MAY SEMESTER/ 2021

BBMA4303

ADVANCED MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING

MATRICS NO. :
IDENTITY CARD NO. :
TELEPHONE NO. :
E-MAIL : yeshwin@oum.edu.my
LEARNING CENTRE : SUNGAI PETANI LEARNING CENTRE
 BBMA4303

CONTENTS

QUESTION 1
1.1 Introduction to performance evaluation 2
1.2 Review of literature on performance evaluation 3-4
1.3 Review of literature on main expectancy theories 5-7
1.4 Impacts of performance evaluation on employees motivation and ethics 8 - 10
1.5 Summary 11 -
12
1.6 References 13

QUESTION 2
2.1 Introduction to the performance measurement system 14 -
15
2.2 Review of literature on the traditional performance measurement system 16 -
17
2.3 Benefits of contemporary performance measurement system :
2.3.1 In performance measures 18
2.3.2 More understandable 18 -
19
2.3.3 Organisation capabilities 19 -
20
2.3.4 In people’s motivation 20
2.4 Differences between traditional and contemporary performance
measurement system :
2.4.1 Financial and non-financial measures 21
2.4.2 External benchmarks 22
2.4.3 Continuous improvement 22 -
23
2.5 Summary 24
2.6 References 25 -
26

1
QUESTION 1

1.1 Introduction to performance evaluation

According to Harrison (2020), performance evaluation is the basis of a management control

system.Periodic comparisons of the actual costs, revenues and investments with the budgeted
costs, revenues and investments can help management in taking decisions about future
allocations. Performance evaluation is defined as a formal and productive procedure to
measure an employee’s work and results based on their job responsibilities.It is used to gauge
the amount of value added by an employee in terms of increased business revenue, in
comparison to industry standards and overall employee return on investment.All
organisations that have learned the art of ‘winning from within’ by focusing inward towards
their employees rely on a systematic performance evaluation process to measure and evaluate
employee performance regularly (Hopwood,2020).Performance evaluation also plays a direct
role in providing periodic feedback to employees such that they are more self-aware in terms
of their performance metrics.Performance evaluation involves the review of how well an
employee has completed assigned tasks.It is used to give ongoing feedback to employees, so
that they can improve their performance.Accounting data frequently is used in performance
evaluations because it is seen as an objective method to evaluate performance.Accounting
information system provide information for planning, controlling and performance
evaluation.Performance evaluation plays a central role in managing human resources in
organisation (Chakravarty, 2019).The term performance evaluation refers to the methods and
processes used by organisation to assess the level of performance of their employees.This
process usually includes measuring employee’s performance and providing usually includes
measuring employee’s performance and providing them with feedback regarding the level
and quality of their performance.The main goal of the performance evaluation in
organisations is to improve employee performance.This goal could be achieved through three
possible mechanisms which are by the information provided by the performance evaluation
can be used for administrative decisions linking the evaluated performance to organisational
rewards or punishments such as a pay raise, promotion or discharge; the performance
evaluation process involves providing performance to the employees who were evaluated,
allowing them to adjust their performance strategies to match the desired performance; and
the performance evaluation is a process that raises employee awareness to the fact that they
are being measured.

1.2 Review of literature on performance evaluation

According to Chenhall and Sidilth (2020), it can be viewed from three perspectives they are
the shareholder’s, board director’s or CEO’s perspective; where the perspective of the
organisation as a whole; the upper management perspective and the operational
perspective.In the upper management perspective of the organisation or its segments as it
pertains to the effectiveness of the unit or the individual managing the unit.In operational
persective of the management and supervisors as it relates to efficient day-to-day
operations.The potential for bias can be regarded as a function of the particular style of
performance evaluation adopted by the organisation like a budget-constrained style is likely
to give rise to a high degree of bias; if standards and budgets are used in a more flexible
profit conscious style, the level of budget bias is likely to be considerably lower.According to
Collier and Gregory (2019), the associated ‘static optimisation’ approach to performance
evaluation through comparison of actual and standard tends to avoid the whole thrust of
modern thinking in areas such as total quality management, continuous improvement and
business process re-engineering.The modern trend in performance evaluation is towards the
use of internal and external benchmarking.The budget provides an internal benchmark against
which performance can be evaluate.Benchmarking is probably the most important recent
innovation in performance evaluation.The standard benchmarking practice can be used to
study processes in the organisation and select which are to be benchmarked, secure suitable
benchmark partners, compare appropriate figures and indicators with partners, adopt and
implement best practices.If the department or business achieves its budget turnover and or
profit for the period that it is deamed to be performing well.Conversely, if it fail to achieve
budget then it is deemed to be performing well.Conversely, if it fail to achieve budget then it
is deemed to be performing badly.This approach to performance evaluation has been subject
to a variety of criticisms the process of establishing a budget and its subsequent use in control
and performance evaluation can have a variety of behavioural effects within the
organisation.Budgets should be assembled and results reported in a manner that is consistent
with the organisational structure.This allows the performance of individual responsibility
areas to be budgeted for and then evaluated.The term performance evaluation refers to the
methods and processes used by organisations to assess the level of performance of their
employees.In order for workers to improve their performance following an appraisal, they
must accept the appraisal rating and be willing to change their performance
accordingly.Ensuring worker’s reactions such as satisfaction, commitment, acceptance of the
appraisal and trust in management could help organisation achieve the primary performance
evaluation purpose of improving performance.In order to yield positive reactions among
ratees, the perform evaluation process should be perceived as reliable, accurate, and free of
political interests on the one hand, and allow the ratee to participate in the process and
express his or her voice on the other.The shift from measuring the accuracy of the appraisals
to measuring the ratee’s reactions and motivations reflects a significant change in the research
of performance evaluation. Using multisource technique helps evaluators collect a range of
views regarding an employee’s performance, with each source adding a unique perspective
(Harrison,2020).For example, a manager can evaluate a nurse on professionalism and
compliance to rules, a peer could evaluate how well he or she gets along with colleagues, and
a patient could add information on how this nurse treats patients.With multisource feedback,
the ratee usually receives the results along with normative data and self-ratings, providing the
employee with comparative information.The purpose of the multisource evaluation is
developmental, namely to develop and nurture employees and to help them achieve their
goals and aspirations which eventually leads to a promotion focus.As such, use of
multisource evaluation assumes to improve employee performance.In addition, the evaluation
data should be used only for developmental purposes, and if other uses are considered, this
fact should not be hidden from the employees because no performance evaluation can work
without mutual trust.The standards for evaluation should be evidence-based, employees
should receive early notice about the evaluation standards, and consistent periodical feedback
should be given to employee regarding their performance.In additional, employees should be
given an opportunity to influence the process during evaluation meetings and to present their
opinions.An employer can provide consistent feedback on an employee’s strengths and strive
for improvement in the areas that the employees need to work on.The goal of this entire
process of performance evaluation is to improve the way a team or an organisation functions,
to achieve higher levels of customer satisfaction.An organisation’s management conduct
frequent employee training and skill development sessions based on the development areas
recognized after a performance evaluation session.Regular performance evaluation help
determine the scope of growth in an employee’s career and the level of motivation with
which he or she contributes towards the success of an organisation.Performance evaluation
lets an employee understand where does he or she stands as compared to others in the
organisation.An organisation’s management can compare every employee’s self-evaluation
with the rating his or her manager provides, which makes the performance evaluation process
exhaustive and effective.

1.3 Review of literature on main expectancy theories

Vroom’s expectancy theory explains that processes that an individual undergoes to make
choices.In organisational behaviour study, expectancy theory is a motivation theory first
proposed by Victor Vroom of the Yule School of Management (Gary,2020).In work and
motivation, he postulated the theory known as “Expectancy theory of motivation”.In this
seminal work, Vroom describes motivation force as a product of expectancy instrumentality
and valence. Vroom defines motivation as “a process governing choices made by persons or
lower organisms among alternative forms of voluntary activity”.According to Vroom, the
motivational force that drives behaviour is a product of these three variables and can be
represented by the equation:

Motivation = Expectancy x Instrumentality x Valence

Vroom’s expectancy theory was the first to examine work motivation and is based on three
key variables which are expectancy, instrumentality and valence.Instrumentality identifies
outcomes as first level or second level in the valence level.First level outcomes are related to
performance and second to need.Instrumentality is the perception that achieving the
performance will lead to a reward.If an employee sees that promotions are based on
performance, instrumentality will be rated high. A low estimate of instrumentality will be
made if the employee fails to see such linkage between performance and rewards.The basic
theory is that the strength of valence depends on whether a particular outcomes is seen as
Valence is the anticipated satisfaction gained from a particular outcome.It may be positive
whereby the individual prefers to achieve a particular outcome than not achieve it; or
negative where the individual prefers to avoid a particular outcome.a route or path to other
outcomes.Zero valence occurs where the individual is different.Valence is the degree to
which the reward satisfies the individual’s goals.In other words, how much he values the
reward and research shows people value monetary reward over non-monetary
rewards.Expectancy identifies where an individual chooses between alternative behaviours
that have uncertain outcomes where that choice is affected by preference for a particular
outcomes and the probability that the outcome will be achieved.Expectancy is an individual’s
perceptions that the effort he or she puts in will lead to a certain performance.If an employee
sees no chance that effort will to the desired performance, the expectancy is zero.On the other
hand, if the employee is confident that the task will be completed, the expectancy have a
value of one.The combination of these three factors is what motivates people.These variables
is the motivation and suggests that the employee’s beliefs about expectancy, instrumentality
and valence interact psychologically.In this way they create a motivational force, such that
the employee will act in a way that brings pleasure and avoids pain.Motivational force as
described by the expectancy theory is based on an individual’s belief that a certain effort will
lead to a given performance and that performance will lead to attainment of a desirable or
undesirable reward.An individual’s perception of each variable is essential to determining
behavior.Vroom’s expectancy theory of motivation is not about self-interest in rewards but
about the associations people make towards expected outcomes and the contribution they feel
they can make towards expected outcomes and the contribution, they feel they can make
towards those outcomes.

According to Hunt (2020), Porter and Lawler’s expectancy theory model suggested that an
individual’s view regarding the attractiveness and fairness of the rewards will affect
motivation.Porter and Lawler’s model is a more complete model of motivation.This model
have been partically applied also in their study of managers.They recommended that the
managers should carefully reassess their reward system and structure.This is a multivariate
model which explains the relationship that exists between job attitudes and job
performance.In fact, Porter and Lawler expectancy theory is an improvement over Vroom’s
expectancy theory.They say that motivation does not equal satisfaction or performance.The
model suggested by them encounters.Some of the simplistic traditional assumptions made
about the positive relationship between satisfaction and performance.They proposed a
multivariate model to explain the complex relationship that exists between satisfaction and
performance. What is the main point in Porter and Lawler’s model is that effort or motivation
does not lead directly to performance.It is in fact, medicated by abilities and traits and by role
perception. Ultimately, performance leads to satisfaction.This various elements of Porter and
Lawler model are effort, performance and satisfaction.Effort refers to the amount of energy
an employee exerts on a given task.How much effort an employee will put in a task is
determined by two factors which are, by value of reward and perception of effort-reward
probability. Performance are one’s effort leads to his or her performance.Both may equal or
may not be.However, the amount of the performance is determined by the amount of labour
and the ability and role perception of the employee.Thus, if an employee possesses less
ability or makes wrong role perception, his or her performance may be low in spite of his
great efforts.Satisfaction is performance leads to satisfaction (Michael,2020).The level
satisfaction depends upon the amount of rewards achieved.If the amount of actual rewards
meet or exceed perceived equitable rewards, the employee will feel satisfied.On the contrary,
if actual rewards fall short of perceived one, he or she will be dissatisfied.In this Porter and
Lawler’s expectancy theory, reward are categorised as intrinsic and extrinsic.Intrinsic factors
such as job enrichment motivate people while extrinsic factors such as salary and bonuses are
mainly related to hygiene or dissatisfaction avoidance (Michael,2020).Intrinsic rewards are
the positive feelings that the individual experiences from completing the task with
satisfaction and sense of achievements. Example of intrinsic rewards are such as a sense of
accomplishment and self-actualization.A fair degree of reseach supports that the intrinsic
rewards are much more likely to produce attitudes about satisfaction that are related to
performance.Extrinsic rewards are rewards emanating from outside the individual such as
bonus, commission an pay increases.Extrinsic rewards may include working conditions and
status.Porter and Lawler’s expectancy theory suggested that an individual view regarding the
attractiveness and fairness of the rewards will affect motivation.They also said that
motivation is also affected by the individual’s ability to perform that task and their perception
of the task.
1.4 Impacts of performance evaluation on employees motivation and ethics

According to James (2019), the fundamental objective of performance evaluation is an

organisation is to increase the employee’s productivity.Therefore, performance evaluation
provides adequate feedback on how employees are performing, by divulging them to
knowledge and the result of their work; avenues for participating in the setting of tasks and
goals; clear and attainable goals of the organisation.By undertaking these activities, it will
lead to the improvement of employee’s performances, and thus higher productivity in the
organisation performance evaluation offers a good opportunity to properly recognize
employee’s contributions and achievements to the organisation and to make sure that a strong
relationship is established and maintained between reward and productivity.It is essential in
an organisation because it helps creates an environment that allows open communication and
also helps in clarifying goals and expectations.It helps brings about progressive feedback and
proper counsel in order to improve employee productivity.According to Cowandy (2020),
motivation can activate, persists or energize definite kinds of individual’s required behaviour,
what in its turn, may ultimately decide the success of failure of an organisation.In this case
companies desire to increase and maximise their employee’s motivation seems to be logical
and obvious.Many researches also emphasized their attention on understanding employee’s
motivation as an essential factor affecting individual’s productivity and organisational
competitiveness.Therefore, comprehension of all the constituents having a bearing upon
employee’s motivation is significantly important in terms of both future researches and
organisational development.Referring to performance evaluation it is necessary to admit that
both the elements included in the system and the system itself affect employee’s
motivation.The understanding of employee’s motivation will always be crucial for
organisations in the modern competitive world.The reason for that is not just companies
willingness to apprehend the nature of their employee’s motivation, but also the economic
consequences and the results obtained.According to Faseeh (2019), the research in recent
years has demonstrated the presence of direct relationship between employers who value their
employee’s motivation and organisation performance.Thereby, it becomes obvious why many
businesses lay special emphasis on the factors increasing employee’s motivation.For these
organisations it becomes essential in terms of their profit and productivity to distinguish the
elements that increases the impart or just being related to employee’s motivation.According
to David (2020), motivation is a function of employee’s comparison of his or her rewards and
efforts made towards rewards and efforts made by other employees.If an employee feels that
he or she received less than other when comparing his or her and other’s work inputs, there
will be negative inequity.Otherwise if the situation is reverse there will be positive
inequity.Thus, in case of perceived negative inequity employee are more likely to change
work inputs or outputs, reconsider comparison points, or even quit.At same time positive
inequity make people increase the quantity or quality of their work or even both of them.In
general, equity theory can be presented as intermediary motivational impact to the
employee.Employees in interactions are motivated by the sense of fairness based on the
social comparison, and that is why not every rewards may work as intended.

Perceived fairness, perceived accuracy and evaluation satisfaction as important components

of performance evaluation that can motivate employees.Among all the criteria that impact
both the results of performance evaluation and employee’s motivation, individual’s
perception of evaluation fairness is considered to be one of the most significant figures of
merit.Fair rater’s evaluation leads to employees confidence in validity usefulness and absence
of bias.Fairness of performance evaluation process and its outcomes directly influence
employee’s motivation.Interactional fairness can be defined as the level and quality of
interactions and interpersonal communication between employee and rater during the
performance evaluation period (Barr,2020).Accuate evaluation stimulates employees to
accept evaluation system as a valid indicator of their performance what leads to increased
participation in evaluate process and motivational accretion.

According to Weaver (2019), employee performance evaluation and management system can
play a critical role in improving ethical conduct of employee in organisation.Organisation
explicitly incorporate ethical behaviour into performance evaluation in order to improve
employee ethical behaviour. Incorporating ethical dimensions into the formal performance
evaluation has been suggested as a way to integrate ethical expectation into employee’s
formal role identities, and to make ethical behaviour at work relevant and rewarding for
employee.If a worker receives a positive performance evaluation, people may tend to rate the
employee’s ethical behaviour was indeed highly ethical.Otherwise, the result could be
inordinately positive judgments of the ethical nature of the worker’s job behaviours.The
ethics and values implemented by any organisation are usually being adopted throughout the
organisation and have been used for every task.The ethics of both the company’s leaders and
employee make up how that company is perceived and whether they are seen as ethical or
not.Nowdays, ethics have emerged as one of the most critical issues facing the organisation
and the people who work with them.Ethical performance of employee is influenced by
schematic, affective and attributional process.Ethical behaviour could be manipulated by
providing unethical, neutral and ethical critical.Performance evaluation system for the most
part, have exclusively concentrated on business performance to the exclusion of ethical
dimensions of job performance.Given the increasing importance of ethical issues in
organisation, there is a need to correct this aberration in the current approach to evaluate
system development and included ethical dimension in the performance evaluation
domain.The overall objective of high ethical performance evaluation should be to provide a
honest assessment of the performance and mutually develop a plan to improve the ratee’s
effectiveness.Organisational aim to guide the ethical behaviour of their employee by
communicating codes of conducts, training, behavioural guidelines and monitoring of ethical
decision making.Evaluation offer supervisors the opportunity to give performance feedback,
agree on targets or work goals, establish a basis for promotion and salary decision and discuss
employee’s career ambitions.These activities, in turn have strong implication for employee’s
position in the organisation and their development, which affects their attitudes like
satisfaction, commitment, trust and their work behaviours.
1.5 Summary

Performance evaluation is defined as a formal and productive procedure to measure an

employee’s work and results based on their job responsibilities.It is used to gauge the amount
of value added by an employee in terms of increased business revenue, in comparison to
industry standards and overall employee return on investment.The main goal of the
performance evaluation in organisations is to improve employee performance. According to
Harrison (2020), it can be viewed from three perspectives they are the shareholder’s, board
director’s or CEO’s perspective; where the perspective of the organisation as a whole; the
upper management perspective and the operational perspective. The modern trend in
performance evaluation is towards the use of internal and external benchmarking.The budget
provides an internal benchmark against which performance can be evaluate.Benchmarking is
probably the most important recent innovation in performance evaluation.The standard
benchmarking practice can be used to study processes in the organisation and select which
are to be benchmarked, secure suitable benchmark partners, compare appropriate figures and
indicators with partners, adopt and implement best practices. Vroom defines motivation as “a
process governing choices made by persons or lower organisms among alternative forms of
voluntary activity”. Vroom’s expectancy theory was the first to examine work motivation and
is based on three key variables which are expectancy, instrumentality and valence. According
to Michael (2020), Porter and Lawler’s expectancy theory model suggested that an
individual’s view regarding the attractiveness and fairness of the rewards will affect
motivation.Porter and Lawler’s model is a more complete model of motivation. In this Porter
and Lawler’s expectancy theory, reward are categorised as intrinsic and extrinsic.The
fundamental objective of performance evaluation is an organisation is to increase the
employee’s productivity. Therefore, performance evaluation provides adequate feedback on
how employees are performing, by divulging them to knowledge and the result of their work;
avenues for participating in the setting of tasks and goals; clear and attainable goals of the
organisation. Motivation can activate, persists or energize definite kinds of individual’s
required behaviour, what in its turn, may ultimately decide the success of failure of an
organisation.In this case companies desire to increase and maximise their employee’s
motivation seems to be logical and obvious.Many researches also emphasized their attention
on understanding employee’s motivation as an essential factor affecting individual’s
productivity and organisational competitiveness.Perceived fairness, perceived accuracy and
evaluation satisfaction as important components of performance evaluation that can motivate
employees. Among all the criteria that impact both the results of performance evaluation and
employee’s motivation, individual’s perception of evaluation fairness is considered to be one
of the most significant figures of merit. Employee performance evaluation and management
system can play a critical role in improving ethical conduct of employee in
organisation.Organisation explicitly incorporate ethical behaviour into performance
evaluation in order to improve employee ethical behaviour.
1.6 References

Barr,S.(2020).Trust-in-supervisor and perceived fairness and accuracy of performance

evaluations.Journal of business research,12(4),301–313.
Chakravarty.(2019).The role of accounting data in performance evaluation, budgetary
participation, and organizational effectiveness.Strategic management journal,7(3),
437- 458.
Chenhall,R.H.,& Sidilth.K.(2020).An empirical study of the role of accounting data in
performance evaluation.Journal of accounting,organizations and society,23(3),43-64.
Collier,P.,& Gregory, A.(2019).The role of influence tactics in perceptions of performance
evaluations’ fairness.International journal of hospitality management,7(1),16-21.
Cowandy,R.(2020).The impact of fair performance evaluation to employee motivation and
satisfaction towards performance evaluation.Journal of applied psychology,2,21-
28.
David,T.(2020).Subjectivity, organizational justice and performance evaluation:
Understanding the concept of subjectivity in leading towards employee’s
perception of fairness in the performance evaluation.Journal of social and
behavioral sciences, 62(24), 189-193.
Faseeh,M.(2019).Role of performance evaluation system on employees’ motivation. Journal
of
business and management,8(4), 66-83.
Gary,J.L.(2020).Factors that motivate business faculty to conduct research: An expectancy
theory analysis.Middle east journal of scientific research,11(1),23-59.
Harrison,A.(2020).Procedural fairness and work group responses to performance evaluation
procedures.Management accounting research,7(3),387- 408.
Hopwood,T.(2020).Empirical study of the role of accounting data in performance evaluation
empirical research.Supplement to journal of accounting research, 2(3),146-182.
Hunt,S.(2020).Instrumentality theory of work motivation: Some experimental results and
suggested modifications.Information resources management journal,13(2),15-25.

James,G.(2019).Total quality management and performance evaluation:An experimental

study
of process.Journal of organizational behavior,20(4),445-457.
Michael,K.(2020).Evaluation of research on expectancy theory predictions of employee
performance.Middle east journal of scientific research,21(1),155-180.
Weaver,G.(2019).Managing ethics in business organisations.Journal of
organizational behaviour and human performance,33(3),360–396.

QUESTION 2

2.1 Introduction to the performance measurement system

According to Evans (2004), performance measurement system can be defined as the set of
metrics used to quantify both the efficiency and effectiveness of actions. Performance
measurement system are characterized as strategic expert systems by which organisation
observe and measure their intangible performance elements in the form of qualitative and
quantitative assessment. According to Neely (2007), performance measurement system is a
brief and precise set of measures financial or non-financial that supports the decision making
process of an organisation by collecting, processing and analyzing quantified data of
performance information.Performance measurement system can serve a range of purposes so
that judgments of what is a good system must depend on its purpose.For example, some
system are designed essentially to give strategic direction to staff through targets based on
measures of strategic performance, others seek to enhance staff and organisational
capabilities through stretch targets based on performance measures; and yet other seek to
support evidence based management and organisational learning through providing measures
of what works. Performance measurement can support each of these purposes.According to
Atkinson, Banker, Kaplan and Young (2001), performance measurement system have six
attributes they are, employees must understand the system and believe it measures what they
control; the system must be based on inputs or outputs depending on which is
applicable.Inputs are applicable when employees have little control over outputs or it is
impossible or too expensive to measure output; performance measurements should be
balanced to reflect the organisation’s critical success factors; the system must have clear
standards of performance; the system must establish a clear relationship between
performance and outcome and when cooperation is critical, the system should reward group
performance, rather than individual performance.Cooperation is needed when there is
interdependence (Henri,2016).Performance measurement system focuses on the critical
success factors of an organisation.Critical success factor is an element or area which is
necessary for an organisation to achieve its strategy or goals.A further critical decision is
designing performance measurement system is the balance between self-assessment and
external assessment.There is major debate about whether a performance measurement system
should attempt to provide a balanced and comprehensive picture of the organisational
performance or whether it should focus on assessing performance in relation to the
organisation’s priority objectives.It is important that the performance measurement system
used by managers to continually reviewed and revised as the environment and economy
changes.Performance measurement system is an important system in the purpose of
improving the organisation performance.Performance measurement system create a very
significant connection between organisation due to measurement in the organisation system
directly related to the organisation strategy. Performance measurement system helps the
organisation to develop and improvise the business environment thus improve better decision
making process.
2.2 Review of literature on the traditional performance measurement system

According to academic literature performance measurement had until the 80’s a more
traditional approach with financial focus Platts (2005). Johnson and Kaplan (1987), argued
that traditional performance measurement systems focused too heavily on accounting or
financial based measures and tended to ignore non-financial measures. In other word, less or
no emphasis is given to long-term value creation, particularly for intangible and intellectual
assets that generate the future growth of the organisation. This is because these intangible
assets could not be easily quantified in terms of financial or monetary values. Budgeting and
variance calculations under standard costing systems are examples of traditional performance
measurement system. The focus of this traditional performance measurement system was to
monitor organisation cost. According to Shaw (2007), supported this view that the traditional
idea of performance measurement system was a mean of maintaining organisation control
and financial goal for hierarchical manufacturing organisations. However, this traditional
performance system is not effective in the context of today’s business environment as a result
of shift in the nature of business and its surrounding.Traditional models of performance
measurement system focused on maximizing the wealth of shareholder, such as earning per
share (EPS), return-on-investment (ROI) which are the result of management action and
organisational performance, and not the cause of it.Traditional performance measurement
system focus on improving and monitoring business process that exist.The only time they go
beyond financial measures is when they attempt to incorporate metrics that are time-based
and quality.Traditional performance measurement system measures that mostly are cost
efficiency oriented and are measured only in financial terms.This system doest not provide
non-financial measures that are also link to the organisation business strategy. The
application of this system is basically suitable for mass production companies with the
purpose of minimizing cost.According to Kaplan and Norton (1996), traditional performance
measurement system focus more on cost and revenue data and less on the process. Most of
the time it provides irrelevant or misleading information. Performance measures which
contain bottom line financial results are too late to take up useful corrective action.
Traditional performance measurement system measures are without activity and process
analysis which are essential to decide the value-added and non-value added activity and
process. Business organisations have to analyse which processes are capable of fulfilling
customer requirement time and time again. Traditional performance measurement system
designed for the industrial-age economy, which emphasize financial measures and tangible
assets, are no longer able to capture the changing nature of today’s business environment
(Fisher,1992). This shortcomings of traditional measurement system have triggered a
performance measurement revolution.Researchers have been highlighting the shortcoming of
the traditional system and proposed various types of performance measurement system that
would enable the organisation measure all aspects of business.Most tradisional cost based
measures were designed around the turn of the century, with the main purpose of providing
information useful in evaluating the operating performance of mass production companies
which were prevalent during that era.Platts (2005), argued that a company should not claim
itself a complete Just-In-Time(JIT) company if it continues to use traditional performance
measurement system to measuring efficiency and producitivity. “Companies may claim to be
practicing JIT but continue to use employee efficiency measures as indicators of
performance.If these are the measurements reported, the firm has not completely converted to
the JIT philosophy”.Shaw (2007), argued that traditional cost accounting measures, especially
the ones used to gauge shop floor performance, may lead to decisions conflicting with the JIT
goal.Assert that traditional cost accounting tends to impair JIT implementation since the
features of cost accounting measures rely on standards, emphasize variances and efficiencies
and are preoccupied with direct labour. The importance of the fire traditional performance
measures, indirect labour productivity, direct labour productivity, variances, labour efficiency
and machine efficiency is decreasing as manufacturers increases their emphasis on JIT
practices (Platts,2005).Traditional process is top-down, linear-structured an static process.It
includes establishing objectives early in the year and presenting them to the employees who
are responsible for achieving them.Then management monitors the performance against those
objectives during the year and share their evaluation near the end of the year when it is time
for the annual performance measurement system.Evaluation are against some types of
specific performance standards established earlier in the year, for example below expectation,
meets expectations and exceeds expectation.

2.3 Benefits of contemporary performance measurement system:

2.3.1 In performance measures

According to Fisher (2007), contemporary performance measurement system measures,

concentrate on current activities which will be drivers of future financial performance.For
example, if actions are taken now to improve quality and customer satisfaction, the effect is
improved future financial performance.According to Shafeeza (2016), contemporary
performance measurement system has a significant effect on the co-operatives managerial
performance.The implication of the study draws an important role of the co-operatives to
explore on the value added activities that could reflect their efficiency in managing their co-
operatives.Hence, the enhancement of human capital resources is crucial such as co-
operatives management which eventually leads to sustainable competitive
advantage.Contemporary performance measurement system encompass multiple financial
and non-financial, perspectives, objectives and performance measures (Bulter,2002).In the
past, as companies invested in programs and initiatives to build their capabilities, managers
relied solely on financial accounting reports.Today’s financial information must be expanded
to incorporate the valuation of the company’s intangible and intellectual assets, such as
committed and entrepreneurial employees, innovative internal processes and loyal customers
(Gregory,2000).Extensive evidence indicates that the use of financial performance measures
in complex, dynamic and uncertain environments results in dysfunctional managerial
attitudes and behaviours and low performance, which suggests that they should be
complemented by qualitative or subjective performance measurement system.With financial
performance measures, managers will primarily monitor results or past performance, while
non-financial or contemporary system provide leading information of future performance and
enable managers to monitor the strategic drivers of future performance.They can be reported
more often and in more timely basis than financial measures, so that managers can take more
immediate actions to improve poor performance, before it affects the financial performance.

2.3.2 More understandable

According to Bourne (2012), contemporary performance measurement system are more

understandable and easier to relate to.For example, operational managers may understand the
meaning of reject product better than variable overhead cost variances.Because they are more
understandable, they are more valuable in evaluation and motivating managerial
performance.According to Scott (2003), contemporary performance measurement system
affect the extent to which people understand their role requirements and are satisfied with
their jobs.The contemporary system facilitates the provisions of job relevant information,
which in turn decreases people’s perception of role conflict like in ability to fulfil job
expectations due to incompatible demands and role ambiguity like unclear information about
job duties, authority and responsibilities. Contemporary performance measurement system
increases managers perceptions of role clarity, the beliefs or individuals about the
expectations and behaviours associated with their work role.The benefit from this system
provides manages with performance information that increases their knowledge of the
organisation’s strategic goals and helps them to better understand the potential benefits of
their actions on the organisation’s value chain.

2.3.3 Organisation capabilities

According to Davis (2003), the benefit of contemporary performance measurement system on

organisation capabilities in terms of strategy processes, communication, strategic capabilities,
managerial practices and corporate control.Researchers find that this system are effective
mechanisms for engaging managers in the strategy formulation and review process, enabling
the strategy to be implemented as it facilitates the translation of strategy into operational
terms, encouraging managers to embrace the organisation’s strategy as a continuous process
rather than a one-off exercise, and improving strategic alignment like helping organisations
align their actions in pursuit of their strategic objectives.Nevertheless, the extent to which
contemporary are able to influence an organisation’s strategy processes is shaped by the
cognitive limitations of managers, alongside the way in which the system is designed,
developed and used.Thus this system positively benefits the strategy processes.The most
researched organisation capabilities are innovation and organisation learning
(Otley,2004).The benefit of contemporary performance measurement system on innovation,
find that the reorganisation of a global contemporary performance measurement system
fostered innovative practices like new ideas, products and ways of working.The interactive
use of a contemporary performance measurement system can enhance the development of
new ideas and initiatives within a firm, improving innovation. Regarding the benefit of the
contemporary performance measurement system on organisation learning, which focus on
action and improvement rather than on reporting and control. This system are effective
mechanisms for facilitating organisational learning that supports growth and development at
all levels. Contemporary performance measurement system can facilitate corporate control of
subsidiaries, as the system strengthens strategic alignment and encourages dialogue between
headquarters and subsidiaries, specifically though the use of non-financial performance
indicator. According to Bulter (2002), ability of organisation to balance controlling like
diagnostic and the enabling or learning like interactive uses of contemporary performance
measurement system constitutes a unique capability in its own right.The use of contemporary
system for feedback and feed-forward control in performance evaluation scheme affects the
exploitation of existing capabilities and the search for and identification of new capabilities.

2.3.4 In people’s motivation

According to Widener (2007), contemporary performance measurement system improve

people’s motivation towards the achievement of strategic objective.Degree of employee
motivation generated is influenced by the degree of participation in the measurement
process.Malina (2001), stimulates motivation when two conditions exist.Firstly, the
contemporary system must be a effective management control device including performance
measures and targets that are controllable, challenging but attainable, and related to
meaningful rewards.Secondly, contemporary performance measurement system is supported
by an effective communication mechanism that encourages feedback, dialogue and
participation. According to Shaw (2007), benefits of contemporary performance measurement
system on the motivation of managers to meet their goals which defined as ‘goal
commitment’.Use of a contemporary containing strong cause-and-effect relationships among
its financial and non-financial performance measures increases the manager’s perceptions of
self-efficacy and goal attractiveness.As a result the motivation of managers to meet their
financial and non-financial performance goal is strengthened. In sum, the evidence state that
it is as much the process of developing and using the contemporary performance
measurement system, as it is the resultant performance measures that yield motivational
benefits.To drive motivation the contemporary performance measurement system developed
and used in a way that enhances the employee’s participation, psychological empowerment
and goal commitment through increased perceptions of self-efficacy and goal attractiveness
(Hall,2008).

2.4 Differences between traditional and contemporary performance measurement

system :

2.4.1 Financial and non-financial measures

Traditional performance measurement system focused too heavily on accounting or financial-

based measures and tended to ignore non-financial measures. Traditional system measures
that mostly are cost efficiency oriented and are measured only in financial terms.Traditional
performance measurement system focused on financial measures such as traditional
budgeting, costing and variances analysis and cost volume profit.In today’s business
environment, organisations need a balanced set of financial and non-financial performance
measures that are customer-driven and have operational acceptance in order to remain
competitive. Contemporary performance measurement system that focus on both financial
and non-financial aspects of measures are better known as integrated performance
measurement system. According to Hoffman (1996), a distinctive feature of these integrative
performance measurement system is that they focus on both financial and non-financial
aspects of measures covering different perspectives which in combination, provide a way of
translating strategy into a coherent set of performance measures.The integrated performance
measurement system accessing the organisation non-financial dimension still incorporates the
traditional elements that measure the organisation activities against financial aspects.Thus,
the focus of integrated performance measurement system incorporates both financial and non-
financial elements. In traditional performance measurement system, performance measures
are based on tracking single dimensions of performance and they do not provide an integrated
or holistic view of performance (Johnson and Kaplan,1987).Since performance is measured
in specific areas only in traditional system, managers tend to find themselves unable to
assess whether they have implemented their strategies effectively.There has been a general
acceptance in practice that a mixture of financial and non-financial measures in a
performance measurement system is beneficial for both profit and non-profit
organisations.Contemporary performance measurement system comprises the use of financial
as well as non-financial performance measures linked to the organisation business
strategy.Example of contemporary performance measurement system, such as the balanced
scorecard, advocate the use of an array of financial and non-financial performance
measures.In contemporary system, organisation’s performance measurement include both
financial and no-financial in order to cater to the complex and dynamic business condition.

2.4.2 External benchmarks

Contemporary performance measurement system often use external benchmarks to indicate

whether performance is as good as that of competitors, or best practice companies.This is
better approach than traditional performance measurement system that compare actual
performance with last year’s performance or with budget targets.Thus, contemporary
performance measurement system are intended to improve performance, unlike traditional
ones which are intended mainly to monitor performance.Most traditional cost based measures
were designed around the turn of the century, with the main purpose of providing information
useful in monitoring the operating performance of mass production companies, which were
prevalent during the era.The focus of the traditional performance measurement system was to
monitor organisation cost and monitoring business process that exist.In mass production
system, operating performance is evaluated based on measures generated from traditional
cost-based accounting data.These measure the importance of evaluation and monitoring the
end results of the system instead of the performance of the activities in the system.Traditional
performance measurement system focus on past financial performance rather that what
managers are doing to create future shareholder value.In traditional system, all measure are
short term focused.Focusing only on the short term is one of the reasons that organisation
struggle to survive over the long haul.These organisation often do well for a year or two, but
end up failing in the long run.According to Anthony (1965), an information system
framework to ensure the integration of external benchmarking efforts and innovative
practices in relation to the performance management process in contemporary performance
measurement system.The organisation able to utilize effectively external benchmarking
processes in order to gain and maintain competitiveness in the selected global
markets.External benchmarking efforts and practices in order to improve the different facts of
organisation performance.Contemporary system helps ensure that performance information is
distributed fairly among participants in the supply relationship which enables learning and
problem solving.Contemporary system focus on strategic areas which are critical to the long-
term success of the organisation.

2.4.3 Continuous improvement

Contemporary performance measurement system help in achieving continuous improvement,

as performance targets can change over time.In traditional performance measurement system,
performance targets do not often change overtimes, thus they hider continuous improvement.
Traditional performance measurement system is not effective in the context of today’s
business environment as a result of shift in the nature of business and its surrounding.This
shows that, traditional performance measurement system do not change over time.Traditional
performance measurement system have not incorporated strategy.Fisher (2007), argues that
setting standards for performance measures in general conflicts with continuous improvement
in traditional performance measurement system. He said that “if standards were not carefully
set, they had the effect of setting norms rather than motivating improvement”.The global
increases in competence due to technological changes and increasing product development
contributed to the continuous improvement of performance as a strategic and competitive
requirements in most organisation in contemporary performance measurement system.
Contemporary performance measurement system, measure itself identify and generate
continuous improvements instead of working as passive control.In contemporary system, to
change management system and improve the commitment and participation of all employees
before it can successfully implement and decentralise continuous improvement which cause-
and-effect-analysis.
2.5 Summary

Performance measurement system is a brief and precise set of measures financial or non-
financial that supports the decision making process of an organisation by collecting,
processing and analysing quantified data of performance information.Performance
measurement system can serve a range of purposes so that judgments of what is a good
system must depend on its purpose.Traditional performance measurement system measures
that mostly are cost efficiency oriented and are measured only in financial terms.This system
doest not provide non-financial measures that are also link to the organisation business
strategy (Neely,2007). The application of this system is basically suitable for mass production
companies with the purpose of minimizing cost.Budgeting and variance calculations under
standard costing systems are examples of traditional performance measurement system. The
focus of this traditional performance measurement system was to monitor organisation
cost.Contemporary performance measurement system measures, concentrate on current
activities which will be drivers of future financial performance.For example, if actions are
taken now to improve quality and customer satisfaction, the effect is improved future
financial performance.Contemporary performance measurement system are more
understandable and easier to relate to.Benefit of contemporary performance measurement
system on organisation capabilities in terms of strategy processes, communication, strategic
capabilities, managerial practices and corporate control. Tradisional performance
measurement system focused too heavily on accounting or financial-based measures and
tended to ignore non-financial measures. Traditional system measures that mostly are cost
efficiency oriented and are measured only in financial terms.While, contemporary
performance measurement system that focus on both financial and non-financial aspects of
measures are better known as integrated performance measurement system. Contemporary
performance measurement system often use external benchmarks to indicate whether
performance is as good as that of competitors, or best practice companies.This is better
approach than traditional performance measurement system that compare actual performance
with last year’s performance or with budget targets. Contemporary performance measurement
system help in achieving continuous improvement, as performance targets can change over
time.In tradisional performance measurement system, performance targets do not often
change overtimes, thus they hider continuous improvement.

2.6 References

Anthony,R.N.(1965).Management planning and control systems: A framework for analysis.

Boston: Harvard business school press.
Atkinson,A.A.,Banker,R.D.,Kaplan,R.S.,& Young,S.M.(2001).Management
accounting (3rd ed.).New Jersey:Prentice Hall.
Bourne,A.(2012).Contemporary performance measurement systems: A review of their
consequences and a framework for research.Management accounting
research, 23(2),79-89.
Bulter,H.(2002).Integrated performance measurement systems: A development guide.
International journal of operations and production management,17(5),522–534.
Davis,T.(2003).The capabilities of market-driven organisations.New York: John Wiley.

Evans,J.R.(2004).An exploratory study of performance measurement systems and

 relationships with performance results.Journal of operations management,22(3),122-
132.
Fisher,A.(1992).Use of traditional financial performance measures.Journal of
cost management,12(12),131-158.
Fisher,J.(2007).Use of non-financial performance measures. Journal of cost
management, 6(2),183-203.
Gregory,M.(2000).Integrated performance measurement: a review of current practice and
emerging trends.International journal of production economics,13(5),281-296.
Hall,M.(2008).The effect of contemporary performance measurement systems on role clarity,
psychological empowerment and managerial performance.Accounting, organizations
and society,33,141–163.
Henri,J.F.(2006).Organisational culture and performance measurement systems.New York:
John Wiley.
Hoffman,L.R.(1996).An exploration of the use of financial and non-financial measures of
performance by executives in a service organisation.Joural of behavioral
Researching accounting,13(12),222-234.
Johnson,H.T.,& Kaplan,R.S.(1987).Relevance lost:The rise and fall of
management accounting.Boston: Harvard business school press.
Kaplan,R.S.,& Norton,D.P.(1996).The balanced scorecard:Translating strategy into action.
Boston:Harvard Business School Press.

Malina,M.(2001).Communicating and controlling strategy: An empirical study of the

effectiveness of the balanced scorecard.Journal of management accounting
research,12(2),134-145.
Neely,A.(2007).Towards a definition of a business performance measurement system.
London:Kogan Page Limited.
Otley,D.(2004).The effects of the interactive use of management control systems on product
innovation.Journal of accounting organisations and society,29(8),709–737.
Platts,K.(2005).Traditional performance measurement system: A literature review and
research agenda. International journal of operations and production management,
25(12), 1228–1263.
Scott,A.(2003).An empirical investigation of the performance consequences of non-financial
measures. Journal of Management AccountingResearch,15,193–223.
Shafeeza.(2016).Developing contemporary performance measurement system performance
 model for co-operatives.International journal of academic research in business and
social sciences,6(11),436–448.
Shaw,N.(2007).Traditional or contemporary:The prevalence of performance measurement
system types.International Journal of productivity and performance management,
56(7),33–74.
Widener,S.K.(2007).Strategic performance measurement systems, job relevant information,
and managerial behavioural responses role stress and performance.Behavioural
researching accounting,19,43–69.