心内容—企业绩效评价,迄今为止还没有形成十分完善的框架体系。本文将在对现有文献和企业绩效评价理论基础进行系统分析的基础上,从总体上明确利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系的基本理论,重点探讨评价主体、评价客体、评价指标、指标权数、评价标准、综合评价模型方面的问题。本文认为,这些研究将完善现有企业绩效评价理论的内容框架,也为相关领域的理论研究,如激励理论、分配理论等奠定基础。
(2)从实际应用来看,本文的研究过程和结论至少在以下几个方面具有一定的参考价值：第一,为企业绩效评价体系的设置提供参考。作为引导企业生产经营活动的绩效评价体系,在设计过程中不但要考虑股东的利益,也要考虑其他利益相关者的利益。另外,企业绩效评价体系只有用于企业实际,其功能才能得到有效的发挥,如果束之高阁,那只能带来成本的浪费。因此,在绩效评价体系的设计过程中,一定要考虑可操作性和企业之间的可比性。第二,有利于利益相关者进行正确的投资决策。利益相关者要进行准确的投资,必须对企业真实的绩效状况有一个清楚地了解。只有这样才能提高投资的准确性,降低投资风险。第三,有利于协调利益相关者之间的利益冲突,建立起双方互信、诚信、双赢的合作机制。不同的利益相关者,其利益要求有相同的地方也有冲突的地方。如果只看到冲突而不能看到合作,将会给企业带来很大的交易成本,并可能使企业陷入困境。而且从长远来看,冲突是暂时的,合作是长期的,是互惠的。利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价不仅能够有效规范和监控企业经营者的行为,而且能够促使利益相关者之间加强沟通和协调,从而使得企业经营活动健康、稳定有序的进行。第四,有利于引导企业经营行为,实现企业的可持续发展。随着市场经济的逐步建立和完善,利益相关者对企业的关注也越来越多,通过企业绩效评价体系来对利益相关者的权益保护程度进行对比和分析,一方面可以强化对企业的管理和监督,另一方面可以引导企业的经营行为,提高其市场竞争能力。
一般来说,一个完整的绩效评价体系是由评价主体、评价客体、评价指标、指标权数、评价标准和评价方法等构成。通过文献检索我们看到,很多专家学者都对利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价进行了研究,研究成果丰富,但也还有一些需要完善的地方,而要想完全超越已有的国内外研究成果重新设计一套利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价体系,不仅工作量庞大,而且重复劳动很多,也难以取得突破性的进展。因此本文在企业绩效评价理论框架下,借鉴国内外相对成熟的研究成果,对利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系进行研究,并对评价结果进行分析。本文的主要结论如下：
(1)虽然企业绩效评价从一开始就是从利益相关者利益要求满意程度的角度对企业经营活动进行的评价,但考虑的利益相关者非常单一,而从广泛的利益相关者角度对企业绩效进行评价的文献直到20世纪90年代才开始出现。随着利益相关者理论和企业社会责任意识的加强,利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价将会成为企业绩效评价的主流。
(2)根据利益相关者理论、战略管理理论和系统管理理论,本文认为,利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价是指企业根据利益相关者的利益要求,通过指标设计、权数确定、标准值选取、综合模型构建等步骤,客观、公正和准确的评价企业一定经营期间内对利益相关者利益要求的满意程度,帮助利益相关者进行有效的投资决策,引导企业改善经营管理,提高经营水平。
(3)由于任何一个企业都有众多的利益相关者,不同的利益相关者有相同的地方,更有不同的地方。因此,利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价体系在设置过程中需要考虑的因素就很多。为了使设置的指标在实际应用过程中方便、简洁,切实发挥评价、导向、管理和预测功能,本文在利益相关者绩效评价体系的设计时遵循了目标一致性、客观性、适用性、系统性、成本效益性等原则。
(4)利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价主体方面,通过对利益相关者定义和分类的文献阅读,并结合我国的实际情况,本文将企业绩效评价的“源主体”分为股东、金融机构、供应商、顾客、员工、政府和社区、社会公众7大类。这7类利益相关者的利益要求与企业的整体利益密切相关,都有对企业绩效进行评价的动机。但从实际情况来看,让这些“源主体”都来设置企业绩效评价体系既不现实也无可能。本文认为,可由中介机构作为“执行主体”,由执行长、指导顾问、执行团队、推行团队等组成一个专门机构,代替“源主体”对企业绩效进行评价。
(5)利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价客体方面,本文从利益相关者理论出发,采用实证研究的方法,按照假设提出—变量选择—研究设计—实证结果及解释等步骤对企业绩效评价客体进行分析,结果表明,不同类型的企业利益相关者对其利益要求是有差异的。因此,我们不能把所有的企业放在一起采用一套指标进行评价,也不能每个企业都设置不同的绩效评价体系,而应该从利益相关者的角度对企业进行分类,将同类型的企业作为一个评价客体。考虑到研究的代表性,在后续的研究中,将以矿产资源型企业为例,对利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系进行研究。
(6)由于企业要考虑的利益相关者众多,如果从结果和过程两个方面来设计利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价指标体系,指标体系将会非常庞大,而且利益相关者不容易抓住重点,数据也不好取得。因此本文只从结果方面来设计利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价指标,并在指标初选的基础上对指标进行筛选。最后从股东、金融机构、供应商、顾客、员工、政府与社区、社会公众7个利益相关者方面设置了18个评价指标,并对每个指标进行了详细说明。
(7)利益相关者理论认为,利益相关者是企业专用性资产的投入者,只有他们对其专用性资产拥有完整的产权,才能相互签约组成企业。专用性资产的多少以及资产所承担风险的大小正是利益相关者团体参与企业控制的依据。因此,本文认为按照利益相关者同等重要的原则和同类指标同等重要的原则来确定权数,过于简单化,也不符合企业的实际情况。本文采用变异系数法和层次分析法相结合的方法确定指标权数,克服了主观赋权法和客观赋权法的弊端,有一定的科学性。
(8)近20年来,多指标综合评价方法的理论研究和实践活动有了很大的发展,评价方法也日益复杂化、数学化和多学科化。从上面的分析看出,各个合成模型都有自身的优点,又有其局限性。为方便理解与应用,本文通过对指标进行趋同化和无量纲化处理、标准值的确定,采用改进后的功效系数法和综合指数法相结合的方法构建企业绩效综合评价模型。
(9)按照本文所建立的利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系,我们对105家矿产资源型上市公司的绩效进行了评价,并对企业绩效的影响因素进行了分析。结果表明：第一,从得分来看,105家矿产资源型上市公司三年来的总分没有一家超过70分,说明利益相关者视角下矿产资源型企业的绩效还有很多方面需要加强。第二,从排名来看,如果企业只关注某一个或二个利益相关者,而忽视其他的利益相关者,其排名将就会受到影响。第三,从影响因素来看,时间差异、矿产资源的用途差异、终极控股人差异、区域差异、规模差异等都对企业绩效有一定的影响。企业在持续经营过程中,需要关注这些差异,做好应对措施,以使利益相关者利益要求的满意程度得到长期稳定提高。
本文采用规范研究和实证研究相结合的方法来建立利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价体系。规范研究为本文提出问题、认识问题、理解问题奠定了基础,而翔实的实证研究则为进一步剖析问题、解决问题提供了依据。具体而言,为了从总体上准确把握利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价的研究进展,笔者查阅了大量的国内外文献,前人的研究成果对本文的研究提供了很多指导和帮助,有些需要完善的地方也为本文的研究寻找到了切入点；另外,本文采用规范研究的方法重点探讨了利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价的理论问题和评价主体问题,为随后几章的分析作了很好的铺垫；而在后面以实证研究为主的内容中,规范研究也始终是每一部分内容的基础。由于一套行之有效的绩效评价体系必须真实准确的反映企业的现实状况,并要经得起实践的检验,因此本文在规范研究的基础上,花费了更多的时间和精力进行实证研究。在实证研究中,本文数据取得的方法包括试调查、访谈调查、问卷调查和上市公司的经验数据。在数据处理的方法方面包括描述性统计、方差分析、参数检验和非参数检验、相关分析和回归分析等,这些方法的运用对本文的研究结论起了非常好的支撑作用。
本文的研究在以下三个方面力求有所创新：
(1)将企业绩效评价的主体分为源主体、执行主体。从理论上讲,凡是对企业进行了专用性投资的利益相关者,都应该对企业绩效有所要求,都应该成为企业的绩效评价主体,本文将他们称之为“源主体”。但从实践来看,让这些“源主体”都来设置企业绩效评价体系既不现实也无可能。因此,从客观、公正和准确的角度来看,我们认为中介机构作为企业绩效评价的“执行主体”更为合适。
(2)根据企业分类来确定企业绩效评价客体。在企业绩效评价的客体方面,目前有两种截然不同的做法,一是将所有的企业作为一个评价客体；二是采取案例研究的方法,将某一个企业作为评价客体。本文认为,这两种观点都不利于企业绩效的对比与分析,也不利于利益相关者根据企业的绩效作出正确的投资决策。因此,笔者采用实证研究的方法,通过问卷调查和上市公司的经验数据,得出不同类型的企业利益相关者对其利益要求不一样的结论。因此,我们应在对利益相关者的利益要求进行分析的基础上,按照企业的特征对企业进行分类,同类型的企业设置相同的绩效评价体系,而不同类型的企业绩效评价体系也应该有所不同。
(3)将变异系数法和层次分析法组合起来确定指标权数。目前指标权数确定的方法从大类来看有定性和定量两种,由于这两种方法有其各自的优缺点,因此有些文献就将所有指标的作用都视为相同。笔者认为这种做法过于简单,既不符合利益相关者理论也不符合企业的实际情况,因此采用定量分析和定性分析相结合的方法来确定评价指标的权数。首先利用企业经验数据,采用变异系数法确定各项评价指标和7个维度的权数；然后利用层次分析法,通过专家打分确定了各项评价指标和7个维度的权数；最后将变异系数法确定的权数和层次分析法确定的权数按照0.6：0.4的比例进行组合,最终确定7个维度和18个评价指标的权数,使指标权数的建立更具有客观性和公正性。
With the development of productivity and market competition, environmental pollution caused by maximizing shareholder value, waste of resources, poor product quality, lack of effective protection of the interests of employees and other issues are more and more serious, which greatly hampered the long-term stable development of enterprises. Stakeholder theory which was developed in the west in 60s of the 20th century considered that any business has many stakeholders, and they carried on special-purpose investment to the company and bear the investment risks. Therefore, the enterprise's survival and development depends on its ability to effectively deal with the relationship among various stakeholders, and shareholders is just only one of them. Theorists and practitioners gradually realized that it is a short-sighted behavior for enterprises if they simply pursue the goal of shareholder value in the production process, regardless of the interests of other stakeholders'requirements. The best way to the long-term survival and prosperity of enterprises is to consider and meet the interests and demands of all important stakeholders. Enterprise and stakeholder has a mutually beneficial relationship. From the perspective of stakeholders, as an supervision system and management system, the enterprise performance evaluation system is not only an enterprise's important self-monitoring, self-restraint, self-evaluation means, but also a vital instrumentation to effectively communicating with stakeholders, coordinating each stakeholder's interests and finally achieving the strategic management goal of enterprise. In this context, the significance of this paper is mainly reflected in the following two aspects:
(1) Theoretically, from perspective of stakeholders, the research on corporate performance evaluation system plays an important role for improving enterprise's performance evaluation theory. Under the economic globalization and intensified competition situation, the business environment has undergone profound changes, more and more stakeholders strengthen their relationships with the enterprise. Because these stakeholders put different resources into enterprise in different ways, they must have their own interests, and these different interests and demands need to be conveyed and reflected in a certain way and framework. Based on the requirements of constraint and incentive mechanism and stakeholders'demand differences, enterprise becomes the aggregation of multilateral contractual relationship, its strategic objectives should be clingy stakeholders, all stakeholders should compromise a unified target, that is enterprise's long-term stable development and constant growth of business total value. Regarding this goal, the design and the measurement of enterprise's performance is practical and feasible from the view of stakeholders. Though stakeholder theory gradually developed after 1960s, its core content, which is enterprise performance evaluation, so far has not formed a perfect system framework. Based on analysis of existing literature and enterprise performance evaluation theory basis, this dissertation firstly indicates basic theory of enterprise performance evaluation system in generally from the perspective of stakeholders. Then this dissertation focuses on evaluating subjects, evaluating objects, index, index weights, evaluation criteria, comprehensive evaluation model, etc. These studies will improve existing enterprise performance evaluation theory, and should also provide research foundation for relevant theory, such as motivation theory, distribution theory, etc.
(2) Practically, research process and the conclusion have certain reference value to enterprise's performance evaluation at least in the following several aspects:Firstly, it provides reference for the establishment of performance evaluation system. As a guidance of enterprise's operational activities, performance evaluation system needs to consider not only shareholder's benefit in the design process, but also other stakeholders'benefit. Moreover, only enterprise performance evaluation system is actually put into use can business functionality effectively played. If we put it aside, it can only bring cost of waste. Therefore, in the design process of performance evaluation system, we must consider its feasibility and the comparability with other enterprises. Secondly, it is helpful for stakeholders make correct investment decisions.
If stakeholders need to conduct accurate investment, they must have a clear understanding of the real situation of enterprise performance. Only in this way can they improve the accuracy of the investment and reduce investment risk. Thirdly, it is in favor of coordinating the conflicts between stakeholders, establishing mutual trust, honesty and win-win cooperation mechanism. As to the interests and demands, there will be similarities and conflicts between different stakeholders. If we can only understand conflicts but not cooperation between different stakeholders, it will possibly bring great transaction cost to enterprises and cause the enterprise to fall into the difficult position. And in the long run, the conflict is temporary, long-term cooperation is mutually beneficial. Stakeholder perspective-based enterprise performance evaluation is not only able to effectively regulate and monitor the behavior of enterprise managers, but also to promote better communication and coordination among stakeholders, so that the business activities can be healthy, stable and orderly. Fourthly, it will help guide the business operations and achieve sustainable development of enterprises. Along with the gradual establishment and improvement of market economy, the enterprise stakeholders concerns more and more, through the analyzing and comparing the protection degree of the interests of the enterprise stakeholders by using performance evaluation system, it can on the one hand strengthen the management and supervision, on the other hand can guide the business activities and enhance their market competitiveness.
Generally speaking, a complete evaluation system is made up of subject, object evaluation index, index weighs, the evaluation standards and evaluation method, etc. Through the literature retrieval we found that many experts and scholars have studied enterprise performance evaluation from the perspective of stakeholders, research results are abundant, but there are still some needed for improvement. If we want to completely beyond existing domestic and foreign research results to re-design a set of enterprise performance evaluation system from the perspective of stakeholders, this will not only expend the huge amount of work and duplication of work, but also be difficult to achieve a breakthrough. Therefore, based on existing relatively mature research results and enterprise performance evaluation theory framework, this dissertation conducts a study on enterprise performance evaluation system from the perspective of stakeholders. The main conclusions are as follows:
(1) Although from the very beginning, the enterprise performance evaluation is executed based on stakeholder's benefit satisfaction degree, the stakeholder it considered is very single. It is until 1990s that the literatures which concentrate on widely stakeholders began to appear. Stakeholder-based performance evaluation will become the mainstream along with the development of stakeholder theory and the strengthening of corporate social responsibility.
(2) According to the stakeholder theory, strategic management theory and system management theory, this paper argues that, from the perspective of the stakeholders, enterprise performance evaluation is a tool based on the interests and demands of stakeholders, it is fulfilled through the design of indicators, weights determined, the selection of standard value, the construction of integrated model and other steps these steps. This kind of evaluation can objectively, fairly and accurately measure stakeholders'interests and demands satisfaction degree during certain operation period, and then helps stakeholders to carry on the effective investment decision, and also guides enterprise to improve the management and operation and improve their management levels.
(3) Because any enterprise has numerous stakeholders, different stakeholders have different interests and demands, there will be many factors that we should consider during the construction process of stakeholder-based performance evaluation system. In order to make the indictors simple, convenient, and can really play evaluation, orientation, management and forecasting functions, the design of evaluation system followed such principles as target consistency, objectivity, applicability, systemic cost-effectiveness et al.
(4) As to evaluating subject, this dissertation divides "source subjects" of performance evaluation into 7 categories which are shareholders, financial institutions, suppliers, customers, employees, government and community and the public. The interests of these stakeholders closely relate to enterprise's overall interests, and all of them have motivation to measure enterprise performance. However, according to actual situation, it is impossible and unrealistic to let each "source subjects" set up an enterprise performance evaluation system. The dissertation argues that "source subjects" may be substituted by "executive subjects" which is an intermediary and composed of chief executive, guidance counselors, executive team and implementation team.
(5) As to evaluating objects, based on stakeholder theory and empirical research method, this dissertation analyzes evaluating objects that follows these stages:putting forward assumption-selecting variables-designing research-empirical results and interpretation. The results showed that different types of business have different interests and demands. Therefore, we cannot use a set of performance evaluation system for all kinds of enterprises, and neither can we establish different evaluation system for each enterprise. We should classify enterprises into different types, the same type of enterprise can be regarded as the same evaluating object. Taking into account the representativeness of the study, in subsequent research, the mineral resource-based enterprises are selected as an example for us to carry on enterprise performance evaluation research from the perspective of stakeholders.
(6) As businesses need to consider a number of stakeholders, if the stakeholder-based performance evaluation index system is designed from result and process aspects, then the index system will be very large and not easy to catch key stakeholders, moreover the data is also difficult to obtain. Therefore, the index system is designed only from result aspect, and the effective indexes are screened based on primary indexes. Finally, the author establishes 18 kinds of indicators and a detailed description of each indicator from the aspects of shareholders, financial institutions, suppliers, customers, employees, government, the community and the public.
(7) Stakeholder theory holds that stakeholders is the investor of special-purpose assets, only then they have the complete property right to its special-purpose property, can they sign a treaty mutually to compose an enterprise. The control that stakeholders group implement to enterprises is in accordance with quantity size and related risk level of special-purpose assets. Therefore, this dissertation argues that if the index weights are determined in accordance with principles that all stakeholders are equally important and similar indexes are equally important, it is oversimplified and doesn't conform to the actual situation of the enterprises. In this paper, in order to overcome the shortcomings of the methods to subjectively or objectively determine the weight of indexes, the AHP method combining with the variation coefficient method was adopted.
(8) Over the past 20 years, theoretical research and practical activities on multi-index synthetic evaluation method have great developments, and evaluation methods are also increasingly complicated, mathematical and emerging. The above analysis shows that each synthesis model has its own advantages as well as limitations. For the convenience of comprehension and application, this dissertation adopts comprehensive enterprise performance evaluation model which is established through index assimilation, dimensionless processing and the combination of improved efficacy coefficient method and comprehensive index method.
(9) Based on the enterprise performance evaluation system we established from the perspective of stakeholders, we chose 105 mineral resource-based enterprises and evaluated their performance, then analyzed influence factors of performance. Results show that:first, looking from the performance points, none of 105 firms obtained more than 70 scores, this result indicates that mineral resource-based enterprises need to strengthen their performance under the perspective of stakeholders. Second, looking from the rankings, if the enterprise focuses on one or two stakeholders and ignore other stakeholders, the ranking will be affected. Third, looking from the influencing factor, the time difference, mineral resource usage difference, the ultimate controlling person difference, regional difference, scale difference and so on have certain impacts on business performance. Business enterprises need to focus on these differences in the process of continuous operation and completes the counter measures so that the interests of stakeholders are satisfied and get long-term stability improvement.
In this dissertation, the author establishes an enterprise performance evaluation system from the perspective of stakeholders by using both normative and empirical methods. Normative research lays foundation for proposing problems, recognizing problems and understanding problems, moreover detailed normative research provides basis for analyzing problems and solving problems. Specifically, in order to accurately grasp the overall research progress in stakeholder-based enterprise performance evaluation, the author accesses to a large number of domestic and foreign literatures. Previous research results provide a lot of guidance and help for this dissertation and also help the author find research breakthrough point. Additionally, the theory and evaluating subject problem of stakeholder-based performance evaluation are probed emphasized by using normative research method and provide basis for next few chapters. Furthermore, normative research has always been the foundation of each empirical research contents part in later chapters. As an effective performance evaluation system must be true and accurate reflection of the reality of companies and can pass the test of practice, then based on normative research, it spends more time and energy on empirical research work. In the empirical study, data acquisition methods in this paper include investigation, interview, questionnaire survey and historical data of listed companies. Data processing methods used in this dissertation include descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, parameter test and non-parameter test, correlation analysis and regression analysis, etc. The use of these methods played a very good supporting role on conclusions of this paper.
The main possible innovations of the thesis concentrate on the following three aspects:
(1) Evaluating subjects are divided into "source subjects" and "executive subjects". Theoretically, any stakeholder who invests special-purpose asset in the enterprise has requirement on enterprise performance and should become enterprise's performance evaluating subjects. The author called them "source subjects". It is impossible and unrealistic to let each "source subjects" set up an enterprise performance evaluation system. Therefore, from an objective, fair and accurate perspective, we believe that intermediary agency is more appropriate to act as an "executive subjects".
(2) Performance evaluating objects are determined according to the classification of enterprise. There are two distinct approaches to determine performance evaluating objects:the one approach is that all the enterprises are treated as only one evaluating object, the other approach is that one enterprise was chose as an evaluating object by using case study method. This dissertation argues that both views are neither conducive to comparison and analysis of business performance, nor conducive to the stakeholders'decision-makings. Therefore, the author adopts empirical research method and takes use of questionnaire and historical data in listed companies, then she finds that stakeholders of different types of enterprises have different interests and demands. Hence, on the basis of the analysis of stakeholders'requirements, we should carry on the enterprise's classification in accordance with enterprise's characteristic. The same types of enterprises should set up the same performance evaluation system, and performance evaluation system of different types of enterprises should also be different.
(3) The AHP method combining with the variation coefficient method was adopted to identify index weights. The current index weight determining methods are, because both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, so that some literatures there are all indicators regarded the role of all indexes the same. The author thinks that this treatment is too simple, it neither conform to the stakeholder theory nor conform to the actual situation of the enterprise. Therefore, the author combines qualitative and quantitative method together to identify index weights. First, the author takes use of enterprise's empirical data and variation coefficient method is adopted to identify evaluating indexes and the weights of 7 dimensions. Next, evaluating indexes are chosen and the weights of 7 dimensions are determined through expert scoring and using of AHP method. Finally, the weights determined by variation coefficient method and AHP method are combined according to the proportion of 0.6:0.4, and ultimately determine the weights of 7dimensions and 18 evaluation indexes. This process helps establish a more objective and impartiality indexes system.
(1)从理论意义来说,利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系的研究对于完善企业绩效评价理论具有重要作用。在经济全球化和竞争白热化的形势下,企业的经营环境发生了深刻的变化,越来越多的利益相关者加强了与企业的关系,他们将不同的资源以不同的方式投入企业,必然有各自的利益所在,其利益要求也都需要通过一定的方式和构架得到传达和反映。因而基于约束和激励机制的要求,以及利益相关者需求的差异性,作为多边契约关系总和的企业,战略目标应紧贴企业利益主体,各个利益主体的目标都可以折衷为一个统一目标——企业长期稳定发展和企业总价值的不断增长。围绕这一目标,从利益相关者视角下设计和评价企业的绩效切实可行。作为20世纪60年代以后逐步发展起来的利益相关者理论,其核心内容—企业绩效评价,迄今为止还没有形成十分完善的框架体系。本文将在对现有文献和企业绩效评价理论基础进行系统分析的基础上,从总体上明确利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系的基本理论,重点探讨评价主体、评价客体、评价指标、指标权数、评价标准、综合评价模型方面的问题。本文认为,这些研究将完善现有企业绩效评价理论的内容框架,也为相关领域的理论研究,如激励理论、分配理论等奠定基础。
(2)从实际应用来看,本文的研究过程和结论至少在以下几个方面具有一定的参考价值：第一,为企业绩效评价体系的设置提供参考。作为引导企业生产经营活动的绩效评价体系,在设计过程中不但要考虑股东的利益,也要考虑其他利益相关者的利益。另外,企业绩效评价体系只有用于企业实际,其功能才能得到有效的发挥,如果束之高阁,那只能带来成本的浪费。因此,在绩效评价体系的设计过程中,一定要考虑可操作性和企业之间的可比性。第二,有利于利益相关者进行正确的投资决策。利益相关者要进行准确的投资,必须对企业真实的绩效状况有一个清楚地了解。只有这样才能提高投资的准确性,降低投资风险。第三,有利于协调利益相关者之间的利益冲突,建立起双方互信、诚信、双赢的合作机制。不同的利益相关者,其利益要求有相同的地方也有冲突的地方。如果只看到冲突而不能看到合作,将会给企业带来很大的交易成本,并可能使企业陷入困境。而且从长远来看,冲突是暂时的,合作是长期的,是互惠的。利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价不仅能够有效规范和监控企业经营者的行为,而且能够促使利益相关者之间加强沟通和协调,从而使得企业经营活动健康、稳定有序的进行。第四,有利于引导企业经营行为,实现企业的可持续发展。随着市场经济的逐步建立和完善,利益相关者对企业的关注也越来越多,通过企业绩效评价体系来对利益相关者的权益保护程度进行对比和分析,一方面可以强化对企业的管理和监督,另一方面可以引导企业的经营行为,提高其市场竞争能力。
一般来说,一个完整的绩效评价体系是由评价主体、评价客体、评价指标、指标权数、评价标准和评价方法等构成。通过文献检索我们看到,很多专家学者都对利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价进行了研究,研究成果丰富,但也还有一些需要完善的地方,而要想完全超越已有的国内外研究成果重新设计一套利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价体系,不仅工作量庞大,而且重复劳动很多,也难以取得突破性的进展。因此本文在企业绩效评价理论框架下,借鉴国内外相对成熟的研究成果,对利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系进行研究,并对评价结果进行分析。本文的主要结论如下：
(1)虽然企业绩效评价从一开始就是从利益相关者利益要求满意程度的角度对企业经营活动进行的评价,但考虑的利益相关者非常单一,而从广泛的利益相关者角度对企业绩效进行评价的文献直到20世纪90年代才开始出现。随着利益相关者理论和企业社会责任意识的加强,利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价将会成为企业绩效评价的主流。
(2)根据利益相关者理论、战略管理理论和系统管理理论,本文认为,利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价是指企业根据利益相关者的利益要求,通过指标设计、权数确定、标准值选取、综合模型构建等步骤,客观、公正和准确的评价企业一定经营期间内对利益相关者利益要求的满意程度,帮助利益相关者进行有效的投资决策,引导企业改善经营管理,提高经营水平。
(3)由于任何一个企业都有众多的利益相关者,不同的利益相关者有相同的地方,更有不同的地方。因此,利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价体系在设置过程中需要考虑的因素就很多。为了使设置的指标在实际应用过程中方便、简洁,切实发挥评价、导向、管理和预测功能,本文在利益相关者绩效评价体系的设计时遵循了目标一致性、客观性、适用性、系统性、成本效益性等原则。
(4)利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价主体方面,通过对利益相关者定义和分类的文献阅读,并结合我国的实际情况,本文将企业绩效评价的“源主体”分为股东、金融机构、供应商、顾客、员工、政府和社区、社会公众7大类。这7类利益相关者的利益要求与企业的整体利益密切相关,都有对企业绩效进行评价的动机。但从实际情况来看,让这些“源主体”都来设置企业绩效评价体系既不现实也无可能。本文认为,可由中介机构作为“执行主体”,由执行长、指导顾问、执行团队、推行团队等组成一个专门机构,代替“源主体”对企业绩效进行评价。
(5)利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价客体方面,本文从利益相关者理论出发,采用实证研究的方法,按照假设提出—变量选择—研究设计—实证结果及解释等步骤对企业绩效评价客体进行分析,结果表明,不同类型的企业利益相关者对其利益要求是有差异的。因此,我们不能把所有的企业放在一起采用一套指标进行评价,也不能每个企业都设置不同的绩效评价体系,而应该从利益相关者的角度对企业进行分类,将同类型的企业作为一个评价客体。考虑到研究的代表性,在后续的研究中,将以矿产资源型企业为例,对利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系进行研究。
(6)由于企业要考虑的利益相关者众多,如果从结果和过程两个方面来设计利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价指标体系,指标体系将会非常庞大,而且利益相关者不容易抓住重点,数据也不好取得。因此本文只从结果方面来设计利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价指标,并在指标初选的基础上对指标进行筛选。最后从股东、金融机构、供应商、顾客、员工、政府与社区、社会公众7个利益相关者方面设置了18个评价指标,并对每个指标进行了详细说明。
(7)利益相关者理论认为,利益相关者是企业专用性资产的投入者,只有他们对其专用性资产拥有完整的产权,才能相互签约组成企业。专用性资产的多少以及资产所承担风险的大小正是利益相关者团体参与企业控制的依据。因此,本文认为按照利益相关者同等重要的原则和同类指标同等重要的原则来确定权数,过于简单化,也不符合企业的实际情况。本文采用变异系数法和层次分析法相结合的方法确定指标权数,克服了主观赋权法和客观赋权法的弊端,有一定的科学性。
(8)近20年来,多指标综合评价方法的理论研究和实践活动有了很大的发展,评价方法也日益复杂化、数学化和多学科化。从上面的分析看出,各个合成模型都有自身的优点,又有其局限性。为方便理解与应用,本文通过对指标进行趋同化和无量纲化处理、标准值的确定,采用改进后的功效系数法和综合指数法相结合的方法构建企业绩效综合评价模型。
(9)按照本文所建立的利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价体系,我们对105家矿产资源型上市公司的绩效进行了评价,并对企业绩效的影响因素进行了分析。结果表明：第一,从得分来看,105家矿产资源型上市公司三年来的总分没有一家超过70分,说明利益相关者视角下矿产资源型企业的绩效还有很多方面需要加强。第二,从排名来看,如果企业只关注某一个或二个利益相关者,而忽视其他的利益相关者,其排名将就会受到影响。第三,从影响因素来看,时间差异、矿产资源的用途差异、终极控股人差异、区域差异、规模差异等都对企业绩效有一定的影响。企业在持续经营过程中,需要关注这些差异,做好应对措施,以使利益相关者利益要求的满意程度得到长期稳定提高。
本文采用规范研究和实证研究相结合的方法来建立利益相关者视角下的企业绩效评价体系。规范研究为本文提出问题、认识问题、理解问题奠定了基础,而翔实的实证研究则为进一步剖析问题、解决问题提供了依据。具体而言,为了从总体上准确把握利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价的研究进展,笔者查阅了大量的国内外文献,前人的研究成果对本文的研究提供了很多指导和帮助,有些需要完善的地方也为本文的研究寻找到了切入点；另外,本文采用规范研究的方法重点探讨了利益相关者视角下企业绩效评价的理论问题和评价主体问题,为随后几章的分析作了很好的铺垫；而在后面以实证研究为主的内容中,规范研究也始终是每一部分内容的基础。由于一套行之有效的绩效评价体系必须真实准确的反映企业的现实状况,并要经得起实践的检验,因此本文在规范研究的基础上,花费了更多的时间和精力进行实证研究。在实证研究中,本文数据取得的方法包括试调查、访谈调查、问卷调查和上市公司的经验数据。在数据处理的方法方面包括描述性统计、方差分析、参数检验和非参数检验、相关分析和回归分析等,这些方法的运用对本文的研究结论起了非常好的支撑作用。
本文的研究在以下三个方面力求有所创新：
(1)将企业绩效评价的主体分为源主体、执行主体。从理论上讲,凡是对企业进行了专用性投资的利益相关者,都应该对企业绩效有所要求,都应该成为企业的绩效评价主体,本文将他们称之为“源主体”。但从实践来看,让这些“源主体”都来设置企业绩效评价体系既不现实也无可能。因此,从客观、公正和准确的角度来看,我们认为中介机构作为企业绩效评价的“执行主体”更为合适。
(2)根据企业分类来确定企业绩效评价客体。在企业绩效评价的客体方面,目前有两种截然不同的做法,一是将所有的企业作为一个评价客体；二是采取案例研究的方法,将某一个企业作为评价客体。本文认为,这两种观点都不利于企业绩效的对比与分析,也不利于利益相关者根据企业的绩效作出正确的投资决策。因此,笔者采用实证研究的方法,通过问卷调查和上市公司的经验数据,得出不同类型的企业利益相关者对其利益要求不一样的结论。因此,我们应在对利益相关者的利益要求进行分析的基础上,按照企业的特征对企业进行分类,同类型的企业设置相同的绩效评价体系,而不同类型的企业绩效评价体系也应该有所不同。
(3)将变异系数法和层次分析法组合起来确定指标权数。目前指标权数确定的方法从大类来看有定性和定量两种,由于这两种方法有其各自的优缺点,因此有些文献就将所有指标的作用都视为相同。笔者认为这种做法过于简单,既不符合利益相关者理论也不符合企业的实际情况,因此采用定量分析和定性分析相结合的方法来确定评价指标的权数。首先利用企业经验数据,采用变异系数法确定各项评价指标和7个维度的权数；然后利用层次分析法,通过专家打分确定了各项评价指标和7个维度的权数；最后将变异系数法确定的权数和层次分析法确定的权数按照0.6：0.4的比例进行组合,最终确定7个维度和18个评价指标的权数,使指标权数的建立更具有客观性和公正性。
With the development of productivity and market competition, environmental pollution caused by maximizing shareholder value, waste of resources, poor product quality, lack of effective protection of the interests of employees and other issues are more and more serious, which greatly hampered the long-term stable development of enterprises. Stakeholder theory which was developed in the west in 60s of the 20th century considered that any business has many stakeholders, and they carried on special-purpose investment to the company and bear the investment risks. Therefore, the enterprise's survival and development depends on its ability to effectively deal with the relationship among various stakeholders, and shareholders is just only one of them. Theorists and practitioners gradually realized that it is a short-sighted behavior for enterprises if they simply pursue the goal of shareholder value in the production process, regardless of the interests of other stakeholders'requirements. The best way to the long-term survival and prosperity of enterprises is to consider and meet the interests and demands of all important stakeholders. Enterprise and stakeholder has a mutually beneficial relationship. From the perspective of stakeholders, as an supervision system and management system, the enterprise performance evaluation system is not only an enterprise's important self-monitoring, self-restraint, self-evaluation means, but also a vital instrumentation to effectively communicating with stakeholders, coordinating each stakeholder's interests and finally achieving the strategic management goal of enterprise. In this context, the significance of this paper is mainly reflected in the following two aspects:
(1) Theoretically, from perspective of stakeholders, the research on corporate performance evaluation system plays an important role for improving enterprise's performance evaluation theory. Under the economic globalization and intensified competition situation, the business environment has undergone profound changes, more and more stakeholders strengthen their relationships with the enterprise. Because these stakeholders put different resources into enterprise in different ways, they must have their own interests, and these different interests and demands need to be conveyed and reflected in a certain way and framework. Based on the requirements of constraint and incentive mechanism and stakeholders'demand differences, enterprise becomes the aggregation of multilateral contractual relationship, its strategic objectives should be clingy stakeholders, all stakeholders should compromise a unified target, that is enterprise's long-term stable development and constant growth of business total value. Regarding this goal, the design and the measurement of enterprise's performance is practical and feasible from the view of stakeholders. Though stakeholder theory gradually developed after 1960s, its core content, which is enterprise performance evaluation, so far has not formed a perfect system framework. Based on analysis of existing literature and enterprise performance evaluation theory basis, this dissertation firstly indicates basic theory of enterprise performance evaluation system in generally from the perspective of stakeholders. Then this dissertation focuses on evaluating subjects, evaluating objects, index, index weights, evaluation criteria, comprehensive evaluation model, etc. These studies will improve existing enterprise performance evaluation theory, and should also provide research foundation for relevant theory, such as motivation theory, distribution theory, etc.
(2) Practically, research process and the conclusion have certain reference value to enterprise's performance evaluation at least in the following several aspects:Firstly, it provides reference for the establishment of performance evaluation system. As a guidance of enterprise's operational activities, performance evaluation system needs to consider not only shareholder's benefit in the design process, but also other stakeholders'benefit. Moreover, only enterprise performance evaluation system is actually put into use can business functionality effectively played. If we put it aside, it can only bring cost of waste. Therefore, in the design process of performance evaluation system, we must consider its feasibility and the comparability with other enterprises. Secondly, it is helpful for stakeholders make correct investment decisions.
If stakeholders need to conduct accurate investment, they must have a clear understanding of the real situation of enterprise performance. Only in this way can they improve the accuracy of the investment and reduce investment risk. Thirdly, it is in favor of coordinating the conflicts between stakeholders, establishing mutual trust, honesty and win-win cooperation mechanism. As to the interests and demands, there will be similarities and conflicts between different stakeholders. If we can only understand conflicts but not cooperation between different stakeholders, it will possibly bring great transaction cost to enterprises and cause the enterprise to fall into the difficult position. And in the long run, the conflict is temporary, long-term cooperation is mutually beneficial. Stakeholder perspective-based enterprise performance evaluation is not only able to effectively regulate and monitor the behavior of enterprise managers, but also to promote better communication and coordination among stakeholders, so that the business activities can be healthy, stable and orderly. Fourthly, it will help guide the business operations and achieve sustainable development of enterprises. Along with the gradual establishment and improvement of market economy, the enterprise stakeholders concerns more and more, through the analyzing and comparing the protection degree of the interests of the enterprise stakeholders by using performance evaluation system, it can on the one hand strengthen the management and supervision, on the other hand can guide the business activities and enhance their market competitiveness.
Generally speaking, a complete evaluation system is made up of subject, object evaluation index, index weighs, the evaluation standards and evaluation method, etc. Through the literature retrieval we found that many experts and scholars have studied enterprise performance evaluation from the perspective of stakeholders, research results are abundant, but there are still some needed for improvement. If we want to completely beyond existing domestic and foreign research results to re-design a set of enterprise performance evaluation system from the perspective of stakeholders, this will not only expend the huge amount of work and duplication of work, but also be difficult to achieve a breakthrough. Therefore, based on existing relatively mature research results and enterprise performance evaluation theory framework, this dissertation conducts a study on enterprise performance evaluation system from the perspective of stakeholders. The main conclusions are as follows:
(1) Although from the very beginning, the enterprise performance evaluation is executed based on stakeholder's benefit satisfaction degree, the stakeholder it considered is very single. It is until 1990s that the literatures which concentrate on widely stakeholders began to appear. Stakeholder-based performance evaluation will become the mainstream along with the development of stakeholder theory and the strengthening of corporate social responsibility.
(2) According to the stakeholder theory, strategic management theory and system management theory, this paper argues that, from the perspective of the stakeholders, enterprise performance evaluation is a tool based on the interests and demands of stakeholders, it is fulfilled through the design of indicators, weights determined, the selection of standard value, the construction of integrated model and other steps these steps. This kind of evaluation can objectively, fairly and accurately measure stakeholders'interests and demands satisfaction degree during certain operation period, and then helps stakeholders to carry on the effective investment decision, and also guides enterprise to improve the management and operation and improve their management levels.
(3) Because any enterprise has numerous stakeholders, different stakeholders have different interests and demands, there will be many factors that we should consider during the construction process of stakeholder-based performance evaluation system. In order to make the indictors simple, convenient, and can really play evaluation, orientation, management and forecasting functions, the design of evaluation system followed such principles as target consistency, objectivity, applicability, systemic cost-effectiveness et al.
(4) As to evaluating subject, this dissertation divides "source subjects" of performance evaluation into 7 categories which are shareholders, financial institutions, suppliers, customers, employees, government and community and the public. The interests of these stakeholders closely relate to enterprise's overall interests, and all of them have motivation to measure enterprise performance. However, according to actual situation, it is impossible and unrealistic to let each "source subjects" set up an enterprise performance evaluation system. The dissertation argues that "source subjects" may be substituted by "executive subjects" which is an intermediary and composed of chief executive, guidance counselors, executive team and implementation team.
(5) As to evaluating objects, based on stakeholder theory and empirical research method, this dissertation analyzes evaluating objects that follows these stages:putting forward assumption-selecting variables-designing research-empirical results and interpretation. The results showed that different types of business have different interests and demands. Therefore, we cannot use a set of performance evaluation system for all kinds of enterprises, and neither can we establish different evaluation system for each enterprise. We should classify enterprises into different types, the same type of enterprise can be regarded as the same evaluating object. Taking into account the representativeness of the study, in subsequent research, the mineral resource-based enterprises are selected as an example for us to carry on enterprise performance evaluation research from the perspective of stakeholders.
(6) As businesses need to consider a number of stakeholders, if the stakeholder-based performance evaluation index system is designed from result and process aspects, then the index system will be very large and not easy to catch key stakeholders, moreover the data is also difficult to obtain. Therefore, the index system is designed only from result aspect, and the effective indexes are screened based on primary indexes. Finally, the author establishes 18 kinds of indicators and a detailed description of each indicator from the aspects of shareholders, financial institutions, suppliers, customers, employees, government, the community and the public.
(7) Stakeholder theory holds that stakeholders is the investor of special-purpose assets, only then they have the complete property right to its special-purpose property, can they sign a treaty mutually to compose an enterprise. The control that stakeholders group implement to enterprises is in accordance with quantity size and related risk level of special-purpose assets. Therefore, this dissertation argues that if the index weights are determined in accordance with principles that all stakeholders are equally important and similar indexes are equally important, it is oversimplified and doesn't conform to the actual situation of the enterprises. In this paper, in order to overcome the shortcomings of the methods to subjectively or objectively determine the weight of indexes, the AHP method combining with the variation coefficient method was adopted.
(8) Over the past 20 years, theoretical research and practical activities on multi-index synthetic evaluation method have great developments, and evaluation methods are also increasingly complicated, mathematical and emerging. The above analysis shows that each synthesis model has its own advantages as well as limitations. For the convenience of comprehension and application, this dissertation adopts comprehensive enterprise performance evaluation model which is established through index assimilation, dimensionless processing and the combination of improved efficacy coefficient method and comprehensive index method.
(9) Based on the enterprise performance evaluation system we established from the perspective of stakeholders, we chose 105 mineral resource-based enterprises and evaluated their performance, then analyzed influence factors of performance. Results show that:first, looking from the performance points, none of 105 firms obtained more than 70 scores, this result indicates that mineral resource-based enterprises need to strengthen their performance under the perspective of stakeholders. Second, looking from the rankings, if the enterprise focuses on one or two stakeholders and ignore other stakeholders, the ranking will be affected. Third, looking from the influencing factor, the time difference, mineral resource usage difference, the ultimate controlling person difference, regional difference, scale difference and so on have certain impacts on business performance. Business enterprises need to focus on these differences in the process of continuous operation and completes the counter measures so that the interests of stakeholders are satisfied and get long-term stability improvement.
In this dissertation, the author establishes an enterprise performance evaluation system from the perspective of stakeholders by using both normative and empirical methods. Normative research lays foundation for proposing problems, recognizing problems and understanding problems, moreover detailed normative research provides basis for analyzing problems and solving problems. Specifically, in order to accurately grasp the overall research progress in stakeholder-based enterprise performance evaluation, the author accesses to a large number of domestic and foreign literatures. Previous research results provide a lot of guidance and help for this dissertation and also help the author find research breakthrough point. Additionally, the theory and evaluating subject problem of stakeholder-based performance evaluation are probed emphasized by using normative research method and provide basis for next few chapters. Furthermore, normative research has always been the foundation of each empirical research contents part in later chapters. As an effective performance evaluation system must be true and accurate reflection of the reality of companies and can pass the test of practice, then based on normative research, it spends more time and energy on empirical research work. In the empirical study, data acquisition methods in this paper include investigation, interview, questionnaire survey and historical data of listed companies. Data processing methods used in this dissertation include descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, parameter test and non-parameter test, correlation analysis and regression analysis, etc. The use of these methods played a very good supporting role on conclusions of this paper.
The main possible innovations of the thesis concentrate on the following three aspects:
(1) Evaluating subjects are divided into "source subjects" and "executive subjects". Theoretically, any stakeholder who invests special-purpose asset in the enterprise has requirement on enterprise performance and should become enterprise's performance evaluating subjects. The author called them "source subjects". It is impossible and unrealistic to let each "source subjects" set up an enterprise performance evaluation system. Therefore, from an objective, fair and accurate perspective, we believe that intermediary agency is more appropriate to act as an "executive subjects".
(2) Performance evaluating objects are determined according to the classification of enterprise. There are two distinct approaches to determine performance evaluating objects:the one approach is that all the enterprises are treated as only one evaluating object, the other approach is that one enterprise was chose as an evaluating object by using case study method. This dissertation argues that both views are neither conducive to comparison and analysis of business performance, nor conducive to the stakeholders'decision-makings. Therefore, the author adopts empirical research method and takes use of questionnaire and historical data in listed companies, then she finds that stakeholders of different types of enterprises have different interests and demands. Hence, on the basis of the analysis of stakeholders'requirements, we should carry on the enterprise's classification in accordance with enterprise's characteristic. The same types of enterprises should set up the same performance evaluation system, and performance evaluation system of different types of enterprises should also be different.
(3) The AHP method combining with the variation coefficient method was adopted to identify index weights. The current index weight determining methods are, because both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, so that some literatures there are all indicators regarded the role of all indexes the same. The author thinks that this treatment is too simple, it neither conform to the stakeholder theory nor conform to the actual situation of the enterprise. Therefore, the author combines qualitative and quantitative method together to identify index weights. First, the author takes use of enterprise's empirical data and variation coefficient method is adopted to identify evaluating indexes and the weights of 7 dimensions. Next, evaluating indexes are chosen and the weights of 7 dimensions are determined through expert scoring and using of AHP method. Finally, the weights determined by variation coefficient method and AHP method are combined according to the proportion of 0.6:0.4, and ultimately determine the weights of 7dimensions and 18 evaluation indexes. This process helps establish a more objective and impartiality indexes system.
引文
[1]李心合.公司价值取向及其演变趋势[J].财经研究,2004.(10)：132-144
[2]王化成,刘俊勇.企业业绩评价模式研究一兼论中国企业业绩评价模式选择[J].管理世界,2004,(4)：82-116.
[3]财政部会计管理司.企业财务通则[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1993.
[4]国务院国资委统计评价局.企业经济效益评价指标体系(试行)[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1995.
[5]中国会计学会.国有资本金效绩评价规则[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2002.
[6]国务院国资委统计评价局.2005年企业绩效评价标准[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2005.
[7]张蕊.企业经营业绩评价理论与方法的变革[J].会计研究,2001,(12)：46-50.
[8]贾生华,陈宏辉,田传浩.基于利益相关者理论的企业绩效评价—一个分析框架[J].科技管理,2003,(4)：94-101
[9]陆庆平.以价值最大化为导向的企业绩效评价体系——基于利益相关者理论[J].会计研究,2006,(3)：56-62.
[10]张蕊.企业循环战略业绩评价理论问题研究[J].当代财经,2007,(7)：104-107.
[11]张川,潘飞.国内外综合业绩评级体系的研究述评[J].当代财经,2008,(4)：120-123.
[12]俞义樵、张维.基于利益相关者的企业经营者业绩评估研究[J].重庆大学学报2009,(1)：48-53
[13]财政部统计评价司.企业绩效评价问答[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1999
[14]孟建民.中国企业劾绩评价[M].北京：中国财政出版社,2002
[15]沈洪涛.公司特征与公司社会责任信息披露——来自我国上市公司的经验证据[J].会计研究,2007.3：9-16
[16]杨宗昌,许波.企业经营绩效评价模式研究——我国电信企业经营绩效考评方法初探[J].会计研究,2003,12：49-51.
[17]温素彬、黄浩岚.利益相关者价值取向的企业绩效评价—绩效三棱镜的应用案例[J].会计研究,2009.4；62-68
[18]王蓉华,费鹤良,徐晓岭.异常数据检验的均值比方法[J].数理统计与应用概率[J],1998,13(1)：63-70.
[19]张德然.统计数据中异常值的检验方法[J].统计研究,2003,5：53-55.
[20]毋红军,刘章.统计数据的异常值检验[J].华北水利水电学院学报,2003,24(1)：69-72.
[21]何平.剔除异常数据中异常值的若干方法[J].航空计测技术,1995,15(1)：19-22.
[22]杜栋等编著：现代综合评价方法与案例精选[M].清华大学出版社,2008
[18]易晓文.上市公司财务状况综合评价实证分析[J].温州大学学报,2002,12(4).
[23]潘淑清.基于客观赋权法的企业竞争力评价方法[J].统计与决策,2005,10：129-130.
[24]杨宇.多指标综合评价中赋权方法评析[J].统计与决策,2006,7：17-19.
[25]林海明,张文霖.主成分分析与因子分析详细的异同和SPSS软件——兼与刘玉玫、卢纹岱等同志商榷[J].统计研究,2005,3：65-69.
[26]曾卫.上市公司业绩综合评价模型的构建及应用[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2002,2：95-98.
[27]徐国祥,檀向球,胡穗华.上市公司经营业绩综合评价及其实证研究[J].统计研究,2000,9：44-51.
[28]叶宗裕.关于多指标综合评价中指标正向化和无量纲化方法的选择[J].浙江统计,2003,4：24-25.
[29]朱孔来.综合评价研究[M].山东：山东人民出版社,2004.
[30].中国证券监督管理委员会信息中心编.上市公司行业分类手册[M].百家出版社,2001年。
[31]赵雯.企业经营综合评价指标体系研究[J].当代财经.1995(5)：49-54
[28]高晨.主观业绩评价研究：述评与启示[J].会计研究.2008(4)：84-88
[29]林有志,张雅芬.信息透明度与企业经营绩效的关系[J].会计研究.2007(9)：26-34
[30]古丽娜、张双武.公司社会责任、利益相关者和公司绩效研究.西北民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版)[J].2004(3)：68-73
[31]陈共荣,曾峻.企业绩效评价主体的演进及其对绩效评价的影响[J].会计研究.2005(4)：65-69.
[32]温素彬,薛恒新.基于科学发展观的企业三重绩效评价模型[J].会计研究.2005(4)：60-64
[33]徐国祥,檀向球,胡穗华.上市公司经营业绩综合评价及其实证研究[J].统计研究.2000(9)：44-51.
[34]潘琰,程小可.上市公司经营业绩的主成份评价方法[J].会计研究.2000(1)：31-35.
[35]池国华,迟旭升.我国上市公司经营业绩评价系统研究[J].会计研究.2003(8)：45-47.
[36]史习民.上市公司复合型业绩评价系统的基本架构[J].财经论丛.2005(3)：93-98.
[37]陈宏辉、贾生华.企业利益相关者三维分类的实证研究[J].经济研究.2004(4)：80-90
[38]陈宏辉、贾生华.企业利益相关者的利益协调与公司治理的平衡研究[J].中国工业经济.2005(8)：114-121
[39]孙永风,李恒.企业绩效评价的理论综述及存在的问题分析[J].预测.2004(2)：41-47
[40]刘淑莲.企业价值评估与价值创造战略研究—两种价值模式与六大驱动因素 [J].会计研究.2004(9)：67-71
[41]王蓉华,费鹤良,徐晓岭.异常数据检验的均值比方法[J].数理统计与应用概率.1998(13)：63-70.
[42]周宏,王海妹,张巍.相对绩效评价的绩效形式研究[J].会计研究.2008(6)72-76
[43]王斌.中国国有企业业绩评价制度：回顾与思考[J].会计研究.2008(11)：21-28
[44]梅国平.基于复相关系数法的公司绩效评价实证研究[J].管理世界.2004(1)：145-149
[45]安迪·.尼利、克里斯·亚当斯、迈克·肯尼尔利著,李剑锋等译.战略绩效管理—超越平衡计分卡[M],北京：电子工业出版社,2004
[46]史蒂文·F·沃克、杰弗里·.E·马尔著,赵宝华、刘彦平译.利益相关者权力[M],北京：经济管理出版社,2003
[47]罗伯特·卡普兰、安东尼·A·阿特金森.高级管理会计[M],大连：东北财经大学出版社,1999.
[48]加里·.P·莱瑟姆等著,萧鸣政等译.绩效考评—致力于提高企事业组织的综合实力(第2版)[M],中国人民大学出版社,2002
[49]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,刘俊勇、孙薇译,王化成译校.平衡计分卡—化战略为行动[M].广东经济出版社,2004
[50]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,上海博意门咨询有限公司译.平衡计分卡的制胜方略--战略中心型组织[M].中国人民大学出版社,2008
[51]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,刘俊勇、孙薇译.战略地图—化无形资产为有形成果[M].广东经济出版社,2005
[52]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,博意门咨询公司译.组织协同—运用平衡计分卡创造企业合力[M].商务印书馆,2006
[53]Abbott, W.F.and R.J.Monsen (1979) " On the Measurement of Corporate Social esponsibility:elf-Reported Disclosures as a Method of Measuring Corporate Social Involvement", Academy of Management Journal, Vol.22, No.3 (July), p.501.
[54]Adams C, Neely A.2003. The New Spectrum:How the Performance Prism Frame work Helps. Performance Management,2:5-25
[55]Ansoff,1.1965.Corporatest Strategy, McGraw Hill, New York.
[56]Aoki, M.1984.Co-operativegame theory of the firm, Oxford University press &Clarendon Press.
[57]Berle, A.& Means, G.1932.The modern corporation and Private property.New York:McMillan.
[58]BlairM.M.1995b.Corporate "ownership". Brookings Review(winter):16-19.
[59]BlairM.M.& Lynn A.S.1999b.A team production theory of corporate law. The journal of corporationlaw(4):751-806.
[60]Buhner, R., Rasheed, A., Rosenstein, J.,&Yoshikawa, T.1998. Research on corporate governance:A comparison of Germany, Japan, and the United States. Advances in International Comparative Management 12:121-155.
[61]Carroll, A.B.1993.Ethics and stakeholder management (2nd ed.).Cincinnati: South-Western.
[62]Clarke, T.1998.The Stakeholder Corporation:A Business Philosophy for the Information Age. Long Range Planning 31(2):182-194.
[63]Cho.Charles.H.and Dennis M.Patten, (2007) " The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy:Are-search note" Accounting, Organizations and Society 32 (2007) 639-647.
[64]Clarkson, M.1994.Arisk-based model of stakeholder theory. Proceedings of the Toronto Conference on Stakeholder Theory. Center for Corporate Social Performance and Ethies. University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
[65]Clarkson, M.1995.Astakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review 20(1):92-117.
[66]Cowen, S.S., L.B.Ferreri and L.D.Parker (1987), "The Impact of Corporate Characteristics on Social Responsibility Disclosure:A Typology and Frequency-Based Analysis", Accounting, Orga-nizations and Society, Vol.12, No.2 (March), p.lll.
[67]Donaldson, T.& Dunfee, T.W.1995.Integrative social contracts theory:A communitarian conception of economic ethics. Economics and Philosophy 11(1):85-112.
[68]Donaldson, T.& Preston, L.E.1995.The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review20(1):65-91.
[69]Frederiek, W.C.1988.Business and society, corporate strategy, public policy, ethics(6thed.), McGraw-Hill Book Co.
[70]Freeman, R.E.1984.strategic management:A stakeholder approach, Boston, MA:Pitman.
[71]Freeman, R.E.1994.The Politics of stakeholder theory:Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly 4:409-421.
[72]Freeman, R.E.,& Reed, D.L.1983.Stoeltholders and stakeholders:A new Perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review25(3):88-106
[73]Jacabs M.1997. The Environment as Stakeholder. Business Strategy Review, 2:25-28
[74]Holmstrom, B.,1982, Moral Hazard in Teams [J], Bell Journal of Economics, Vol.13,324-340.
[75]Husted, Bryan W.,2000, A Contingency Theory of Corporate Social Performance [J], Business and Society, Vol.39(1),24-48.
[76]Ingram, R.W.,1978, A Investigation of the Information Content of(Certain)Social Responsibility Disclosures[J], Journal of Accounting Research,16,270-285.
[77]Jawahar, I.M., and Mclaughlin, G.L.,2001, Toward a Descriptive Stakeholder Theory:An Organizational Life Cycle Approach[J], Academy of Management Review, Vol.26(3),397-414.
[78]Jensen, M., and Meckling, W.,1976, Theory of the Firm:Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure[J], Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.3, 305-360.
[79]Jensen, Michael C.,2002, Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory and the Corporate Objective Function, Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking[M], Greenleaf Publishing Limited.
[80]Jones, T.M.,1994, The Toronto Conference:Reflections on Stakeholder Theory[J], Business and Society, Vol.33(1),82-131。
[81]Jones, T.M.,1995, Instrumental Stakeholder Theory:A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics[J], Academy of Management Review, Vol.20(2),404-437.
[82]Neely A, Adams C, Kennerley M.2002. The Performance Prism:The Scorecard for Measuring and Managing Bushless Success. Person Education Limited
[83]Richardson, Alan, and Welker, Michael, (2001), "Social Disclosure, Financial Disclosure and the Cost of Equity Capital", Accounting, Organization and Society, 26,597-616.
[84]Shankman, N.A.1999. Reframing the debate between agency and stakeholder theories of the firm. Journal of Business Ethics 19(4):319-334.
[85]Wheeler D, M Sillanpaa.1998. Including the Stakeholder:The Business Case. Long Range Planning,2:201-210
[86]Trevino, L.K., and Weaver, G.R.,1999, Response:The Stakeholder Research Tradition:Converging Theorists-Not Convergent Theory[J], Academy of Management Review, Vol.24(2),222-227.
[87]Wijnberg, N.M.,2000, Normative Stakeholder Theory and Aristotle:The Link Between Ethics and Politics[J], Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.25,329-342.
[88]Windsor D.,2002, Jensen's Approach to Stakeholder Theory[A], Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking, Greenleaf Publishing Limited.
[2]王化成,刘俊勇.企业业绩评价模式研究一兼论中国企业业绩评价模式选择[J].管理世界,2004,(4)：82-116.
[3]财政部会计管理司.企业财务通则[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1993.
[4]国务院国资委统计评价局.企业经济效益评价指标体系(试行)[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1995.
[5]中国会计学会.国有资本金效绩评价规则[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2002.
[6]国务院国资委统计评价局.2005年企业绩效评价标准[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2005.
[7]张蕊.企业经营业绩评价理论与方法的变革[J].会计研究,2001,(12)：46-50.
[8]贾生华,陈宏辉,田传浩.基于利益相关者理论的企业绩效评价—一个分析框架[J].科技管理,2003,(4)：94-101
[9]陆庆平.以价值最大化为导向的企业绩效评价体系——基于利益相关者理论[J].会计研究,2006,(3)：56-62.
[10]张蕊.企业循环战略业绩评价理论问题研究[J].当代财经,2007,(7)：104-107.
[11]张川,潘飞.国内外综合业绩评级体系的研究述评[J].当代财经,2008,(4)：120-123.
[12]俞义樵、张维.基于利益相关者的企业经营者业绩评估研究[J].重庆大学学报2009,(1)：48-53
[13]财政部统计评价司.企业绩效评价问答[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1999
[14]孟建民.中国企业劾绩评价[M].北京：中国财政出版社,2002
[15]沈洪涛.公司特征与公司社会责任信息披露——来自我国上市公司的经验证据[J].会计研究,2007.3：9-16
[16]杨宗昌,许波.企业经营绩效评价模式研究——我国电信企业经营绩效考评方法初探[J].会计研究,2003,12：49-51.
[17]温素彬、黄浩岚.利益相关者价值取向的企业绩效评价—绩效三棱镜的应用案例[J].会计研究,2009.4；62-68
[18]王蓉华,费鹤良,徐晓岭.异常数据检验的均值比方法[J].数理统计与应用概率[J],1998,13(1)：63-70.
[19]张德然.统计数据中异常值的检验方法[J].统计研究,2003,5：53-55.
[20]毋红军,刘章.统计数据的异常值检验[J].华北水利水电学院学报,2003,24(1)：69-72.
[21]何平.剔除异常数据中异常值的若干方法[J].航空计测技术,1995,15(1)：19-22.
[22]杜栋等编著：现代综合评价方法与案例精选[M].清华大学出版社,2008
[18]易晓文.上市公司财务状况综合评价实证分析[J].温州大学学报,2002,12(4).
[23]潘淑清.基于客观赋权法的企业竞争力评价方法[J].统计与决策,2005,10：129-130.
[24]杨宇.多指标综合评价中赋权方法评析[J].统计与决策,2006,7：17-19.
[25]林海明,张文霖.主成分分析与因子分析详细的异同和SPSS软件——兼与刘玉玫、卢纹岱等同志商榷[J].统计研究,2005,3：65-69.
[26]曾卫.上市公司业绩综合评价模型的构建及应用[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2002,2：95-98.
[27]徐国祥,檀向球,胡穗华.上市公司经营业绩综合评价及其实证研究[J].统计研究,2000,9：44-51.
[28]叶宗裕.关于多指标综合评价中指标正向化和无量纲化方法的选择[J].浙江统计,2003,4：24-25.
[29]朱孔来.综合评价研究[M].山东：山东人民出版社,2004.
[30].中国证券监督管理委员会信息中心编.上市公司行业分类手册[M].百家出版社,2001年。
[31]赵雯.企业经营综合评价指标体系研究[J].当代财经.1995(5)：49-54
[28]高晨.主观业绩评价研究：述评与启示[J].会计研究.2008(4)：84-88
[29]林有志,张雅芬.信息透明度与企业经营绩效的关系[J].会计研究.2007(9)：26-34
[30]古丽娜、张双武.公司社会责任、利益相关者和公司绩效研究.西北民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版)[J].2004(3)：68-73
[31]陈共荣,曾峻.企业绩效评价主体的演进及其对绩效评价的影响[J].会计研究.2005(4)：65-69.
[32]温素彬,薛恒新.基于科学发展观的企业三重绩效评价模型[J].会计研究.2005(4)：60-64
[33]徐国祥,檀向球,胡穗华.上市公司经营业绩综合评价及其实证研究[J].统计研究.2000(9)：44-51.
[34]潘琰,程小可.上市公司经营业绩的主成份评价方法[J].会计研究.2000(1)：31-35.
[35]池国华,迟旭升.我国上市公司经营业绩评价系统研究[J].会计研究.2003(8)：45-47.
[36]史习民.上市公司复合型业绩评价系统的基本架构[J].财经论丛.2005(3)：93-98.
[37]陈宏辉、贾生华.企业利益相关者三维分类的实证研究[J].经济研究.2004(4)：80-90
[38]陈宏辉、贾生华.企业利益相关者的利益协调与公司治理的平衡研究[J].中国工业经济.2005(8)：114-121
[39]孙永风,李恒.企业绩效评价的理论综述及存在的问题分析[J].预测.2004(2)：41-47
[40]刘淑莲.企业价值评估与价值创造战略研究—两种价值模式与六大驱动因素 [J].会计研究.2004(9)：67-71
[41]王蓉华,费鹤良,徐晓岭.异常数据检验的均值比方法[J].数理统计与应用概率.1998(13)：63-70.
[42]周宏,王海妹,张巍.相对绩效评价的绩效形式研究[J].会计研究.2008(6)72-76
[43]王斌.中国国有企业业绩评价制度：回顾与思考[J].会计研究.2008(11)：21-28
[44]梅国平.基于复相关系数法的公司绩效评价实证研究[J].管理世界.2004(1)：145-149
[45]安迪·.尼利、克里斯·亚当斯、迈克·肯尼尔利著,李剑锋等译.战略绩效管理—超越平衡计分卡[M],北京：电子工业出版社,2004
[46]史蒂文·F·沃克、杰弗里·.E·马尔著,赵宝华、刘彦平译.利益相关者权力[M],北京：经济管理出版社,2003
[47]罗伯特·卡普兰、安东尼·A·阿特金森.高级管理会计[M],大连：东北财经大学出版社,1999.
[48]加里·.P·莱瑟姆等著,萧鸣政等译.绩效考评—致力于提高企事业组织的综合实力(第2版)[M],中国人民大学出版社,2002
[49]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,刘俊勇、孙薇译,王化成译校.平衡计分卡—化战略为行动[M].广东经济出版社,2004
[50]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,上海博意门咨询有限公司译.平衡计分卡的制胜方略--战略中心型组织[M].中国人民大学出版社,2008
[51]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,刘俊勇、孙薇译.战略地图—化无形资产为有形成果[M].广东经济出版社,2005
[52]罗伯特·卡普兰、大卫·诺顿著,博意门咨询公司译.组织协同—运用平衡计分卡创造企业合力[M].商务印书馆,2006
[53]Abbott, W.F.and R.J.Monsen (1979) " On the Measurement of Corporate Social esponsibility:elf-Reported Disclosures as a Method of Measuring Corporate Social Involvement", Academy of Management Journal, Vol.22, No.3 (July), p.501.
[54]Adams C, Neely A.2003. The New Spectrum:How the Performance Prism Frame work Helps. Performance Management,2:5-25
[55]Ansoff,1.1965.Corporatest Strategy, McGraw Hill, New York.
[56]Aoki, M.1984.Co-operativegame theory of the firm, Oxford University press &Clarendon Press.
[57]Berle, A.& Means, G.1932.The modern corporation and Private property.New York:McMillan.
[58]BlairM.M.1995b.Corporate "ownership". Brookings Review(winter):16-19.
[59]BlairM.M.& Lynn A.S.1999b.A team production theory of corporate law. The journal of corporationlaw(4):751-806.
[60]Buhner, R., Rasheed, A., Rosenstein, J.,&Yoshikawa, T.1998. Research on corporate governance:A comparison of Germany, Japan, and the United States. Advances in International Comparative Management 12:121-155.
[61]Carroll, A.B.1993.Ethics and stakeholder management (2nd ed.).Cincinnati: South-Western.
[62]Clarke, T.1998.The Stakeholder Corporation:A Business Philosophy for the Information Age. Long Range Planning 31(2):182-194.
[63]Cho.Charles.H.and Dennis M.Patten, (2007) " The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy:Are-search note" Accounting, Organizations and Society 32 (2007) 639-647.
[64]Clarkson, M.1994.Arisk-based model of stakeholder theory. Proceedings of the Toronto Conference on Stakeholder Theory. Center for Corporate Social Performance and Ethies. University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
[65]Clarkson, M.1995.Astakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review 20(1):92-117.
[66]Cowen, S.S., L.B.Ferreri and L.D.Parker (1987), "The Impact of Corporate Characteristics on Social Responsibility Disclosure:A Typology and Frequency-Based Analysis", Accounting, Orga-nizations and Society, Vol.12, No.2 (March), p.lll.
[67]Donaldson, T.& Dunfee, T.W.1995.Integrative social contracts theory:A communitarian conception of economic ethics. Economics and Philosophy 11(1):85-112.
[68]Donaldson, T.& Preston, L.E.1995.The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review20(1):65-91.
[69]Frederiek, W.C.1988.Business and society, corporate strategy, public policy, ethics(6thed.), McGraw-Hill Book Co.
[70]Freeman, R.E.1984.strategic management:A stakeholder approach, Boston, MA:Pitman.
[71]Freeman, R.E.1994.The Politics of stakeholder theory:Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly 4:409-421.
[72]Freeman, R.E.,& Reed, D.L.1983.Stoeltholders and stakeholders:A new Perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review25(3):88-106
[73]Jacabs M.1997. The Environment as Stakeholder. Business Strategy Review, 2:25-28
[74]Holmstrom, B.,1982, Moral Hazard in Teams [J], Bell Journal of Economics, Vol.13,324-340.
[75]Husted, Bryan W.,2000, A Contingency Theory of Corporate Social Performance [J], Business and Society, Vol.39(1),24-48.
[76]Ingram, R.W.,1978, A Investigation of the Information Content of(Certain)Social Responsibility Disclosures[J], Journal of Accounting Research,16,270-285.
[77]Jawahar, I.M., and Mclaughlin, G.L.,2001, Toward a Descriptive Stakeholder Theory:An Organizational Life Cycle Approach[J], Academy of Management Review, Vol.26(3),397-414.
[78]Jensen, M., and Meckling, W.,1976, Theory of the Firm:Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure[J], Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.3, 305-360.
[79]Jensen, Michael C.,2002, Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory and the Corporate Objective Function, Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking[M], Greenleaf Publishing Limited.
[80]Jones, T.M.,1994, The Toronto Conference:Reflections on Stakeholder Theory[J], Business and Society, Vol.33(1),82-131。
[81]Jones, T.M.,1995, Instrumental Stakeholder Theory:A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics[J], Academy of Management Review, Vol.20(2),404-437.
[82]Neely A, Adams C, Kennerley M.2002. The Performance Prism:The Scorecard for Measuring and Managing Bushless Success. Person Education Limited
[83]Richardson, Alan, and Welker, Michael, (2001), "Social Disclosure, Financial Disclosure and the Cost of Equity Capital", Accounting, Organization and Society, 26,597-616.
[84]Shankman, N.A.1999. Reframing the debate between agency and stakeholder theories of the firm. Journal of Business Ethics 19(4):319-334.
[85]Wheeler D, M Sillanpaa.1998. Including the Stakeholder:The Business Case. Long Range Planning,2:201-210
[86]Trevino, L.K., and Weaver, G.R.,1999, Response:The Stakeholder Research Tradition:Converging Theorists-Not Convergent Theory[J], Academy of Management Review, Vol.24(2),222-227.
[87]Wijnberg, N.M.,2000, Normative Stakeholder Theory and Aristotle:The Link Between Ethics and Politics[J], Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.25,329-342.
[88]Windsor D.,2002, Jensen's Approach to Stakeholder Theory[A], Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking, Greenleaf Publishing Limited.