论文部分内容阅读
在《首都经济》杂志社的大力支持下,由北京市经济委员会和北京市统计局联合设置的北京市工业系统工业企业综合经济效益评价指标完成情况和排序已定期公布了两期。排序公布后,引起了各级领导和广大工业企业的关注。一些企业询问有关情况并提出改进意见。通过这两期公布,我们发现一些问题需要改进。主要有: 一、有些企业数据明显不实,主要表现在增加值率和劳产率上。 二、有些企业生产不正常或组织形式变化,造成某些数据不切实际的高,如停产、半停产企业的产销率,部分企业合资后母体的成本利润率和资金利税率等。 三、在指标没定上,虽然是按照工业经济效益指标在综合效益中的重要程度确定的,但由于某些指标的全国标准值较低,使得某些指标如劳产率比重过大。 四、在主要行业综合经济效益指标头名榜中,有些企业效益比较差,但在中类行业中独一家,因而在头名榜中也列上了。 根据以上情况,我们在公布今年上半年排序时初步作了些调整,对上述第一、二种情况比较突出的作了剔除;对上述第四种情况,暂不作变动,只是在中类行业上独一家的企业前面加“*”标记。为了便于对照,在排序末行列出了全市独立核算工业企业经济效益指标。
With the strong support of the “Capital Economy” magazine, the completion and ranking of the evaluation indexes of the comprehensive economic benefits of Beijing’s industrial system industrial enterprises jointly set up by the Beijing Economic Commission and the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Statistics has been regularly announced. After the sorting was announced, it attracted the attention of leaders at all levels and the majority of industrial enterprises. Some companies asked about the situation and put forward suggestions for improvement. Through these two announcements, we found that some issues need to be improved. There are mainly: First, some corporate data is obviously not true, mainly in the value-added rate and labor productivity. Second, some enterprises have abnormal production or changes in organizational forms, resulting in unrealistically high levels of certain data, such as the production and sales rates of suspended production and semi-discontinued enterprises, and the cost-profitability, capital-profits, and taxation rates of some enterprises after joint ventures. Third, in the indicators did not set, although it is determined in accordance with the importance of industrial economic indicators in the comprehensive benefits, but because of the lower national standards of some indicators, making certain indicators such as labor productivity ratio is too large. 4. In the list of leading comprehensive economic efficiency indicators in major industries, some companies have relatively poor returns, but they are only one in the Chinese industry, and thus are listed in the top rankings. Based on the above situation, we made some initial adjustments in the first half of the year when we announced the rankings. We have excluded the first and second situations mentioned above; for the above-mentioned fourth case, we will not make any changes, but only in the Chinese industries. A single company is marked with “*” in front of it. For ease of comparison, the economic indicators of the independent accounting industrial enterprises in the city are listed at the end of the ranking.