Review Article

Literature Review on the Financial Resource Allocation Effect of SOEs’ Mixed Reform1

Yu Lu and Rongshan Li*

Beijing Technology and Business University, China

Submission: May 14, 2020; Published: June 09, 2020

*Corresponding author: Rongshan Li, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing, China

How to cite this article:Yu L, d Rongshan L. Literature Review on the Financial Resource Allocation Effect of SOEs’ Mixed Reform1. Ann Soc Sci Manage Stud. 2020; 5(4): 555667. DOI: 10.19080/ASM.2020.05.555667

Keywords:Financial resource allocation; Economic consequences; Resource utilization efficiency; Micro-resource allocation; Enterprise; Strategic goal; Risk management

Literature Review on Financial Resource Allocation

This part comprehensively reviews relevant literature on financial resource allocation from four aspects: definition, measurement, influencing factors and economic consequences.

Definition and measurement of strategic financial resource allocation

The original meaning of allocation is that there are many different ways to use relatively scarce resources, which need to be compared before making choices (Zhu Liyan Zhu 2017). Due to the finiteness and scarcity of resources, it is necessary to allocate the resources reasonably so as to achieve the optimal economic effect of resource utilization efficiency. Resource allocation is a process in which the allocator combines and distributes scarce resources among different industries or enterprises Jand et al. 2013.

From the narrow and broad sense of the distribution subject, resource allocation can be divided into macro-resource allocation and micro-resource allocation (Li Yan 2017). When the distribution subject is individual enterprise it is micro resource allocation, that is, the allocation of resources among various investment projects, which is also the study of this project. Financial resources refer to the capital owned by an enterprise and the unique, non-imitative financial assets formed in the process of raising and using capital (Xiong Hui 2014). The allocation of financial resources in broad sense is the management of factors such as the optimization of enterprise financial environment, the establishment of financial system, the improvement of financial personnel quality, and the transparency of financial information. In the narrow sense, it refers to the rational structure of enterprise assets, scientific use of funds and effective cost control.

Based on previous research, the research of this subject defines the allocation of strategic financial resources as the allocation of financial resources around the corresponding strategies to achieve the strategy-oriented goals. Financial resource allocation can transform abstract strategies into concrete financial resource allocation. Through the rational allocation of financial resources to show the strategic intentions of enterprises, and then achieve strategic goals, at the same time, by means of effective allocation of strategic financial resources to achieve continuous dynamic competitive advantage. The enterprise’s strategy is often expressed through the overall resource allocation or a group of strategic resource allocation, such as financial resource allocation. The strategy is ultimately reflected in the strategic resource allocation through the implementation of it. The strategic goal is finally achieved by the effective resource allocation of the enterprise, which forms the strategic goal. The strategic choice of the enterprise is a dynamic process that is based on the enterprise’s relative resource advantage, through a series of resource allocation decisions to show and strengthen its resource advantages, and finally achieve the strategic goal. The implementation of strategic positioning and strategic strategy is finally reflected in the way of strategic resource allocation. Enterprises use strategic resource allocation to reflect their strategic direction and strategies adopted, at the same time, they adjust and optimize their resource advantages through strategic resource allocation to maintain or improve their strategic competitiveness. Due to the long-term nature of the strategy, financial conservatism ensures the smooth implementation of it. As for the rationality of financial structure, on the one hand, it can guarantee the reasonable liquidity of enterprise funds; on the other hand, it can form a reasonable governance environment.

There are many indicators to measure the allocation of financial resources in enterprises. Wang Dajun (2012) used cost allocation to measure the resource allocation management model of large commercial Banks. Xiong Hui (2014) used the proportion of cash holding of listed subsidiary to measure the cash allocation level of group companies in listed subsidiaries. Sun Ziyuan (2015) divided financial resources into two categories: external funds and internal funds, they selected undistributed earnings per share and financial expenses as a percentage of total assets to measure internal financial resources and external financial resources, and chose the proportion of long-term borrowings over total liabilities to measure the financial resources of coal enterprises. But this kind of evaluation index is single, which is limited to the single index analysis within the balance sheet. Although it is simple and clear, it basically does not involve the business performance, cash flow and other factors of the enterprise, so it is hard to comprehensively judge the financial resources of the enterprise, and draw a rational and comprehensive conclusion on the financial risk of the enterprise. Zhang Ling & Liu Yanbin (2014), Pan Shu & Zhou Yaqian (2015) made factor analysis of financial resource allocation indicators.

Most studies measure financial resource allocation through modeling. Zhang Huili & Wu Youhong (2011) conducted an empirical study on the distribution of cash between listed companies and their entire subsidiaries, and constructed an estimation model for the appropriate allocation of financial resources. Wei Xiumei & Pan Ailing (2016) redefined the group financial resources based on the synergy theory and enterprise resource theory, regarding synergy capability as the group heterogeneity integrating resource and dividing the internal factors that affect the allocation of group financial resources into three levels and five dimensions, and then demonstrated the interactive relationship between group strategy and financial resource allocation, constructed the system framework of group financial allocation. Tang Guliang & Zhang Shouwen (2017) took the boundary control system initiated by China North Industries Group Corporation as the case study object, on the basis of the theory and literature analysis, they summarized the key index system and trial calculation model for balancing financial resource allocation performance and risk in enterprises. By transforming the efficiency of financial resource allocation and risk management control objectives into measurable and executable boundary values of multiple indicators, the boundary management control system can effectively coordinate with enterprise management and control activities to form a closed-loop system. The measurement standard of non-financial indicators often leads to the hardening (钢化，翻译可能不太准确) of financial resource allocation behavior (Wei Xiumei 2013).

Influencing factors of financial resource allocation

Most of the existing research focuses on macro resource allocation across countries and different industries. (Gong Guan & Hu Guanliang 2015; Shao Yihang et al. 2013; Tang Song 2014; Yang Guang et al. 2015; Gong Guan et al. 2015; Huang Haixia & Zhang Zhihe 2015; Luo Zhi & Zhang Chuanchuan 2015; Sun Yuanyuan, Zhang Jianqing 2015; Zhang Tianhua & Zhang Shaohua 2016; Zhang Wanli & Luo Liangwen 2018; Ma Ying et al. 2018). There are few literatures on micro-resource allocation, and the influencing factors mainly include two aspects: internal and external.

The external environment includes audit quality, government intervention and financial market influence on resource allocation. Li Yan (2017) found that audit quality has a positive impact on resource allocation efficiency, and media reports will strengthen this impact. Zhu Yanli (2017) found that the government’s intervention in credit resources is directional, and effective intervention can help ease the friction in the credit market. However, the government’s tangible or intangible guarantee support for inefficient enterprises is an important factor in the continuous mismatch of credit resources. Baneijee & Moll (2009), Greenwood et al. (2010), Song et al. (2011), Sun puyang (2014), Jian ze et al. (2018) found that in addition to the information asymmetry of the financial market, capital distortion is also inherent in the non-market allocation of credit in the financial sector (资本扭曲还内生于金融部门信贷配置的非市场 化), especially the preference of bank credit allocation to SOEs.

In terms of internal environment, Fox and Smeets (2011), Syverson (2011) pointed out that technology impact, management capabilities, R&D investment and investment models will affect resource allocation efficiency. Ding Congming & Chen Zhongchang (2010), Yang Guang et al. (2015) pointed out from the perspective of adjusting costs, due to the existence of cost adjustment; enterprises cannot expand to its desirable level without cost, which results in the process of optimal allocation of resources cannot be completed. Sun Puyang et al. (2013) also studied the reasons for the long-term existence of resource mismatches from the perspective of product replacement rate. Chen Yanli et al. (2014) found that the related guarantee transactions and fund transactions within the enterprise group would reduce the efficiency of resource allocation in the capital market. There are also scholars who analyzed the causes of resource misplacement from the perspective of financing constraints (Banerjee & Moll, 2010) and tariffs (Bond et al. 2013).

There are many literatures about the influence of accounting information quality on resource allocation in enterprises. Zhao Xiaoyuan (2005) studied the theoretical methods and strategic planning of enterprise information resources allocation, the factors influencing the protection of information resources allocation, allocation needs and costs, and established a moderate level model of information resources allocation. The theory, method and process of information resource allocation were classified and analyzed. Zhou Zhongsheng & Chen Hanwen (2008) used the listed companies in Shenzhen and Shanghai from 1999 to 2004 as the research samples, by constructing the resource allocation efficiency model of the securities market; they discussed the impact of accounting information transparency on the efficiency of resource allocation in the securities market. The study found that after controlling the liquidity and scale of the stock market, the higher the transparency of accounting information disclosure, the better the efficiency of resource allocation in securities market. It’s also found that accounting information transparency and other corporate governance variables such as property rights and product market competition have complementary effects on resource allocation efficiency. Li qingyuan (2009) found that the quality of accounting information was significantly negatively correlated with the non-efficient investment of listed companies, proving that high-quality accounting information could realize the efficient allocation of corporate capital by improving contracts and supervision. Ma Yongqiang et al. (2014) examined the impact of earnings management behavior on credit resource allocation from the perspectives of real earnings management and accrued earnings management. The study has found that the more profits enterprises increase through earnings management, the more credit resources they obtain. The phenomenon that SOEs obtain credit resources through accrued earnings management and non- SOEs obtain credit resources through real earnings management are both more obvious. Han shaozhen (2016) empirically studied the impact of accounting information on capital allocation (including equity, credit and bond capital allocation).

The economic consequences of financial resource allocation

The economic consequences of resource allocation mainly include enterprise performance. Some scholars measure strategic performance based on strategic priority, they believe that the strategic objectives of enterprises represent different interest orientations and their performance measurement indicators are also different. Tan jingying (2011) pointed out that under different types of strategies; resource allocation components significantly related to enterprise performance are not the same. By analyzing whether the company has correctly configured the resource allocation components that are significant related to performance under its strategy type, predict its performance to evaluate the value of the enterprise. Based on the description and measurement of strategic resource allocation, Mao Yuhui (2011) used panel data analysis method to analyze the impact of strategic resource allocation elements on company’s business performance, competitive performance and shareholder value creation. It’s found that the impact of strategic resource allocation indicators on performance indicators is generally lagging, which indicates the long-term nature of the strategy, while the company’s operational capability has a significant impact on business performance, competitive performance and shareholder value performance, which has become an important means of achieving performance improvement in the short term. He believe that enterprise value stems from enterprise strategy, and enterprise strategy originates from strategic resources and capability advantages of enterprises under certain environmental constraints, and is reflected in the strategic resource allocation of enterprises. Therefore, the analysis of the impact of corporate strategy on its performance can also start with strategic resource allocation, analyzing the impact of specific strategic resource allocation on corporate performance. The results of Westhead (2001), Zhang Ling & Liu Yanbin (2014) showed that financial resource allocation has a positive effect on performance. Wei Xiumei & Pan Ailing (2016) integrated and optimized the group’s financial resources through a collaborative mechanism of three levels of subsystems to achieve the improvement of the overall value of the enterprise group. Wang Dajun (2012) found that the internal financial resource allocation of large commercial Banks in China was closely related to business performance and business innovation. Zhang Huili & Wu Youhong (2011) pointed out that over-concentration or overdispersion of allocation will have a negative impact on business performance. Zhu Yanli (2017) found that credit market distortion negatively affect bank performance.

Other aspects include growth and economic development, financing, capital structure and decision-making. Cyert & March (1963), Fu & Nicholas (2017), Li Xiaoxiang & Liu Chunlin (2018) used questionnaire survey to study the relationship between resource allocation and innovative growth of small and mediumsize enterprises (SMEs). They found that the complementary internal and external resource allocation strategy is more conducive to the innovation and growth of SMEs, SMEs should treat the utility of resource allocation strategy and behavior strategy comprehensively. Bernheim and Whinston (1986) pointed out that resource allocation affects economic development. Macphailwilcox and King (1986), Sims (2011) and Nikolaomutini (2012) studied the impact of financial resource allocation on financing. Xiong Hui’s (2014) research shows that the listed subsidiaries with higher cash ratio obtained from the group headquarters have slower capital structure adjustment speed, while the listed subsidiaries with lower cash ratio obtained from the group headquarters have faster capital structure adjustment speed. Chevaillier (2002) pointed out that changes in financial resource allocation affect the structure of decision-making systems.

Enterprise strategy and resource allocation

The literature on the correlation between enterprise strategy and resource allocation is relatively few and mainly based on theoretical analysis. Some literatures study the impact of resource allocation on strategic positioning (Mao Yuhui 2011), strategic matching (Xu Songyi 2007; Mao Yuhui 2011), strategic evolution (Zhang Feng 2015) and strategic performance (Mao Yuhui 2011; Xu Jingying 2011). Xu Songyi (2007) adopted the research paradigm of modulation matching relation that is, starting from the matching relation between competitive strategy and enterprise resources and taking enterprise performance as the criterion to analyze how enterprise resources can promote enterprises to achieve good business performance through matching competitive strategy. On the basis of expounding the element composition and function orientation of the strategy introduction value evaluation system, Mao Yuhui (2011) started from the basic theory of strategic resources, analyzed the influence of environment and resources on the strategic positioning of enterprises, and the internal mechanism and formation path model. Based on the resource and capability foundation of enterprise strategic positioning, the strategic dimension is determined from two perspectives of business area and business unit. From the perspective of resource allocation to explore the descriptive elements and indicator measures of the competitive advantage of business area and business unit value chain. Exploring the relationship between resource allocation elements and corresponding strategic performance in each dimension, in order to reveal key strategic resource allocation indicators that affect corporate strategic performance. Based on the empirical results, the resource allocation indicators that significantly affect the performance of each dimension are obtained. Then analyze the performance of different types of overall resource allocations to reveal the comprehensive resource allocation characteristics of various performances. Finally, the neural network method is used to mine the mapping relationship between resource allocation indicators and performance of each dimension, and on this basis, the prediction of new resource allocation is realized. Tan Jingying (2011) took pharmaceutical and biological manufacturing industry as the research object, from the perspective of resource allocation, she identified and measured the elements of enterprise strategic resource allocation that can describe the characteristics of the industry on the basis of analyzing and summarizing various kinds of strategic resource theories, and used principal component analysis to extract the main components that can describe the strategic resource allocation model of enterprises. By clustering analysis, enterprises with similar resource allocation patterns are classified into one category. Using the resource allocation model exhibited by such enterprises as the characteristics of this kind of strategy, the strategy of pharmaceutical biological manufacturing enterprises in China can be divided into several types. Based on different types of strategies, construct a method of judging enterprise performance from the perspective of resource allocation, extract the resource allocation components that are significantly related to enterprise performance under each strategic type, and observe whether the performance-related resource allocation components are different under different strategic types ,finally analyze how these components affect performance. On the basis of the research of resource-based theory and strategic duality, Zhang Feng (2015) found that due to the influencing factors such as time, space and quantity, the importance and scarcity of enterprise resources are different, which makes the way of resource allocation different, and then promotes the evolution of dual strategic focus of enterprises.

Most of the other literatures are based on the resource-based theory, using case analysis and mathematical modeling methods to explore the impact of enterprise strategy on resource allocation and efficiency. Huang Hui (2016) found that resource integration must serve the enterprise’s strategy, and be consistent with the enterprise’s strategy in the direction, emphatically reflecting the strategic ideas and intentions. Resource integration schemes or measures must ensure the realization of enterprise strategic objectives. Resource integration is the specific path and method of enterprise strategy implementation; it should follow the basic steps of strategic management. Wei Wenchuan (2008) found that the definition and promotion of resource allocation process is the key path for corporate managers to achieve established strategic goals and obtain innovative strategies. Gui Liangjun (2016) expounded the important relationship between rational resource allocation and strategic cost management in hightech enterprises, and discussed how to realize the strategic cost management of resource allocation “across time and space” from the time and space dimensions. Also, he took the Apple Inc as an example, analyzed how to maintain strategic cost advantage through resource allocation across time and space. Specific to project enterprises, Song Chenying (2006) constructed a strategic-oriented resource allocation method system for projectbased enterprises from two aspects of strategic development and project relationship and multi-project resource balance. With the overall strategy of the company determined, Qin Bo (2008) screened the projects in the product line planning according to the strategy, and finally used the multi-pack box model to allocate resources for the screened projects. Lu Feng (2018) studied the allocation mechanism of limited resources under the established strategy of enterprise dual innovation. He discussed from the two scenarios of static decision making and dynamic decision making. In the analysis of resource allocation of dynamic decision making, based on the theory of enterprise behavior and resource view, he introduced relative performance with reference points to establish a dynamic decision making model. From the perspective of enterprise management decision-making, considering the impact of relative performance on managers’ decision-making and the intermediary role of knowledge, a closed-loop mechanism is formed dynamically. Then, according to the two parameters in the resource allocation function, the enterprise is classified and combined with different enterprises for analysis. Zhang Yuanjun and Li Lin (2016) studied the allocation efficiency of scientific and technological resources of private military enterprises under innovation-driven strategy. They used DEA model to measure the Malmquist index and its decomposition of 87 private military enterprises.

In terms of financial resources, Gu Zengjun (2016) studied the matching relationship between cost leadership strategy and enterprise capital. He proposed the identification method of the matching path between cost leadership strategy and corporate capital, and designed the matching evaluation model from two dimensions: self-evaluation and intra-industry evaluation. He selected 39 listed companies implementing cost leadership strategy in general equipment manufacturing industry for empirical study. It’s found that environmental change is the external condition to promote the matching of cost leadership strategy and enterprise capital, and the need of enterprise internal self-development (spontaneity) is the internal force to promote the matching between the two. The policy environment, financial environment, industrial environment, market environment and other continuous changes of enterprise operational environments determine the dynamic nature of strategic matching. However, this study is only a preliminary attempt of framework, from index system, method system to application practice; there is room for further improvement. Xian Hu & Liu Tian (2014) analyzed and discussed the planning and management of intangible assets from the perspective of the integration of finance and strategy, and proposed a brief framework for the financial strategy system of intangible assets. Chen Quanxing (2010) believes that commercial banks should allocate financial resources oriented by strategic objectives, and study the direction and effect of financial resources allocation through the formulation, decomposition and assessment of strategic objectives, so as to make beneficial exploration for commercial Banks to achieve strategic objectives.

Literature review on mixed ownership reform

Reviewing and summarizing the current academic research literature based on the reform of SOEs, its main theoretical views can be roughly divided into two groups: political view and manager view (经理人观) (感觉应该是类似于代理人观:agency view.不太确定，所以先翻译成了manager~).

According to the political view, the inefficiency of SOEs mainly comes from the government’s intervention in their business activities (Boycko et al. 1996). In order to pursue certain political goals, the government often imposes some social functions on SOEs and makes them bear heavy policy burdens, thus distorting the business objectives (Lin et al. 1998). Lin Yifu and others believe that SOEs themselves do not have a natural disadvantage in ownership, but in the process of SOEs’ operation, they have to bear social responsibility and other policy burdens, leading to the dilemma of “high input and low output” in production and operation. Therefore, the primary task of state-owned enterprise reform is to reduce the non-economic responsibilities of SOEs. If the social burden of SOEs cannot be effectively dealt with, even if the privatization reform is completed, the problem of soft budget constraint of SOEs cannot be eliminated. Bai Chongen believes that the reform of SOEs should consider the possible impact on the society after eliminating the policy burden of enterprises, for example, the layoffs brought about by restructuring may affect social stability and the tax evasion incentives in enterprises can apparently increase after restructuring. Therefore, considering the social cost after the restructuring of SOEs, the reform should first reduce or even eliminate the policy burden of SOEs.

According to the manager view (经理人观), the inefficiency of SOEs is mainly due to the lack of effective supervision and incentive mechanism for managers. (Laffont & Tirole 1993, Wu Jinglian 1993) One of the earliest scholars in China to explain the inefficiency of SOEs from this perspective is Wu Jinglian. In his view, the separation of ownership and control of SOEs will lead to serious agency problems. Enterprise managers generally lack the enthusiasm and initiative to carry out innovative activities, even if such innovative activities are beneficial, which leads to the low efficiency of production and operation activities of SOEs. The long chain of principal-agent and the resulting owner vacancy result in the agency cost of SOEs being significantly higher than that of other enterprises, which leads to more serious agency problems ( Li Shouxi 2007; Qian Yingyi 1991).

The debates between the two views are attributed to the explanation of the reasons for the rigidity and inefficiency of SOEs, and both advocate reforms to improve the inefficiency of SOEs. It can be said that both views can be used for reference.

The mixed ownership reform, as an important breakthrough for the reform of SOEs, can ease the policy burden, improve the efficiency of enterprises, and effectively mobilize the enthusiasm of management. Many scholars have combined the two viewpoints to study the effect of mixed ownership reform on the reform of SOEs. Chen Lin & Tang Yangliu used the early reform of SOEs to study the effect of mixed reform of SOEs in alleviating the policy burden of SOEs. It is found that mixed ownership reform has a significant promoting effect on easing the policy burden of SOEs, and unlike competitive industries, the mixed reform policy of monopolistic industries has a better effect. Therefore, it is proposed that the reform focus of SOEs should be on monopolistic industries (Chen Lin & Tang Yangliu 2004). Zhang Hui et al. (2016) used the industrial enterprise database from 1999 to 2007 to study the promotion and internal influence mechanism of mixed reform on the efficiency improvement of SOEs. The study found that after the implementation of the mixed-ownership reform, the operating performance of SOEs increased significantly, which mainly benefited from the easing of the policy burden of enterprises. In addition, the higher the proportion of equity obtained by individuals or private economic entities in the process, the stronger the motivation to improve corporate governance mechanism, so as to mobilize the enthusiasm of managers to achieve an effective incentive effect (Lu tong & dang Yin 2014) (这 句话后面两段有重复的, 只翻译了此处).

Many scholars have studied the optimal allocation of stateowned capital in the process of state-owned enterprise reform, mainly including the problems of capital allocation efficiency of SOEs, the necessity of state-owned enterprise reform on capital allocation efficiency and the influencing factors of capital allocation efficiency. First, in the past, due to government intervention, mismatch between the financial system and the economic system, regional discrimination and other factors, China’s state-owned enterprise capital has been inefficiently allocated, which affected the development stability of the national economy. The reform of SOEs can make the market play a decisive role in the allocation of state-owned capital. However, there are still some problems in the reform of SOEs, such as unreasonable layout, failure of state-owned assets supervision and administration commission (SASAC) to supervise SOEs in the way of managing capital, and imperfect corporate governance structure. Second, the mixed ownership reform of state-owned enterprise groups is of great significance to enhance the concentration of state-owned capital and improve the efficiency of capital allocation. Therefore, the government should encourage non-public ownership to enter SOEs, stimulate market vitality, and promote the healthy development of China’s national economy by optimizing the allocation of state-owned capital (Zang Yueru et al. 2016). As a product of the optimization of ownership structure, mixed ownership is the overall requirement for the optimal allocation of resources in economic operation (Wu Wanzong & Zong Dawei 2016). Third, the capital allocation efficiency of SOEs is affected by many factors, both positive and negative. For example, the political relevance of the industry will reduce the sensitivity of changes in corporate investment, resulting in low efficiency of capital allocation. By listing SOEs to standardize management and improve the quality of information disclosure can make capital flow from industries with low return on investment to industries with high return on capital, thus improving capital allocation (Li Haifeng & Shi Yanping 2014). Improving the internal control of SOEs through mixed ownership reform can also improve the efficiency of capital allocation (Qian Xuesong 2013). However, intra-group transactions will have a negative impact on the efficiency of resource allocation. Therefore, it is necessary to effectively supervise the related transactions within state-owned enterprise groups to improve the efficiency of resource allocation.

As SOEs are faced with less external financing constraints and market competition pressure, external financing such as loans obtained by SOEs are more likely to be used by senior executives for on-the-job consumption, collective welfare and inefficient investment, etc., which makes SOEs more vulnerable to financial difficulties, thus leading to higher volatility of SOEs’ earnings (Tian Lihui 2005). SOEs have a close relationship with the government, their earnings manipulation and hidden costs of “bad news” are lower, as a result, the actual controllers of SOEs are more likely to encroach on the company’s interests and plunder the company’s financial resources. Studies have found that the internal governance level of state-owned listed companies is generally lower than that of non-state-owned listed companies. Compared with non-SOEs, SOEs will implement more connected transactions and other non-market behaviors, which will have a negative impact on the company’s earnings quality, and then affect financial resource allocation (Zhu Jianchao 2015).

Summary

Combining the current research situation, existing research and literature at home and abroad, a series of discussions are conducted on the project research issues, the main characteristics are as follows:

First, there is a lack of relevant research on the new round of mixed ownership reform

There is still no research on the mixed ownership reform effect under the background of the impact of the new round of mixed ownership reform policy in 2015. Most domestic literatures based on state-owned enterprise reforms take split-share reform in 2005 as the research object to study the effects of policy shocks on enterprises. However, the current reform of mixed ownership is in a new stage of mixing mechanism centered on governance system. Different from the previous focus on mixing at the capital level, this stage pays more attention to the governance effect after mixing, so it has different background of times and significance, which needs our further study.

Second, the mechanism and path of optimal allocation of strategic financial resources are not clear

Existing studies have discussed resource allocation and efficiency under strategic guidance based on resource-based theory (Song Chenying 2006; Wei Wenchuan 2008; Qinbo 2008; Huang Hui 2016; Guiliangjun 2016; Zhang Yuanjun & Li Lin 2016; Gu Zengjun 2016; Lu Feng 2018). Zhang Huili & Wu Youhong 2011 analyzed the internal financial resources allocation of enterprise groups based on internal capital market theory. Both resourcebased theory and internal capital market theory have limitations. Although there are many researches on resource-based theory at home and abroad, there are still some problems that have not been recognized or reached consensus (Simon 2007). It is a feasible method to analyze the mechanism and path of strategic financial resources allocation based on the new theoretical framework.

Third, there are few research on the economic consequences of strategic financial resource allocation

On the basis of the resource-based theory, the literature studies the influence rule of resource allocation on performance. Some scholars measure strategic performance based on strategic priority, and believe that enterprise’s strategic goal or the interest orientation represented by strategic goal is different, and the performance metrics are also different. Other literature studies the impact of resource allocation on growth and economic development, financing, capital structure and corporate decisionmaking. The existing literature provides an effective tool for us to further study the economic consequences of strategic financial resource allocation, which is conducive to further research on relevant issues [1-20].

References

1. Chongen B, Jiangyong L, Zhigang T (2006) An Empirical Study on the Effect of State-owned Enterprise Reform. Economic Research (08): 4-13.
2. Qiliang B, Ruquan L (2013) Construction and Implementation of Transnational Management Strategy Management System [J]. Enterprise Management (3): 90-93.
3. Guilong C, Jianhua L, Xinxiao M (2008) Governance of non-state-owned shareholders and executive compensation incentives of SOEs. Management World (5).
4. Guilong C, Guojian Z, Xinxiao M, et al. (2018) Government Decentralization Willingness and Mixed Ownership Reform of SOEs. Economic Research 53(09): 99-115.
5. Shiyun Z, Guilong C, Minying C (2017) Can non-state-owned shareholders improve the quality of accounting information? —— Empirical Evidence from Competitive State-owned Listed Companies. Accounting and Economic Research (4): 28-44.
6. Chuanming C, Junhua S (2008) Population background characteristics of entrepreneurs and choice of diversification strategy: an empirical study based on panel data of Chinese listed companies [J]. Management World (5): 124-133.
7. Lin C, Yangliu T (2014) Mixed Ownership Reform and Policy Burden of SOEs: An Empirical Study Based on Big Data of Early State-owned Enterprise Property Rights Reform [J]. Economist (11): 13-23.
8. Quanxing C (2010) On the allocation of financial resources of commercial banks——oriented by strategic goals [J]. Friends of Accounting (9): 32-33.
9. Minying C, Minghai W (2013) Power over-allocation of relational shareholders. China Industrial Economy (10): 108-120.
10. Shixiong C, Jianping L (2014) Output efficiency and influencing factors of R&D input in China's industrial sector. Journal of Quantitative and Technical Economics (2): 36-51.
11. Guohua C (2010) Model of Enterprise Internal Control Evaluation System Based on Management Perspective [J]. Accounting Research (10):126-126.
12. Guohua C (2009) Construction of Internal Control Standards Implementation Mechanism: Strategic Orientation and System Integration [J]. Accounting Research (9): 66-71.
13. Renyong C (2003) Research on Enterprise Technology Innovation Efficiency and Its Influencing Factors. Journal of Quantitative and Technical Economics 20(6): 105-
14. Xiaoqing D, Jian Z, Pengwei (2014) Research on the loss of innovation efficiency of SOEs. China Industrial Economy (2): 97-
15. Minghua G (2015) Financial Governance Index Report of Chinese Listed Companies [M]. Economic Science Press.
16. Gu Zengjun (2016) Trigger design for matching corporate overall strategy with financial strategy [J]. East China Economic Management 30(12): 129-134.
17. Liangjun G, Yang Y, Xinnan G (2016) Strategic Cost Management of High-tech Enterprises Based on "Trans-temporal" Resource Allocation: A Case Study of Apple [J]. Finance and Accounting (24): 26-28.
18. Yongfeng G (2012) Nature of Enterprise Strategy and Governance Effect [D].
19. Hao yang, Gong Liutang (2017) Mixed state-owned and private equity participation and corporate performance improvement [J]. Economic Research (3): 124-137.
20. Fuying H (2008) On the Coupling of Internal Control and Financial Governance Structure [J]. Economic Research Guide (9): 81-82.