9.2 Financial and Non-Financial Performance Measures in Manufacturing and Service Organisations

As organizations expand in size and complexity, top executives decentralize decision-making authority to divisional managers. Decentralization improves operational responsiveness, empowers local leaders, and frees senior executives to focus on corporate strategy. However, decentralization requires robust performance measurement systems to ensure that divisional managers act in harmony with corporate goals (goal congruence).

---

1. From Responsibility Centres to Measures

Section 9.1 explained responsibility centres and the controllability principle. This section calculates the measures used to judge them: cost variances for cost centres, sales variances for revenue centres, controllable profit and margins for profit centres, and ROI or residual income for investment centres.

---

2. Investment Centre Performance: ROI vs. Residual Income (RI)

Because investment centre managers control capital allocation, assessing them solely on operating profit is inadequate. A division generating $1,000,000 profit on $5,000,000 capital is performing far better than a division generating $1,000,000 profit on $20,000,000 capital. Management accounting employs two primary financial metrics to assess investment centres:

Return on Investment (ROI)

Return on Investment (ROI) expresses controllable operating profit as a percentage of divisional capital employed:

$$\text{ROI} = \frac{\text{Controllable Operating Profit}}{\text{Divisional Capital Employed}} \times 100\%$$

ROI can be decomposed using the DuPont Analysis Framework into two operational drivers:

$$\text{ROI} = \text{Operating Profit Margin} \times \text{Asset Turnover}$$ $$\text{ROI} = \left( \frac{\text{Controllable Operating Profit}}{\text{Sales Revenue}} \right) \times \left( \frac{\text{Sales Revenue}}{\text{Divisional Capital Employed}} \right)$$

• Advantages: Intuitive percentage format; enables direct performance comparisons between divisions of differing scale; widely understood by capital markets.
• Disadvantages: Incentivizes sub-optimization and short-termism, as demonstrated below.

Residual Income (RI)

Residual Income (RI) measures the absolute currency operating profit generated above the required cost of capital charge (imputed interest) on the assets employed:

$$\text{Residual Income (RI)} = \text{Controllable Operating Profit} - (\text{Divisional Capital Employed} \times \text{Cost of Capital})$$

• Cost of Capital: The minimum required hurdle rate (e.g., weighted average cost of capital, WACC) set by corporate headquarters.
• Advantages: Encourages goal congruence; managers accept any investment that yields a return greater than the cost of capital.
• Disadvantages: Expressed in absolute currency amounts rather than a percentage, making direct comparisons between divisions of different sizes difficult.

---

3. The Dysfunctional Decision-Making Problem: ROI vs. RI

A classic illustration of why the choice of measure matters is how reliance on ROI can induce dysfunctional decision-making (sub-optimisation), whereas residual income encourages goal congruence.

Practical Demonstration Scenario

Nexus Global plc has a corporate cost of capital of 12%. Two decentralized divisions—Division Alpha and Division Beta—face new capital investment opportunities:

• Division Alpha Current Position:
  • Capital Employed: $1,000,000
  • Controllable Operating Profit: $250,000
  • Current Divisional ROI: $\frac{\text{\textdollar}250,000}{\text{\textdollar}1,000,000} = \mathbf{25.0\%}$
  • Current Divisional RI (at 12%): $\text{\textdollar}250,000 - (\text{\textdollar}1,000,000 \times 12\%) = \text{\textdollar}250,000 - \text{\textdollar}120,000 = \mathbf{\text{\textdollar}130,000}$

The Proposed Project for Division Alpha:

• Required Initial Investment: $200,000
• Forecast Annual Controllable Profit: $34,000
• Project ROI: $\frac{\text{\textdollar}34,000}{\text{\textdollar}200,000} = \mathbf{17.0\%}$

Corporate Perspective vs. Divisional Manager Decision

1. Corporate Headquarters Perspective:

   • The project earns 17.0%, which exceeds the corporate cost of capital (12.0%).
   • Undertaking the project creates positive economic value of $\text{\textdollar}34,000 - (\text{\textdollar}200,000 \times 12\%) = +\text{\textdollar}10,000$ per year.
   • Corporate verdict: ACCEPT the project.

2. Division Alpha Manager Evaluated on ROI:

   • New combined Capital Employed: $\text{\textdollar}1,000,000 + \text{\textdollar}200,000 = \text{\textdollar}1,200,000$
   • New combined Operating Profit: $\text{\textdollar}250,000 + \text{\textdollar}34,000 = \text{\textdollar}284,000$
   • New Combined ROI: $\frac{\text{\textdollar}284,000}{\text{\textdollar}1,200,000} = \mathbf{23.67\%}$
   • Because 23.67% is lower than the division's current 25.0% ROI, the manager's reported performance drops!
   • Manager's Decision under ROI: REJECT the project!
   • This is classic dysfunctional decision-making: the manager rejects a commercially viable project that would have generated $10,000 net value for shareholders.

3. Division Alpha Manager Evaluated on Residual Income (RI):

   • Project Residual Income: $\text{\textdollar}34,000 - (\text{\textdollar}200,000 \times 12\%) = +\text{\textdollar}10,000$
   • New Divisional RI: $\text{\textdollar}130,000 + \text{\textdollar}10,000 = \mathbf{\text{\textdollar}140,000}$
   • Because Residual Income increases by $10,000, the manager's performance rating rises.
   • Manager's Decision under RI: ACCEPT the project!
   • Residual income encourages goal congruence between divisional management and corporate shareholders.

Asset Valuation Dilemmas in ROI and RI

Both ROI and RI require measuring Capital Employed. The valuation method chosen has significant behavioural consequences:

• Net Book Value (NBV): Assets are valued at historical cost less accumulated depreciation. As assets age, NBV declines, causing calculated ROI to rise artificially over time even if physical output declines. This discourages managers from replacing obsolete machinery with modern equipment.
• Gross Book Value (GBV): Assets are valued at original cost before depreciation. Prevents artificial ROI inflation but ignores wear and tear.
• Replacement Cost: Revalues assets at current market acquisition price. Reflects true economic capital but involves subjective, costly valuations.

---

4. Limitations of Financial Performance Indicators & Non-Financial KPIs

While ROI and RI provide valuable financial summaries, relying exclusively on financial performance indicators suffers from severe shortcomings:

1. Historical and Lagging: Financial statements report past results rather than current competitiveness or future capability.
2. Encourages Managerial Myopia: To meet short-term quarterly profit targets, managers may cut essential discretionary expenditures, such as preventative machine maintenance, research & development (R&D), customer service, and staff training.
3. Vulnerable to Accounting Manipulation: Operating profit can be distorted through subjective inventory valuations, depreciation policies, and timing of revenue recognition.
4. Ignores Intangibles: Financial metrics fail to measure customer loyalty, employee morale, brand equity, or product innovation.

To overcome these limitations, modern management accounting pairs financial measures with leading non-financial Key Performance Indicators (KPIs):

---

5. Measures in Service and Not-for-Profit Organisations

Because services are intangible, perishable and variable (Section 9.1), service organisations lean heavily on non-financial and capacity measures:

Section 10.4 calculates composite measures such as cost per patient-day and cost per tonne-kilometre.

---

6. The Kaplan & Norton Balanced Scorecard

Developed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton, the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a strategic performance management framework that translates an organization's mission and strategy into a comprehensive set of performance measures.

The Balanced Scorecard provides balance across four critical dimensions:

• Between financial and non-financial metrics
• Between short-term and long-term objectives
• Between lagging indicators (past outcomes) and leading indicators (future drivers)
• Between internal operations and external stakeholders

The Four Perspectives of the Balanced Scorecard

1. Financial Perspective:
   • Core Question: "To succeed financially, how should we appear to our shareholders?"
   • Typical Metrics: Return on Capital Employed (ROCE), Residual Income (RI), cash flow from operations, operating profit margin, revenue growth from new products.
2. Customer Perspective:
   • Core Question: "To achieve our strategic vision, how should we appear to our customers?"
   • Typical Metrics: Customer satisfaction ratings, customer retention rate, market share percentage, Net Promoter Score (NPS), delivery punctuality.
3. Internal Business Processes Perspective:
   • Core Question: "To satisfy our shareholders and customers, what business processes must we excel at?"
   • Typical Metrics: Manufacturing cycle efficiency, defect rate in production, unit cost reduction, new product development time, inventory turnover.
4. Learning and Growth Perspective (Organizational Capacity):
   • Core Question: "To achieve our vision, how will we sustain our ability to change and improve?"
   • Typical Metrics: Hours of employee training per year, key employee retention rate, implementation of worker process improvement suggestions, IT system capabilities.

Cause-and-Effect Strategy Mapping

A fundamental strength of the Balanced Scorecard is its explicit cause-and-effect hypothesis. A strategy is not a collection of independent goals; it is a chain of logical linkages:

$$\begin{matrix} \text{Investment in Employee Training (Learning \& Growth)} \\ \Downarrow \\ \text{Fewer Manufacturing Errors \& Faster Cycle Times (Internal Processes)} \\ \Downarrow \\ \text{Higher On-Time Delivery \& Customer Satisfaction (Customer)} \\ \Downarrow \\ \text{Increased Repeat Orders, Operating Profit, and ROI (Financial)} \end{matrix}$$

By monitoring leading non-financial indicators in the lower perspectives, management anticipates and protects future financial performance long before issues materialize in the statutory profit and loss accounts.