Research Objectives General research objectives: To propose the establishment a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers for management of rubber enterprise
Trang 11 Reason for selecting the topic
In order to survive and develop in the current market economy, enterprises are always looking for ways to operate efficiently, improve competitiveness With the achievements in the current management science, decentralization of the responsibility centers in most enterprises is inevitable Therefore, a organization operates efficiently, it is necessary to evaluate the achievements of responsibility centers as well as the shortcomings, causes and responsibilities of related departments Enterprises should have
a system of evaluation indicators to evaluate responsibility centers appropriately The development and provision of this indicator system belongs to responsibility accounting,
an important subdivision of management accounting
Rubber is considered as the main export of Vietnam but from 2013 until now the rubber manufacturing enterprises prolonged losses There are many reasons in that not much emphasis on measurement and evaluation of the performance of the responsibility centers has made the business of the rubber manufacturing enterprises is not effective In order to meet the demand for information, the proposal to set up and implement a system
of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in the rubber industry of Vietnam is necessary and useful Based on the above reasons, the author has chosen the topic:
"Establishing a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers
in the rubber manufacturing industry of Vietnam" as the subject of thesis research
2 Research Objectives
General research objectives: To propose the establishment a system of performance
evaluation measures for responsibility centers for management of rubber enterprises in Vietnam to measure and evaluate the performance, responsibility and rights of responsibility centers and also the basis for the administrator to make effective business decisions
Specific research objectives:
Firstly, summarizing the basics of responsibility accounting, the content and
methodologies used to determine a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers to build scientific arguments that underpin the study of the thesis;
Secondly, study and assess the actual situation of applying a system of performance
evaluation measures for responsibility centers of enterprises in the rubber industry of Vietnam;
Thirdly, propose orientations and develop a system of performance evaluation
measures for responsibility centers of enterprises in the rubber industry of Vietnam
3 Research questions
To achieve the above objectives, the thesis should answer the following research questions:
(1) Basic arguments on business characteristics, management decentralization, and
a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in manufacturing enterprises ?
(2) The current status of a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers and the level of satisfying the information needs of internal management of enterprises in the rubber industry of Vietnam today?
(3) What are the suggestions for the development a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in the rubber manufacturing industry in Vietnam?
4 Subjects and scope of research
Trang 2Research subjects: The content and methodology for developing a system of
performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers is suitable and effective in order to help organizations manage their business effectively
Research scope:
Content: The thesis focuses on the development of developing a system of
performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in the the Vietnamese rubber industry?;
Spatial domain: The rubber manufacturing industry in Vietnam cultivates and
preliminarily processes rubber latex with average size upward;
Time range: Research data from 2015 to 2017
5 Research methodology
For the purpose of the thesis, the author used qualitative research method Specifically, the author conducted surveys, in-depth interviews and case studies (in five typical companies in the sector) to find out the current situation of production organization, management decentralization, level of application a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers from which to suggest direction, building a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers for effective in the Vietnamese rubber industry The general research process of the thesis is described in the diagram 1.1
* Data collection methods:
(1) Data collection: The author collects from two main sources: primary data source
and secondary data source The secondary data sources were collected through the case study at five companies (Daklak rubber one member limited company, Dong Nai rubber corporation – one member limited liability company, Dong Phu rubber jsc, Chu Se rubber co., ltd, Quang Nam rubber co., ltd) Primary data sources were collected by survey method using questionnaires (sending questionnaires and collecting responses via Google Docs)
Diagram 1.1 The research process of the thesis
Source: Self-built author
Trang 3In addition, the author also interviews directly with these executives and accountants to check the information on the answer sheets as well as clarify the issues of viewpoints, indicators and the need to use a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers of the rubber plantation administrators.
About the sample of enterprises surveyed: The total number of enterprises involved
in rubber production is 92 enterprises (announced by the Vietnam Rubber Association (2016), to ensure the database for thesis research, the author conducted a survey on the sample of 92 enterprises and collected 85 questionnaires including 77 valid responses from 77 enterprises (including 34 one number company limited, 4 two number company limited and more and 39 joint stock company) Thus, the sample was finally identified as
77 enterprises reaching 83.69% of the sample size
(2) On how to collect data: The author conducts data collection through (a): Send
the survey form via email through the Google Docs; (b) in-depth interviews and (c) case studies in five medium-sized companies in the large-scale group
(3) On the scope of collection time, survey data: The author conducts surveys,
interviews, case studies of the Vietnamese rubber industry from 2015 to 2017
6 New contributions of the thesis
The research results of the thesis contribute the following basic contents:
* New contributions in terms of academics, reasoning: The thesis has analyzed and
synthesized from domestic and foreign researches related to the basic characteristics of responsibility accounting, contents and methods a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in manufacturing enterprises as well as systematizing theories of responsibility accounting, responsibility centers and needs management of management assessment responsibility centers in manufacturing enterprises The thesis has clarified the content and methodology for identifying a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers through different periods and at the same time developing and supplementing the contents and methods of determining a system of advantages performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in manufacturing enterprises
* New proposals from the research results of the dissertation: (1) The thesis
proposes to define the content and methodology for the development of a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in the Vietnamese Rubber Group on the basis of apply the Balanced Scorecard method; (2) The thesis clearly identifies the core groups of each type of responsibility centers on aspects of the Balanced Scorecad (finance, customer, internal processes, learning and development) from which develop specific financial and non-financial indicators for each activity group and in each aspect of the Balanced Scorecard; (3) The thesis clearly identifies causal relationships between financial indicators and non-financial indicators in each responsibility center; It provides information on the results, causes and responsibilities of the relevant departments and also provides a basis for the implementation of appropriate and active remuneration policies for employees This is the motivation for the manager with employees to step by step lead the enterprise to fulfill the vision statement; (4) The thesis proposes recommendations to state management agencies, Vietnam Association of Accountants and Auditors as well as to the Vietnamese rubber industry on conditions for developing and applying the system only However, for the successful implementation of the enterprises,
it is necessary to prepare in a more detailed and clear way the requirements, principles, construction process, material conditions, people suitable for each specific enterprise
Trang 47 Structure of the thesis
Apart from the summary, the list of tables, figures, diagrams, conclusions, reference materials, theses are structured in four chapters:
Chapter 1: Overview of Research on a system of performance evaluation measures
for responsibility centers in manufacturing enterprises
Chapter 2: Theories of a system of performance evaluation measures for
responsibility centers in manufacturing enterprises
Chapter 3: Research results a system of performance evaluation measures for
responsibility centers in the rubber industry of Vietnam
Chapter 4: Orientations and proposals for the development of a a system of
performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers in the rubber industry of Vietnam
CHAPTER 1 OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH ON A SYSTEM OF PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION MEASURES FOR RESPONSIBILITY CENTERS IN
MANUFACTURING ENTERPRISES 1.1 Overview of foreign research
Responsibility accounting has a great influence on the contents, methods and bases
of information that define the indicator system of management responsibility Therefore, when studying a system of performance evaluation measures for responsibility centers, Scholars have expressed their views on responsibility accounting as a fundamental premise
1.1.1 The results of the joint research on responsibility accounting
The majority of responsibility accounting research studies focus on the following issues:
* Elements of a responsibility accounting system
Gordon (1963) argues that the responsibility accounting system consists of four elements: (1) Types of Responsibility Centers (2) Principles for determining prices of goods and services; (3) Regulations on responsibilities and authority for each manager and Responsibility Centers; (4) Reward system Fowzia (2011) argues that the following two elements are added: (1) Establishment of measures or criteria for evaluation based on the establishment of a system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers; (2) Evaluate the results of the responsibility centers to implement appropriate remuneration policies
* Steps to perform responsibility accounting
Define responsibility accounting of an organization, the following steps should be taken: (1) Identify key issues of the responsibility accounting; (2) Analyze the current state of the current system, including the responsibility accounting system and management system; (3) Consider issues of understanding and level of participation of employees in the responsibility accounting, identification of control points, etc.; (4) developing approach of the responsibility accounting; (5) design the responsibility accounting system; (6) Training staff for the responsibility accounting system; (7) Do the design work (Anstine and Scott, 1980)
* Responsibility accounting report
Vos and O'Connell (1968) assert that responsibility accounting report is the basis of
a management information system, which provides information for planning and controlling activities The main contents of the resonsibility accounting report include: (1) Types of Responsibility Centers; (2) Criteria for evaluation; (3) actual performance; (4) Volatility of the period compared with the estimation period (Cox et al., 1989)
Trang 51.1.2 Results of research on responsibility centers and a system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers
* Types of Responsibility Centers
When referring to the Responsibility Centers, Melumad, Mookherjee, Dand Reichelstein (1992) argue that there are three types of Responsibility Centers in an organization, including cost center, profit center and investment center However, according to the actual survey conducted by Sarkar and Yeshmin (2005), 33% of organization have 4 types of Responsibility Centers (cost center, revenue center, profit center and investment center) and 30% of organization have 3 types of Responsibility Centers (cost center, profit center and investment center) Schoute's research (2008) has advised executives to operate a organization with four types of Responsibility Centers, namely cost center, revenue center, profit center and investment center In which: cost center is a responsibility center in which a manager is responsible only for costs; (2) The revenue center is a responsibility center in which a manager is responsible only for revenues; (3) Profit Center is a responsibility center in which a manager is responsible only for profit growth; (4) The investment center shall take the main responsibility and mobilize and use the investment capital
* The system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers
In corporate governance, every stage of a business process evaluates its business results in a different way - depending on the economic context and the needs of the manager Indeed, the study by Neely and Austin (2002) showed that the method and content of the indicator system were diverged into two distinct phases: The period before
1980 and the period after 1980 The period before 1980, the system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers were mainly focused on evaluating the efficiency of production and sales through financial indicators, the most popular was the comparison method and illegal method; The period from 1980 up to now, focusing on comprehensive assessment of the activities of enterprises Newly added methods include: PMM (Keegan, Eiler & Jones, 1989), SMART (Lynch & Cross, 1991), R & DM (Fitzgerald et al., 1991), BSC (Kaplan & Norton,
1992, 1996) in all methods proposed additional non-financial indicators
1.2 Overview of research in Vietnam
1.2.1 General research results on resonsibility accounting:
The results of the joint research on resonsibility accounting mainly focus on the model of resonsibility accounting and the elements of resonsibility accounting model based on the inheritance of research results of foreign authors (Tran Van Tung (2010), Nguyen Thi Minh Phuong (2013), Nguyen Huu Phu (2014), Tran Trung Tuan (2015), )
In addition to the above resonsibility accounting factors, most of domestic researches do not cover practical steps as well as practical experiences in applying resonsibility accounting of an organization
1.2.2 Research results on responsibility centers and the system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers
* Types of responsibility Centers: Many authors suggest that an organization should
build four types of responsibility centers, namely cost center, revenue center, profit center and investment center (Nguyen Thi Minh Phuong 2013), Nguyen Huu Phu (2014), Tran Trung Tuan (2015), )
* The system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers: (1) Regarding
assessment methods: Most of the research in Vietnam only deals with classical evaluation methods such as comparative methods, illegal method, (Tran Van Tung (2010), Nguyen
Trang 6Thi Minh Phuong (2013), (2) Regarding the content: Most of the research in Vietnam only mentioned financial indicators and not to mention non-financial indicators (Nguyen Thi Minh Phuong (2013), Tran Trung Tuan (2015), )
In summary, through research projects in and outside the country on responsibility accounting and The system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers, has shown that the usefulness of the information that this indicator brings to the enterprise is very large, especially the control, assessment of the responsibility of the administrator for the responsibility centers However, the results of the study also show that some issues of The system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers
have not been satisfactorily resolved or not mentioned such as:
(1) There is no mention of the basis and criteria for the classification of costs in order to create information for the purpose of identifying The system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers;
(2) The demarcation of the boundary between types of Responsibility Centers is not very clear;
(3) Not using modern assessment methods such as BSC, SMART, PMM, prism performance, in the assessment of responsibility centers;
(4) Not applying or researching the use of non-financial indicators or using combined financial and non-financial indicators to assess responsibility centers in the Vietnamese rubber industry;
(5) Steps and sequence of assessment of responsibility centers in the context of modern information technology
The issues mentioned above are the research gap that until now has not been announced by other researchers The author selects the content and methodology for developing a system The system of evaluation measures for responsibility centers in the Vietnamese rubber industry based on the application of BSC and this is also the author's choice in research and development thesis
Trang 7CHAPTER 2 THEORIES OF A SYSTEM OF PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MEASURES FOR RESPONSIBILITY CENTERS IN MANUFACTURING ENTERPRISES 2.1 Characteristics of business operations, management requirements and the formation of business management indicators in manufacturing enterprises
2.1.1 Characteristics of business activities in manufacturing enterprises
Business activities have the following basic characteristics: business activities are always linked to the market; diversified business activities; business needs a certain amount of capital; Enterprises exist and develop when business activities are profitable; Business activities bring the main source of revenue for the State budget; At different stages of social history, the characteristics, scale and mode of business activity are most different in the present knowledge economy
2.1.2 Demand management of business activities in manufacturing enterprises
To achieve the vision, mission and strategic goals, enterprises must meet the requirements of business management in both short and long term For long-term business activities: Ensure good management of work processes such as identifying and implementing vision, mission into development strategies and specific objectives; For mid-term and short-term business: enterprises need to focus on input supply, production, consumption, research and product development,…
2.1.3 Establishment of business management indicators in manufacturing enterprises
Derived from management needs in enterprises with decentralized management to the responsibility center, from the results of implementation and specific vision and mission in the process of executing business operations managers need to determine and develop a business management system to achieve long-term goals
2.1.4 Decentralization of business operations and the establishment of responsibility centers in manufacturing enterprises
2.1.4.1 Decentralized management models in enterprises
The decentralization of management and assignment of responsibility center is inevitable in an organization Depending on the size and characteristics of the an organization and the views of the manager, the an organization can choose or combine different models of management decentralization to organize the organization well suited The current hierarchical management models in organization such as: (1) Organizational structure of product management; (2) Organizational model according to business location; (3) Organizational model by customer; (4) organizational model in strategic business units; (5) Mixed model, Each model has different advantages but they all support managers to organize, assign, monitor and evaluate the responsibilities of the parts
in their business better
2.1.4.2 The establishment of management responsibility centers
The formation of responsibility centers in organization is necessary In order to form the responsibility centers, the manufacturing enterprises must first rely on the technological process, production characteristics, product consumption, enterprise size, professional capacity of the staff to determine the organizational structure and functional departments help manager to make appropriate business decisions For the production department, enterprises need to determine the number of production levels, management limits, to identify the responsibility center; For the non-manufacturing department, most
of the companies are based on horizontal management decentralization to identify the appropriate responsibility centers
Trang 82.2 Responsibility Centers and role of responsibility accounting in manufacturing enterprises
2.2.1 The responsibility center and the type of responsibility center in the manufacturing enterprise
A responsibility center is a segment of the business whose manager is accountable for specified sets of activities
Types of Responsibility Centers: Most authors believe that there exist four types of Responsibility Centers: (1) The cost center is a responsibility center in which a manager is responsible only for costs; (2) The revenue center is a responsibility center in which a manager is responsible only for revenues; (3) Profit Center is a responsibility center in which a manager is responsible only for profit growth; (4) The investment is a responsibility
center in which a manager is responsible only for profit and the investment capital
2.2.2 The role of responsibility accounting in manufacturing enterprises
Responsibility accounting is a system of collecting, processing and communicating information to control the ability of each responsibility center to fulfill its common goals
As well as financial accounting, responsibility accounting for performing cost estimation functions; Implementing and providing information but responsible accountants have their own special point of view is to assess responsibility for each center, each administrator and each department
2.3 Indicator system and methodology for identifying indicator system for management responsibility center in manufacturing enterprises
2.3.1 Indicators and Indicators System
2.3.1.1 Definition of indicators and indicator system
Indicators are used to reflect the results obtained in qualitative or quantitative terms
in specific time and space conditions;
The indicator system is a set of related indicators, complementary to each other, which may reflect the characteristics and basic relationships of the research object The indicator system helps us to evaluate the change of subjects more deeply and comprehensively (Boyle and Cao Minh Kiem, 2008)
2.3.1.2 Classification of indicator system
The indicator system can be classified into different indicator groups:
- In terms of content, the indicator system can be divided into groups of indicators, such as the group of indicators reflecting production activities and production results, groups of indicators reflecting consumption and consumption results, ;
- In terms of expression, it is possible to divide the indicator system into absolute index and relative indicator group;
- Regarding the responsibility to carry out the task of production and business, the indicator system can be divided into 3 groups: group of norms, group of perform indicators and group of evaluation indicators;
- In terms of measurement of business results, the criteria can be divided into two groups: financial indicators and non-financial indicators
2.3.2 The relationship between the task and indicator system for management responsibility center in manufacturing enterprises
2.3.2.1 The relationship between the task and indicator system for cost center
- Standard cost center: production task; Monitoring, reflecting the costs incurred, results of production according to each management responsibility center, so the system of indicators including the group of indicators reflect the cost norms of production,
Trang 9production and responsibility of the parts produced;
- Estimates cost center: Having the task of developing, proposing and advising on production and business plans, The indicator system assesses the results and effectiveness of these advisory activities
2.3.2.2 The relationship between the task and indicator system for revenues center
The mission of the revenue center is to sell and maximize revenue; Index system is the criteria to evaluate the ability to complete sales, consumption in the period
2.3.2.3 The relationship between the task and indicator system for profit center
The main function of the profit center is to maximize profitability based on revenue, cost, price, consumption structure, whereby indicator system for profit center is The norms for assessing the level and rate of profit in the period as compared to the estimates
2.3.2.4 The relationship between the task and indicator system for investment center
The mission of the investment center is to manage costs, sales, profits and investment in addition to costs, revenues that cost centers, revenue centers have controlled According to these criteria are ROA, ROE, ROI, EVA, MVA,
2.3.3 Methodology for determining the indicator system for management responsibility center in manufacturing enterprises
2.3.3.1 Method of estimating norms: The following common methods:
The method of estimating the incremental increase is the method by which the value of the estimation criteria should be based on the value of the current period performance plus the estimated value added in the next period
The method of estimating the value from 0 is the estimation method where the value of the estimation criteria must start from 0 and the total value of the estimation criteria must be thoroughly measured as soon as the determination
The method of estimating the rolling estimate (also called continuous estimation) is the method by which estimation norm values are determined and updated regularly by adding a new replacement period
Methodology for determining activity-based estimation: This method is based on the relationship between the activities and the level of resource consumption as well as the benefits from these activities to determine the value of the indicators estimates
2.3.3.2 Method of determining the performance indicators
Including accounting voucher method, accounting account method, price calculation method, balance method, method of survey, interview,
2.3.3.3 Methodology for defining indicator of management responsibility center:
Comparison method: The method commonly used in evaluating economic performance and mainly used in the assessment of financial indicators;
Exclusion Method: This method is commonly used in assessing the tendency, the degree of influence of each component on the overall object of study;
Performance measurement and management (PMM): A combination of financial and non-financial indicators The categories of expenditures into "expenses" (financial indicators) or "non-expenditures" (non-financial norms) and other performance criteria into "inside" or "outside" norms;
Pyramid Performance (SMART): This method is considered a four-tiered pyramid with objectives and an evaluation gauge At the bottom is the strategy level and the bottom
is the individual level - Business performance at all levels is assessed through financial and non-financial indicators
Matrix of Influence and Results (R & DM) A combination of two main dimensions,
Trang 10results and determinants of business results;
Input - Process - Output - result: This method is based on the relationship of business processes from input, process, output and results to achieve the objectives of the enterprise
Balance Scorecard: A methodology for evaluating causal relationships through financial and non-financial indicators to clarify four fundamental aspects of business processes, including: Finance - Customers - Internal Processes - Learning and Growth and
is one of the methods most favorite companies today;
Prism performance: The approach of this method from the perspective of the needs of investors, the evaluation criteria include the satisfaction of investors, the strategy of the business, the process of operation, resources of the company and contributions from investors
2.4.1 Content evaluation system of cost centers
2.4.1.1 The estimation indicator system of the cost centers
(1) For standard cost centers, including financial indicators (indicators reflecting direct material costs, direct labor costs ) and non- finance (indicators reflecting the quality of products, services, internal processes, learning and growth process);
(2) For expected cost center including the financial indicators (variable cost and fix cost) the estimated period and non-financial indicators (quality indicators, intrigue, ) estimation period
2.4.1.2 The implemented indicator system of the cost center
(1) Standard cost center, including financial indicators (indicators reflecting direct material costs, direct labor costs, etc.) and non- major (indicators reflect quality of products, services, internal processes, ) implementation period;
(2) For expected cost center, financial indicators (variable costs, cost norms) and non-financial indicators (quality indicators, intrigue, ) implementation period
2.4.1.3 The indicator system of the cost center
(1) For standard cost centers: including financial indicators (indicators reflecting changes in direct material costs, direct labor costs, etc.) compared to implementation period and estimation period and non-financial norms (indicators reflecting the quality of products, services, internal processes, etc.) compared to implementation period and estimation period;
(2) For expected cost center, including financial indicators (indicators reflecting change in variable costs and charges) compared to implementation period and estimation period and non-financial indicators (Indicators reflect the quality, effectiveness of advisory activities, operational procedures advising, ) compared to implementation period and estimation period
2.4.2 Contents of the estimation indicator system of the revenue center
2.4.2.1 The estimation indicator system of the revenue center
Including financial indicators reflect the revenue period and non-financial indicators (indicators reflect relationship with customers, internal processes, ) period estimate
2.4.2.2 The implemented indicator system of the revenue center
Including indicators reflecting the revenue of the implementation period and financial indicators, reflecting relations with customers, internal processes, the implementation period
non-2.4.2.3 The indicator system of the of the revenue center
Including financial indicators (indicators reflecting turnover fluctuations) of the implementation period compared with the estimation period and non-financial targets (indicators reflecting relations with customers, internal processes, of the implementation
Trang 11period compared with the estimation period
2.4.3 Contents of the indicator system of the profit center
2.4.3.1 The estimation indicator system of the profit center
Including financial indicators (indicators reflecting the fluctuation of profit) period estimates and non-financial indicators (indicators reflect relationships with customers, internal processes, ) period estimates
2.4.3.2 The implemented indicator system of the profit center
Including financial indicators (indicators reflecting the profitability) of the implementation period and non-financial indicators (indicators reflecting customer relations, internal processes, learning process) of the implementation period
2.4.3.3 The indicator system of the profit center
Including financial indicators (indicators reflecting the fluctuation of profitability)
of the implementation period compared with the estimation period and non-financial indicators (indicators reflecting the relationship with customers, internal processes, of the implementation period compared with the estimation period
2.4.4 Contents of the indicator system of the investment center
2.4.4.1 The estimation indicator system of the investment center
Include financial indicators (ROE, ROS, ROI, EVA, ) for estimation period and non-financial indicators (indicators reflect investor relations, internal investment process, ) of estimation period
2.4.4.2 The implemented system of the investment center
Including financial indicators (ROE, ROS, ROI, EVA, etc.) of implementation period, non-financial performance indicators (indicators reflecting investor relations, internal investment processes, etc.) of implementation period
2.4.4.3 The indicator system of the investment center
Including financial indicators (ROE, ROS, ROI, EVA, ) of the implementation period compared with the estimation period.and non-financial indicators (indicators of investor relations, investment period, ) of the implementation period compared with the estimation period
Trang 12CHAPTER 3 RESULTS OF REALIZATION OF A SYSTEM OF PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION MEASURES FOR RESPONSIBILITY CENTERS IN RUBBER
MANUFACTURING ENTERPRISES IN VIETNAM 3.1 An overview of the rubber manufacturing enterprise in Vietnam
3.1.1 History of formation and development
In 1887, France officially planted rubber trees in Vietnam, in 1973 Vietnam took over these rubber plantations from which the Vietnam Rubber Industry came into being According to statistics of the Vietnam Rubber Association, our country ranks 4th in the world in terms of export volume of natural rubber and enterprises involved mainly in the process of planting, preliminary processing and consumption accounted for a large proportion in the valuae chain of the rubber industry
3.1.2 Business characteristics and functional organization
Business Characteristics:
(1) Structure of enterprises involved in rubber production: There are 92 enterprises involved in rubber production, of which there are 3 types of companies: 48 limited companies, 42 joint stock companies and 2 private companies human;
(2) Production process characteristics: The process of producing rubber consists of basic stages such as cultivation, latex exploitation, preliminary processing into rubber latex The stage of cultivation, tending and harvesting takes place in the rubber plantations, preliminary processing stages are carried out in the processing factories
(3) Characteristics of the market: Few products are consumed domestically and most are exported In terms of world market share, Vietnam is the fourth largest exporter
of rubber, accounting for 11.2% of the world market share
Functional organization of the management: Survey results show that there are two
organizational models applied by the companies are online model and online – function model Online model has 5 companies (6.49%) apply and online - function model has 72 companies (93.51%) apply
3.1.3 Characteristics of decentralize management
The survey results show that 93.51% of the rubber companies decentralize their organization into responsibility centers, of which 61 are fully organized in four types of responsibility centers and 11 are organized in two types of responsibility center The case study results show that the majority of rubber emterprises are hierarchically managed by management hierarchy and responsibility centers, although hierarchical levels are uneven and transparent
3.1.4 Features of the organization of the accounting apparatus
On the organizational model: According to survey results show that companies holding financial accounting model combined with management accounting accounted for 93.51% of sample research, not many companies held the separation model separate financial accounting and management accounting
Form of organization: the rubber companies only organize the centralized accounting system at the head office and arrange the monitoring staff at the rubber plantation, processing factory periodically or at the end of month words, records and reconciliation of data with company accounting
3.2 Study of a system of performance evaluation measure for responsibility centers
in rubber manufacturing emterprises in Vietnam
3.2.1 The system of performance evaluation measure for cost centers
Estimated indicator system: Determining method: Combining both the method of