O IMPACTO DO PLANO DE EXPANSÃO NO DESENHO E NO USO DOS SISTEMAS DE AVALIAÇÃO DE DESEMPENHO

• Autor(a) principal: Takemoto, Afonso Celso Kinji
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes)
• Texto Completo: http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/16101
• topic: Ciências Contábeis; Plano de Expansão; Sistema de Gestão de Desempenho; Avaliação de Desempenho; Contabilidade Gerencial; subject.br-rjbn

The present study aimed to investigate the impacts of the Expansion Plan on the design and use of performance evaluation systems. It was configured as a single case study and it had the Delta organization PMS as the object of study. Data collection took place by sending an electronic questionnaire, conducting interviews and observation. Ferreira and Otley's (2009) framework and the Content Analysis procedure according to Bardin (2006) were adopted. The observed company operates in the automotive segment and has approximately 4200 direct employees. The firm's purchasing department, with approximately 60 employees, was selected for the purposes of the research. The investigation led to the conclusion that: (1) the Expansion Plan impacts the design of PMS; (2) the Expansion Plan results in adjustments in the design of the PMS and can also be the result of the PMS; (3) the typification of plans and strategies would be a relevant increment to the adopted framework; (4) Ferreira and Otley's (2009) model enabled a holistic analysis that resulted in the perception that the information generated by the organization's PMS is used interactively by management; and (5) in the midst of the debate about the analysis of PMS as a package or as isolated systems, it became evident that (a) the package approach proved to be efficient and in line with reality; and (b) the holistic analysis does not necessarily require the investigation of all the organization's control systems and subsystems. Among the limitations faced, it is emphasized that the study investigated only one department and that the methodological choices can cause bias in the analysis, that is, different methodological propositions could result in different analyses, findings and conclusions.