Author

  • Stephen Migiro

    • University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville Campus, South Africa
    • South Africa

  • Patricia Shewell

    • University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville Campus, South Africa
    • South Africa

Abstract

The practice of measuring performance of the finance function as a business support unit is not widespread. This study assessed the importance of measuring finance function performance, by ascertaining whether such measurement facilitates identification of the relative efficiency of business finance functions, and by establishing its impact, if any, on overall company performance. Focussing on a sample of companies in the South African Freight Forwarding industry, a performance metric was developed and implemented to measure finance function performance. Relative finance function efficiency was then evaluated using inputorientated data envelopment analysis (DEA) to identify ‘best in class’ performance and to benchmark participants’ performance. Further, value chain DEA (VC-DEA) was applied to evaluate finance function efficiency simultaneously with overall company efficiency. Results show that implementation of the performance metric together with DEA facilitated the benchmarking of the finance functions of the sample group and the establishment of improvement targets for the finance functions determined as inefficient. In addition, a link between overall company performance and finance function performance in terms of inputs was confirmed; however, this link was not conclusively established as regards finance function performance in terms of outputs. The contribution of the study includes confirmation that implementation of the performance metric together with DEA facilitates the critical evaluation of finance function performance, thus establishing the importance of measuring the performance of the finance functions. In addition, incorporating the use of DEA in a performance framework for the finance function as a business support unit has extended the range of applications of DEA.

Keywords

References

  • Accenture Management Consulting. (2014). The CFO as Architect of Business Value: Accenture Management Consulting. Retrieved from https://www.accenture.com
  • Ang, S. & Chen, C. M. (2016). Pitfalls of decomposition weights in the additive multi-stage DEA model. Omega, 58, 139-153.
  • Boisvert, H. (2001a). Profiling success. CMA Magazine, 75(3), 30.
  • Boisvert, H. (2001b). Analysis of the strategic deployment of the finance function. Canada: CMA International Centre [Received via e-mail].
  • Brown, M. G. (1996). Keeping score: Using the Right Metrics to Drive World-Class Performance. New York: AMACOM Division of American Management Association.
  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444.
  • Chen, Y. & Zhu, J. (2004). Measuring information technology's indirect impact on firm performance. Information Technology and Management, 5(1-2), 9-22.
  • Chiu, Y. H. & Huang, C. W. (2011). Evaluating the optimal occupancy rate, operational efficiency, and profitability efficiency of Taiwan's international tourist hotels. Service Industries Journal, 31(13), 2145-2162.
  • Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M. & Zhu, J. (2004). Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
  • Court, S. (2005). Repositioning the Finance Function from making policy to designing strategy. Accountancy Ireland, 37(2), 78-79.
  • Das, A. & Narasimhan, R. (2000). Purchasing competence and its relationship with manufacturing performance. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 36(2), 17-28.
  • Despotis, D. (2016). Composition versus decomposition in two-stage network DEA: A reverse approach. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 45(1), 71.
  • Easton, L., Murphy, D. J. & Pearson, J. N. (2002). Purchasing performance evaluation: With data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 8(3), 123-134.
  • Ebrahimnejad, A., Tavana, M., Lotfi, F. H., Shahverdi, R. & Yousefpour, M. (2014). A three-stage Data Envelopment Analysis model with application to banking industry. Measurement, 49(0), 308-319.
  • Elkins, T. T. (2003). Multiple Criteria/Multiple Objective and Dynamic Data Envelopment Analysis with the Freight Service Business (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, Newark, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/288136921?accountid=11921 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I database. (UMI No. 3080562)
  • Ellram, L. M., Zsidisin, G. A., Siferd, S. & Stanly, M. (2002). The impact of purchasing and supply management activities on corporate success. The Journal of Supply Chain Management: A Global Review of Purchasing and Supply, 38(1), 4-17.
  • Financial Executives Research Foundation. (2013). Benchmarking the finance function. Danvers, MA: The Financial Executives Research Foundation. [Received via e-mail]
  • Financial Executives Research Foundation. (2016). Benchmarking the accounting and finance function. Danvers, MA: The Financial Executives Research Foundation. [Received via e-mail]
  • Fitzgerald, L., Brignall, S., Silvestro, R., Voss, C. & Robert, J. (1991). Performance Measurement in Service Businesses. London: Chartered Institute of Management Accountants.
  • Golany, B. & Roll, Y. (1989), An application procedure for DEA. Omega, 17(3), 237.
  • Guo, C., Shureshjani, R. A., Foroughi, A. A. & Zhu, J. (2016). Decomposition weights and overall efficiency in two-stage additive network DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, In Press. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221716306178.
  • Institute of Management and Administration. (2005). Hackett Group Survey Quantifies Efficiency & Effectiveness in Finance Controller's Report (1-15). Peterborough, NH. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=18619001&site=ehost-live.
  • Johnston, R., Brignall, S. & Fitzgerald, L. (2002). The involvement of management accountants in operational process change: Results from field research. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(12), 1325-1338.
  • Kao, C. (2014). Network data envelopment analysis: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 239(1), 1-16.
  • Kaplan, R. S. (1984). The evolution of management accounting. Accounting Review, 59(3), 390.
  • Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (1996a). The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy Into Action. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
  • Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (1996b). Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy. California Management Review, 39(1), 53-79.
  • Keegan, D. P., Eiler, R. G. & Jones, C. R. (1989). Are your performance measures obsolete. Management Accounting, 70(12), 45-50.
  • Lehtinen, J. & Tuomas, A. (2010). Is performance measurement suitable for an extended enterprise. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 30(2), 181-204.
  • Lenihan, B. & O'Malley, M. (2002). Finance function: Are you geared for the challenges ahead. Accountancy Ireland, 34(2), 3.
  • Lynch, R. L. & Cross, K. F. (1992). Measure up!: The essential Guide to Measuring Business Performance. London: Mandarin.
  • Mitra, S., Sambamurthy, V. & Westerman, G. (2011). Measuring IT performance and communicating value. MIS Quarterly Executive, 10(1), 47-59.
  • Morgan, C. (2004). Structure, speed and salience: performance measurement in the supply chain. Business Process Management Journal, 10(5), 522-536.
  • Narasimhan, R. J., Jayaram, J. & Carter, J. R. (2001). An empirical examination of the underlying dimensions of purchasing competence. Production and Operations Management, 10(1), 1-15.
  • Neely, A. (2004). The challenges of performance measurement/Interviewer: S. Powell. Management Decision, 42(0), 1017-1023: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  • Nørreklit, H. (2000). The balance on the balanced scorecard—a critical analysis of some of its assumptions. Management Accounting Research, 11(1), 65-88.
  • O'Connor, J., Schneider, L. & Willman, T. (2015). The world-class performance advantage: Three imperatives for greater finance agility. Finance Executive Insight. The Hackett Group. Retrieved from http://www.thehackettgroup.com/finance-strategy/research/
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2014). Survival and success: Insurance finance effectiveness benchmark study. South Africa. [Received via e-mail]
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2015). Breaking away: How leading finance functions are redefining excellence. Delaware: PricewaterhouseCoopers. Retrieved from http://www.pwc.com/us/en/increasingfinance-function-effectiveness/finance-effectiveness-benchmark-study.html
  • Saranga, H. & Moser, R. (2010). Performance evaluation of purchasing and supply management using value chain DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(1), 197-205.
  • Seiford, L. M. & Zhu, J. (2002). Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 142(1), 16-20.
  • Shewell, P. (2011). Finance function: Leveraging a source of competitve advantage for selected South African companies in KwaZulu-Natal (unpublished Master’s dissertation). Durban University of Technology, Durban.
  • Van Arnum, P. (2004). Executive leadership: Finance functions. Chemical Market Reporter, 265(22), 19.
  • Van der Stede, W. A. & Malone, R. (2010). Accounting trends in a borderless world: Chartered Institute of Management Accountants. Retrieved from http://www.cimaglobal.com/Documents/Thought_leadership_docs/AccountingTrends.pdf
  • Wang, C. H., Gopal, R. D. & Zionts, S. (1997). Use of data envelopment analysis in assessing information technology impact on firm performance. Annals of Operations Research, 73, 191-213.
  • Wang, M. S. & Lu, S. T. (2015). Information technology and risk factors for evaluating the banking industry in the Taiwan: An application of a Value Chain DEA. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 16(5), 901-915.
  • Zhu, J. & Cook, W. D. (2010). Modeling Data Irregularities and Structural Complexities in Data Envelopment Analysis. Boston: Springer US.
  • Zhu, J. (2014). Quantitative Models for Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking : Data Envelopment Analysis with Spreadsheets. Boston: Springer US.

Downloads

No downloads have been recorded for this article yet. Figures appear here once readers begin downloading the full text.

How to Cite

Migiro, S., & Shewell, P. (2018). Finance Function Performance Measurement-A Data Envelopment Analysis Approach. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 9(6(J), 109-121. https://doi.org/10.22610/jebs.v9i6.2009

Share this article

License

Copyright (c) 2018 Stephen Migiro, Patricia Shewell (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Author (s) should affirm that the material has not been published previously. It has not been submitted and it is not under consideration by any other journal. At the same time author (s) need to execute a publication permission agreement to assume the responsibility of the submitted content and any omissions and errors therein. After submission of revised paper in the light of suggestions of the reviewers, the editorial team  edits and formats manuscripts to bring uniformity and standardization in published material.

This work will be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) and under condition of the license, users are free to read, copy, remix, transform, redistribute, download, print, search or link to the full texts of articles and even build upon their work as long as they credit the author for the original work. Moreover, as per journal policy author (s) hold and retain copyrights without any restrictions.

Keywords

Section

Research Paper

Published in

Vol. 9 No. 6(J) (2017) SME Strategy, FDI & Macro Stability View issue contents

Published

2018-01-15

Submissions

Have research to publish? Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies welcomes submissions.

Make a Submission