ACC 702 : Measuring Performance and Management Control Systems
Added on -2020-02-24
| ACC 702| 22 pages| 4796 words| 30 views
Trusted by 2+ million users, 1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 6 of 22 pages
Runninghead:MEASURINGPERFORMANCEANDMANAGEMENTCONTROL SYSTEMS Measuring Performance and Management Control Systems Name of the Student: Name of the University: Author’s Note: Course ID:
1MEASURING PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS Executive Summary: The current report aims to evaluate the performance and management control systems of the three leading insurance companies in Australia in order to assess the effectiveness of executive performance and remuneration policies. The three organisations that have selected to fit the purpose of this report include AMP Limited, IAG Limited and QBE Insurance Group. The remuneration systems for the three organisations have been evaluated as well to assess the efficacy of the overall organisational performance. Finally, the report sheds light onprovidingrecommendationsforimprovingthereportingalongwithwideningthe performance measures of the organisation. It has been found that it could be stated that the remuneration methods of AMP Limited are superior in contrast to the other two organisations due to better financial performance in the Australian insurance industry.
2MEASURING PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS Table of Contents 1. Introduction:...........................................................................................................................3 2. Company reviews:..................................................................................................................3 2.1 Allocation of executive remuneration:.............................................................................3 2.2 Change in executive remuneration reporting:..................................................................9 2.3 Company performance versus executive pay:................................................................10 2.4 Mix of performance measures used:..............................................................................12 3. Comparison of remuneration systems:.................................................................................15 4. Summary of findings:...........................................................................................................16 5. Analysis of remuneration methods used:.............................................................................16 6. Recommendations:...............................................................................................................17 7. Conclusion:..........................................................................................................................18 References and Bibliographies:................................................................................................19
3MEASURING PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS 1. Introduction: The current report aims to evaluate the performance and management control systems of the three leading insurance companies in Australia in order to assess the effectiveness of executive performance and remuneration policies. The three organisations that have selected to fit the purpose of this report include AMP Limited, IAG Limited and QBE Insurance Group. In this report, the company reviews have been evaluated in terms of executive remuneration apportionment, changes in remuneration reporting, company performance in contrasttoexecutivepaymentandcombinationofperformancemeasuresused.The remuneration systems for the three organisations have been evaluated as well to assess the efficacyoftheoverallorganisationalperformance.Finally,thereportshedslighton providingrecommendationsforimprovingthereportingalongwithwideningthe performance measures of the organisation. 2. Company reviews: 2.1 Allocation of executive remuneration: In order to determine the allocation of executive remuneration, it is necessary to consider the fixed pay, short-term incentives and long-term incentives of the executive directors (Arnaboldi, Lapsley and Steccolini, 2015). AMP Limited:
4MEASURING PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS Executive remuneration in 2016 Executive remuneration in 2014 Executive remuneration in 2015 Executive remuneration in 2013 Figure 1: Allocation of executive remuneration in AMP Limited from 2013-2016 (Source: Amp.com.au, 2017) According to the above figure, it could be found out that AMP Limited has disclosed the value of long-term incentives (LTIs) at their face value from 2013-2016, as laid out its annual report. However, in case of STIs, no such disclosure in relation to short-term
5MEASURING PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS incentives (STIs) has been made in 2013 and 2014. From 2015, the organisation has revealed its method of allocating short-term incentives by segregating them into 60% cash component and 40% deferred into share rights and the allocation process is identical in 2016 as well. It has been observed that the fixed remuneration of AMP Limited was $8,896,000 in 2014, which has increased to $9,098,000 in 2014 and the trend is inherent in case of 2015, as it has increased to $10,240,000 in 2015. However, in 2016, it has fallen to $9,415,000 in 2016. The organisation has failed to provide any short-term incentive in 2013; however, it has provided $1,195,000 in 2014 as STIs in 2014 and it has increased further to $11,498 in 2015. In 2016, it has again declined significantly to $2,219,000 in 2016. In case of LTIs, it has increased considerably over the years and thus, there is an increase in overall remuneration until 2015, which has declined in 2016 slightly due to fall in STIs. IAG Limited:
Found this document preview useful?
You are reading a preview Upload your documents to download or Become a Desklib member to get accesss