主题：解读国资委新政策——央企实施经济增加值考核 -- 土拨鼠yuanap
家园 as I mentioned in previous p post, EVA is a measure with both merits and weaknesses. One weakness is it fails to take into consideration the volatility (business and industry risk) of different firms.
BTW, financial service should be treated separately--leave this aside.
The gov. needs to make adjustment to the interest rate to reflect such risk difference. One can not use ONE raw rate.
Hydro Electric is very stable business. I know it because my friend is in charge of the audit of one of the largest NAmerican Hydro firm. EVA is still a good tool in reduce unecessary capital expenditure--but firm can go around it by changing capitalization criteria.
Financial service is special industry. Even in US conglomerate, it is evaluated separately from manufacturing/utility divisions. I am surprised that Guo Zi Wei does not separate electric utility from financial service, THAT'S COMMON SENSE in America.
家园 不是国资委没常识，而是具体执行的官员在敷衍了事 国资委里面也有一些海归专家，对美国监管知识是非常熟悉的。但是他们的上级只要政绩，不管执行的可行性和难度，所以他们也只好弄些完全不可操作，但是又可以糊弄领导的玩意，新概念，新工具，理论上可以头头是道，实际完全不可行。国资委监管资产超过10万亿人民币，员工上千万，企业遍及全世界，监管人员只有几百人，你说能干什么具体事情。所以知道是一回事情，能够实施是另一回事情。以我以前服务的企业而言，在央企序列里是个小企业，也有2、3000亿资产，10几万员工，遍及全国，一年开一次工作汇报总结会，就要100多人准备半年资料，核实和稽核各种报表数据（因为下属企业弄虚作假和越权渎职是不可避免的），光是监管手册就有1000多页。国资委如果想有效监管，工作量不敢想象。而目前他们是按中央部委的运营方式，是个衙门。衙门的工作方式是什么？汇报，打板子，再汇报，再打板子。
家园 这个太搞了！ 汇报，打板子，再汇报，再打板子。- 复 这个太搞了！
家园 去这种部委汇报工作（xxx委，xxx委等等都一样），待遇 就象过堂。首先大老爷要问几个稀松平常的问题，例如年景如何，收成如何，然后一拍惊堂木：老实招来，为何有什么什么问题？
汇报人也是身经百战：大老爷在上，您说的这种事情也是有的，但是事出有因，。。。。。以下省去几百上千字，所以情有可原，以后一定不再犯。。。。。。
不要再说，我都知道了，明年打算怎么干那？
回大老爷的话，明年如此等等，那么等等。
又是老调重弹，我警告你，在这么下去我可帮不了你。
哪里敢，哪里敢。一定努力。。。。。。
今年完成不好，不惩罚是不行了，来呀，看看今年对他们是怎么处罚的？。。。。。。
谢谢领导，谢谢领导。
都散了吧，我还有事情。
您慢走，您慢走。
好险，今年又熬过去了。。。。。。
家园 I see. My two cents. 国资委监管资产超过10万亿人民币，员工上千万，企业遍及全世界，监管人员只有几百人，你说能干什么具体事情。I see. It is good to know.I thought it has thousands of staff.
US conglomerates control thousands of subsidiaries through several mechanisms.
1.Internal audit--in GE, this department is huge, they send professional staff to fly over the world to check over internal control, management efficiency, system integrity on a regular basis at different divisions. This function serves as the eye and ear for top HQ managers on a regular basis. Very powerful function.
2.External audit--external audit is done NOT just on US headquarter and US divisions, but also on ALL overseas divisions. The independent overseas auditors will give annual feedback to HQ as to the system integrity at division level.
一年开一次工作汇报总结会，（因为下属企业弄虚作假和越权渎职是不可避免的）
--that's because internal/external audits are either not there or totally ineffective. THOSE COSTS ARE NECESSARY, because it helps the top to watch over those thousands of people below you on a regular basis.
3.Direct reporting lines with integrated ERP system--my friend at Procter Gamble told me that its Asian division gets info feed on production and sale from China division on a daily baisis.--solve this problem. 就要100多人准备半年资料，核实和稽核各种报表数据
光是监管手册就有1000多页。国资委如果想有效监管，工作量不敢想象。而目前他们是按中央部委的运营方式，是个衙门。衙门的工作方式是什么？汇报，打板子，再汇报，再打板子。
--One effective way is PPT presentation: ask those CEOs to summarize info into an one-hour presentation. THAT'S COMMON PRACTICE IN corporate America.
Then the panel of specialists asks Many TOUGH QUESTIONS.
1.It tests those CEO's familarity of his or her own business and key data (if he or she said--I do not know this/that, that's huge embarrassment)
2.Oral communication is efficient and interactive--it allows clarification, extension and quick feedback
3.*It pushes those CEOs to be western-style professional managers--I mean being very strong in public speech and PPT presentation. 汇报 is not presentation. Most state firm manager's 汇报 is a blah-blah talk piece of joke.
4.A face-to-face opportunity to identify talents.
*Here the panel must be knowledgeable, professional too. If people know to ask good questions, then it is no longer politically motivated 打板子, it is process of effective evaluation. But I guess the panel does not have many experts as good as people like you.
BTW, one personal observation on the common problem in state-owned firms. Am I right?
1. *very weak and unprofessional mid-managers(except for production dept). Top leaders are often quite smart. Lowest level workers can be really hard-working. But the mid-level just too weak to implement the big picture from the top.
(long time ago when I audited state firms) I had experience meeting some accounting managers who could not write correct accounting journals and do not understand varioius accounting rules, or purchase managers who clearly had no clue about managing purchasing. That's quite different compared my experience with those managers at the China division of IBM/GE/PG....
I often question how these people get their jobs in the first place--nepotism? maybe.
家园 国情不同。中国央企并不是严格意义的企业，例如要承担稳定 地方的任务，要承担很多无法用金钱表示的社会责任。举例而言，我们某地有一子公司经营不好，受到总部处罚，当地省委书记和省长就联袂来京说情，因为企业解决了当地部分就业问题。甚至隐含威胁：如果你们敢关掉这个企业，你们在本省的其他企业也得完蛋。再说国资委无法任免央企领导，所以也就没什么力度了。你一定听过安定团结贷款，也一定听过维稳就业，这就是央企的责任。国资委也无可奈何。所以没办法完全按照市场法则来监管央企，因为他本来就不是一个真正的企业。
家园 求教美国监管知识 忙总，这半年多跟您学了不少东西，能够平和的看待很多事了，非常感谢您。
想请您提示一些美国监管知识的资料可以吗
- 复 求教美国监管知识
家园 查一句：美国企业的效益由市场监管 财务报表由外部审计和法院监管
- 复 求教美国监管知识
家园 美国政府对企业监管很少，一般主要注重法律监管，也即公平性 监管，是一系列法案来实现，例如萨班斯-奥克斯利法案等等。他们不管企业财务指标，盈利能力监管。这是企业自己的事情。企业集团监管自己的下属企业，各家都有自己的标准，例如GE标准，杜邦标准。总的来说是当期盈利能力为主，中长期发展潜力储备为辅。具体指标非常多，可以看看美国的相关财务制度就知道。资产增值是一类，盈利指标是一类，现金流量是一类，偿债能力是一类。我个人认为主要是净资产收益率，自由现金流量和资产周转率是最主要的三类企业监管指标。