Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Working Knowledge
Business Research for Business Leaders
  • Browse All Articles
  • Popular Articles
  • Cold Call Podcast
  • Managing the Future of Work Podcast
  • About Us
  • Book
  • Leadership
  • Marketing
  • Finance
  • Management
  • Entrepreneurship
  • All Topics...
  • Topics
    • COVID-19
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Finance
    • Gender
    • Globalization
    • Leadership
    • Management
    • Negotiation
    • Social Enterprise
    • Strategy
  • Sections
    • Book
    • Podcasts
    • HBS Case
    • In Practice
    • Lessons from the Classroom
    • Op-Ed
    • Research & Ideas
    • Research Event
    • Sharpening Your Skills
    • What Do You Think?
  • Browse All
    Specific Knowledge and Divisional Performance Measurement
    07 Oct 2009Working Paper Summaries

    Specific Knowledge and Divisional Performance Measurement

    by Michael C. Jensen and William H. Meckling
    Performance measurement is one of the critical factors that determine how individuals in an organization behave. It includes subjective as well as objective assessments of the performance of both individuals and subunits of an organization such as divisions or departments. Besides the choice of the performance measures themselves, performance evaluation involves the process of attaching value weights to the different measures to represent the importance of achievement on each dimension. This paper examines five common divisional performance measurement methods: cost centers, revenue centers, profit centers, investment centers, and expense centers. The authors furnish the outlines of a theory that attempts to explain when each of these five methods is likely to be the most efficient. Key concepts include:
    • Each of these methods can be seen as providing an alternative way of aligning corporate decision-making authority with valuable "specific knowledge" inside the organization.
    • Jensen and Meckling's theory suggests that cost and revenue centers work best in cases where headquarters has (or can readily obtain) good information about cost and demand functions, product quality, and investment opportunities.
    • Decentralized profit and investment centers tend to supplant revenue and cost centers when managers of business units have a significant informational advantage over headquarters.
    LinkedIn
    Email

    Author Abstract

    This paper discusses five common divisional performance measurement methods—cost centers, revenue centers, profit centers, investment centers, and expense centers—while providing a theory that explains when each of these methods is likely to be the most efficient. The central insight of the theory is that each method offers a different way of aligning decision-making authority with valuable "specific knowledge" inside the organization. The theory suggests that cost and revenue centers work best in cases where headquarters has good information about cost and demand functions, product quality, and optimal output mix. Profit centers—defined as business units whose managers have responsibility for overall profits, but not the authority to make major capital spending decisions—tend to supplant revenue and cost centers when line managers have a significant informational advantage over headquarters and when there are few interdependencies (or "synergies") between divisions. Investment centers—profit centers in which unit managers are allowed to make major investment decisions—tend to prevail when the activity is capital-intensive and when it is difficult for headquarters to identify the value-maximizing investment strategy for the business unit. In evaluating the performance of profit centers, rate-of-return measures like ROA are likely to be effective when unit managers do not have major influence over the level of new investment. But, in the case of investment centers, Economic Value Added, or EVA, is likely to be the most effective single-period measure because it is designed to encourage only value-increasing investment decisions. 13 pages.

    Paper Information

    • Full Working Paper Text
    • Working Paper Publication Date: September 2009
    • HBS Working Paper Number:
    • Faculty Unit(s):
      Trending
        • 22 Nov 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Humans vs. Machines: Untangling the Tasks AI Can (and Can't) Handle

        • 21 Nov 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Employee Negativity Is Like Wildfire. Manage It Before It Spreads.

        • 25 Jan 2022
        • Research & Ideas

        More Proof That Money Can Buy Happiness (or a Life with Less Stress)

        • 27 Nov 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Voting Democrat or Republican? The Critical Childhood Influence That's Tough to Shake

        • 26 Apr 2023
        • In Practice

        Is AI Coming for Your Job?

    Michael C. Jensen
    Michael C. Jensen
    Jesse Isidor Straus Professor of Business Administration, Emeritus
    Contact
    Send an email
    → More Articles
    Find Related Articles
    • Finance
    • Organizational Design
    • Business Units
    • Business Headquarters
    • Decisions
    • Theory

    Sign up for our weekly newsletter

    Interested in improving your business? Learn about fresh research and ideas from Harvard Business School faculty.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
    ǁ
    Campus Map
    Harvard Business School Working Knowledge
    Baker Library | Bloomberg Center
    Soldiers Field
    Boston, MA 02163
    Email: Editor-in-Chief
    →Map & Directions
    →More Contact Information
    • Make a Gift
    • Site Map
    • Jobs
    • Harvard University
    • Trademarks
    • Policies
    • Accessibility
    • Digital Accessibility
    Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College