Purpose

Firm performance remains at the heart of strategic management. In the quest to refine the field’s contribution, Venkatraman and Ramanujam (1986) argued that reliance upon single measures of firm performance is risky and firm performance should be treated as a multidimensional construct. Subsequently, researchers have examined trends in firm performance measurement ever since. Over a decade since the last examination of this issue, this study aims to add to the ongoing conversation.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors investigated 1,972 research papers published in five premier management journals for the years 2015–2019 to determine if multidimensional measurement of firm performance has improved.

Findings

The findings suggest that approximately two-thirds of papers that measure firm performance are published using only a single measure of firm performance, and approximately three-fourths do not measure firm performance across multiple dimensions.

Originality/value

This study contributes to the literature by emphasizing the necessity to consider the dimensionality of firm performance, use multiple measures and consistently ground firm performance variables with theory – especially control variables – to keep firm performance as the focus of the strategy field. Evidence and implications are discussed and recommendations for researchers and reviewers are provided.

中文翻译：

---

战略管理中的“公司绩效”衡量：关于我们绩效的一些注释

目的

公司绩效仍然是战略管理的核心。为了完善该领域的贡献，Venkatraman 和 Ramanujam（1986）认为，依赖单一的企业绩效衡量标准是有风险的，企业绩效应该被视为多维结构。随后，研究人员研究了此后公司绩效衡量的趋势。自上次研究这个问题以来已有十多年了，这项研究旨在补充正在进行的对话。

设计/方法论/途径

作者调查了 2015 年至 2019 年五家顶级管理期刊上发表的 1,972 篇研究论文，以确定企业绩效的多维度衡量是否有所改进。

发现

研究结果表明，大约三分之二的衡量公司绩效的论文仅使用单一的公司绩效衡量标准发表，而大约四分之三的论文没有跨多个维度衡量公司绩效。

原创性/价值

本研究强调有必要考虑企业绩效的维度，使用多种衡量标准，并用理论（尤其是控制变量）持续支持企业绩效变量，以保持企业绩效作为战略领域的焦点。讨论了证据和影响，并为研究人员和审稿人提供了建议。