Новые показатели эффективности: Прибыль в расчете на сотрудника

Most performance indicators emerged in the 20th century, the century of industrial companies. But times have changed, and the need to change rates.
This article was prepared by Anastasia Nechushkin, Aleksandor Shubin, "Partner Business Consulting", based on «The new metric of corporate peformance: Profit per employee», Lowell L. Bryan, director in McKinsey's New York office, McKinsey Quartely, 2007 

Most companies are focused on measuring the return on invested capital (ROIC), instead of measuring the contribution of talented people. Many companies still measure their performance using a system of financial performance, based on indicators that do not provide a sufficient understanding of the actual mechanisms of value creation: knowledge, attitude, goodwill, and other intangible assets created by talented people and represented investments in R & D, marketing, and training.
More and more companies create value by transforming the individual intangible assets in certain skills, patents, trademarks, software, intellectual capital, which increase the profit per employee and return on invested capital. These intangible assets are a true capital in terms of the return of cash, even though the sources are intangible. Today, therefore, companies should review their financial and performance-oriented.
Why is it needed? Consider a simple estimate of intangible capital, which is calculated as the market value less the amount of invested financial capital. In 2005, the intangible capital, in the sense of this evaluation, the world's largest 150 companies was $ 7.5 trillion, versus $ 800 billion in 1985.
Despite evidence of the fact that the most valuable asset possessed by the company today is intangible, not financial - it's intangible assets, the company strictly control their costs, including their minor and not critical. Advertising, research, and R & D, new product development, training, software projects, etc. almost always in the expenditure of the question: "What can we eliminate?", instead of asking "Why?".
The first reason for this question is that of intangible assets is a very difficult task. In particular, a contribution of each intangible and difficult to assess, as, for example, to evaluate a brand. Intangible assets are included in the value chain of the product, but it is not clear what intangible assets are a source of profit - or what the balance of intangible and material has to be real for the economic result.
A significant problem is that most companies measure the financial performance of work under the requirements of an earlier industrial age, when the financial assets in the minds of strategists and investors took first place. Companies filling annual reports information on the use of capital, are unable to adequately reflect the use of the people whose job it is to generate new thinking and ideas, and who are making an increasing contribution to the creation and enhancement of the value of companies in today's information economy. Financial performance (marked on the balance sheet, cash flow and stated income) is without a doubt and will remain a key parameter for evaluating the company and its management. But it is time to recognize that the financial outcome is increasingly shaped by the return of investment in talent, not financial capital.
Accounting for investments in accordance with the accounting standards remains largely conservative, since intangible investments are not capitalized. However, we can not say that conservatism in this matter is bad, but it really encourages executives to reduce spending on intangible assets for a quick profit. But do not forget that it could also undermine the well-being of the company in the long run.
Increase the capacity of creating value for the strategic thinking of the tutorial in the incarnation of the radical ideas of changes in indicators of financial performance by focusing on the index return on talent, not a return on invested capital. Following the new principles will encourage managers otherwise relate to expenditures on intangible assets.

Measurement of financial efficiency in the information age

Before a detailed examination of new indicators, let's consider the facts using "thinking" people, not financial capital (Figure 1).
From 1995 to 2005 in 30 of the largest companies in the world (ranked by market capitalization) profit per employee increased from $ 35,000 to $ 83,000 per person per year. On average, the number of people employed by these companies has increased from 92 000 to 198 000, and their record ROIC (or cost of capital, calculated according to the rules of financial accounting) increased from 17% to 23%.

As a result, the average market capitalization of the group companies reached $ 168 billion to $ 34 billion, with payments to shareholders (TRS) 17% per annum. The push of a sharp increase in the market capitalization was a five-fold increase in average earnings - increase due to more than 100 -% jump in profit per employee, and doubling the number of employees. In comparison, ROIC of these companies increased during this same period, only one-third.
You can not say for sure until it has established appropriate theoretical studies, there is a direct correlation between profits and market capitalization, and that the five-fold increase in profits will lead to a similar increase in capitalization. But the obvious is the fact that the total profit is primarily the result of profit per employee, and the total number of employees. Maximizing both sides of this expression, we increase the overall profits, which in turn affects the market capitalization. With this in mind, companies need to change the assessment of financial performance. The new approach should be based on maximizing the return on investment per employee.
The use of a new set of indicators of financial performance enables companies to measure their job more efficiently. Managers should primarily be focused on how much profit the company earns per employee. They should take the measure of the number of employees as a strategic factor. If you want to keep a closer eye on the financial value of the company, in order to be sure that the company is earning more than the cost of capital. Under this system of indicators can be formulated and the basic objectives such as return on talent (profit per employee), growth (number of employees) and return on capital. Together, these figures clearly reflect and manage market capitalization.

Profit per employee

A sign of good financial performance in the information age is the ability to earn "rents" from intangible assets. Profit per employee - one measure of rents, the return on investment - other. If a company increases earnings per employee without increasing kapitalaemkosti business, management increases the "rental" payments for the use of intangible assets (talent people), as well as an indicator of return on invested capital must exceed the value of his involvement. The difference is that the rate of profit per employee to evaluate refund for talent. This indicator allows to change the thinking of managers and direct it to increase profits in accordance with the number of employees. The most valuable use of the talent within the organization - the creation and use of intangible assets. Opportunities to increase profit per employee is unprecedented in the modern economy where intangible assets - a rich source of value.
Another advantage of using profit per employee - no need to adjust to the account. The cost of intangible assets - are not investments (which are depreciated over time). And since it is based on an existing account, the company has the ability to determine its effectiveness by comparing the results of the competition.
Profit per employee of the company focuses on the creation of a "talantoemkoy" values ​​for talented people - those who, under certain investments, can produce valuable intangible assets.
Number of employees
One way to increase the profit of the company - it's low-yield dismiss employees. However, if employees generate profits greater than the capital invested in their work, the loss of such personnel will lead to a reduction in the value created by the company. The real value of the company increases with an increase in profit per employee, or the number of employees, or both indicator. You can observe this trend in Fig. 2, which shows the source of profit. The figure also shows how the increase in employment can serve as a breeding ground of the internal organization of any organization, especially when you can compare companies with similar industry. From this point of view, earnings per employee is a measure of how well a company manages this organizational complexity. Look at Wal-Mart, a company that is able to manage more than 1.5 million people and at the same time show a good performance.


Companies can certainly simplify your organization uses formalized network for the exchange of information, knowledge management and personnel development. The introduction of such technologies can increase the profit per employee, but also if there is no obvious economic benefit, as it allows you to neutralize the problem of wastage of talent people.

Return on equity

The capital can be relatively inexpensive and available, but it requires the return, so using it should be very carefully thought out. If the company uses a policy of full employment to increase the desire for growth, the amount of capital, which would require to be derived from the capital necessary to ensure the work of employees. Managers should use the index return on equity as a robust assessment of management decisions. While the return exceeds the cost of capital, profit per employee is a better indicator because it gives an idea of how a lack of resources and reflects the profit after costs and make the necessary investments. Investments meanwhile depreciated and lose their original cost.

Using the total number of employees as a measure allows the company to avoid a balance of subjective judgment. Accounting capital, on the other hand, is ambiguous because the subject is somewhat arbitrary accounting depreciation and expense reserves. The calculation of return on invested capital have their limitations, particularly for financial institutions whose assets are primarily financial. Invested capital for these companies is not just a formal concept, but also some "bold" assumptions. 

Maximizing the market capitalization

Of course, the goal of making efforts to reorient the indicators of financial performance around talent, is to maximize market share, perhaps that is perhaps the most important measure of economic feasibility. Market capitalization directly affect the company's ability to manage the strategic development and highly correlated with net income. The company can show this correlation, presenting net income as a return on the share multiplied by the number of them. You can see the same relationship, breaking net income in respect of the profits per employee and the total.
Net income and market capitalization may, therefore, be evaluated as a function of the return on capital or or talent. The fact is that while these two measures give similar results, return on talent is a more powerful model in the competitive environment in which intangible assets that create talented employees, provide the majority of newly created value. For managers who want to meet the ever changing market conditions and the company's strategic development plan should take advantage of new methods of money management, in particular to change the view of the system of indicators that measure financial performance. Index - the profit per employee - makes it possible to talk about the strategic development, as talent, skills and knowledge are not amortized and not lose their value, respectively, by investing in talent, we get a higher return, rather than return on investment.
The current companies' annual reports filled with information about how they use the funds, but they are of little recorded information on the number of employees, diversity of staff, or different types of employees. Yet it is now "thinking" talent, not capital, controls the creation of value and, therefore, can claim to be more attention and a more accurate measurement of the leaders who are inclined to think strategically.