登录新浪财经APP 搜索【信披】查看更多考评等级 证券代码：000720 证券简称：新能泰山 公告编号：2025-048 山东新能泰山发电股份有限公司 2025年第三次临时董事会会议决议公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假记载、误导性陈述或重大遗 漏。 一、董事会会议召开情况 3.应出席会议董事10人，实际出席会议董事10人。 4.会议由公司董事长李晓先生主持，公司高级管理人员列席了会议。 5.本次会议的召开符合有关法律、行政法规、部门规章、规范性文件和公司章程的规定。 二、董事会会议审议情况 （一）审议批准了《关于修订〈经理层成员薪酬管理规定〉的议案》； 表决情况：同意10票，反对0票，弃权0票，本议案获得通过。 本议案提交董事会审议前已经公司第十届董事会薪酬与考核委员会2025年第一次会议审议通过。 （二）审议批准了《关于经理层成员2024年度绩效考核清算的议案》。 1.公司于2025年12月26日以传真及电子邮件的方式发出了关于召开公司2025年第三次临时董事会会议的 通知。 2.会议于2025年12月31日以通讯方式召开。 表决情况：同意10票，反对0票，弃权0票， ...

公司公告汇总 截至2025年12月26日收盘，山东出版（601019）报收于8.6元，较上周的8.77元下跌1.94%。本周，山东 出版12月25日盘中最高价报8.84元。12月24日盘中最低价报8.45元。山东出版当前最新总市值180.31亿 元，在出版板块市值排名4/29，在两市A股市值排名1078/5181。 本周关注点 以上内容为证券之星据公开信息整理，由AI算法生成（网信算备310104345710301240019号），不构成 投资建议。 山东出版于2025年12月30日召开第四届董事会第三十九次（临时）会议，应出席董事7名，实际出席6 名，董事长刘文强书面授权郭海涛代为表决。会议审议通过《关于公司2024年度高质量发展绩效考核情 况的议案》《关于公司2025年度经营管理层高质量发展经济效益基础指标目标值的议案》《关于公司高 级管理人员2024年度薪酬方案的议案》《关于公司部分募投项目延期的议案》及《关于公司部分内设机 构更名的议案》，所有议案均获全票通过。 来自公司公告汇总：山东出版部分募投项目延期至2026年7月和9月。 来自公司公告汇总：董事会审议通过高级管理人员2024年度薪酬方案。 来自 ...

Core Viewpoint - The public fund industry in China, with an asset management scale exceeding 36.7 trillion yuan, is set to implement new regulations aimed at enhancing performance evaluation and compensation management for fund management companies [1] Group 1: New Guidelines Overview - The China Securities Investment Fund Industry Association has issued the "Guidelines for Performance Evaluation Management of Fund Management Companies (Draft for Comments)" to address performance evaluation and compensation management issues in the public fund industry [1][2] - The guidelines consist of seven chapters with 32 articles, covering general principles, compensation structure, performance evaluation, compensation payment, internal control management, self-regulation, and supplementary provisions [2] Group 2: Compensation Structure and Performance Evaluation - Fund management companies are required to establish a deferred payment system for performance compensation, with a minimum deferral ratio of 40% and a duration of at least three years for key personnel [2][3] - Performance compensation for active equity fund managers must be linked to performance benchmarks and fund profitability, with specific rules for reductions in compensation based on underperformance [2][3] - The guidelines emphasize optimizing the internal distribution of compensation, balancing pay across different roles, and ensuring that the average salary increase for senior management does not exceed the overall company salary increase [3] Group 3: Differentiated Assessment and Accountability - The guidelines mandate differentiated assessment for active equity fund managers, with performance indicators weighted at no less than 80%, and specific requirements for sales personnel and fixed-income investment staff [4] - A unified calculation standard for key indicators has been established to enhance fairness and scientific rigor in performance evaluations [4] - The guidelines include a phased implementation plan to provide fund companies with necessary adjustment time [5] Group 4: Industry Impact and Strategic Directions - The essence of these measures is to align fund interests with actual investor returns, replacing vague trust with transparent rules, and solidifying the "investor interest first" principle within the public fund business model [6] - The implementation of the guidelines is expected to significantly improve the investment experience for investors and compel fund management companies to redesign internal evaluation systems and adjust compensation structures [7] - The guidelines are seen as a shift from "scale expansion" to "quality competition" in the public fund industry, encouraging leading firms to leverage their advantages and smaller firms to innovate and find niche markets [7][8] Group 5: Future Development Strategies - Leading fund companies are advised to focus on building a platform-based, industrialized investment research production system to support large-scale fund management and ensure sustainable excess returns [8] - There is a shift from product offerings to solution-oriented services, aiming to convert product returns into actual investor gains [8] - The guidelines encourage a transition from short-term incentives to long-term benefit sharing, emphasizing the importance of stable long-term performance metrics [8]

Core Points - The company establishes a Compensation and Assessment Committee to enhance the management of director and senior management compensation and assessment [1] - The committee is responsible for formulating assessment standards and reviewing compensation policies for directors and senior management [2][3] Group 1: Committee Structure - The Compensation and Assessment Committee consists of more than three directors, with a majority being independent directors [2] - The committee elects a chairperson from among the independent directors to lead its activities [2] - The term of committee members aligns with that of the directors, and they can be re-elected [2] Group 2: Responsibilities - The committee is tasked with developing assessment standards for directors and senior management and reviewing their compensation policies [3] - It must propose recommendations to the board regarding the compensation of directors and senior management, as well as any changes to incentive plans [3][4] Group 3: Meeting Procedures - Meetings of the committee require at least two-thirds of members to be present for decisions to be made [5] - The committee can hold meetings via various communication methods, including phone and video conferencing [5][6] - Meeting records must be kept, and all attendees are bound by confidentiality regarding the discussed matters [7]

Core Points - The article outlines the rules for the Compensation and Assessment Committee of Baotailong New Materials Co., Ltd, aimed at improving the management of compensation and assessment for directors and senior management [1][2] - The committee is responsible for establishing assessment standards, reviewing compensation policies, and making recommendations to the board [1][3] Group 1: General Provisions - The Compensation and Assessment Committee is established to enhance the governance structure of the company [1] - The committee consists of three directors, with a majority being independent directors [2] Group 2: Responsibilities and Authority - The committee is tasked with formulating assessment standards for directors and senior management, as well as reviewing compensation mechanisms [3][4] - Recommendations made by the committee regarding compensation must be approved by the board and submitted for shareholder review [3] Group 3: Decision-Making Procedures - The committee must prepare relevant materials and coordinate with departments before making decisions [4][5] - The committee is required to hold at least one meeting annually, with a quorum of two-thirds of members present [5][6] Group 4: Meeting Regulations - Meetings must be documented, and records should be kept for a minimum of ten years [6][8] - The committee has the authority to invite other directors and senior management to meetings when necessary [6]

Core Points - The establishment of the Compensation and Assessment Committee aims to enhance the management of compensation and assessment for directors and senior management, improving corporate governance structure [1] - The committee is responsible for formulating, managing, and assessing the compensation system for directors and senior management, reporting to the board of directors [1][2] - The committee consists of three directors, with the chairperson being an independent director [2] Group 1: Committee Structure - The committee is composed of three directors, nominated by the chairman, independent directors, or a third of all directors, and elected by the board [2] - The term of the committee aligns with that of the board, and if a member ceases to be a director, they automatically lose their committee position [2][3] - The committee can appoint a convenor from among its members, who is responsible for leading the committee's work [2] Group 2: Responsibilities and Authority - The committee's main responsibilities include formulating compensation plans for directors and senior management, reviewing their performance, and developing equity incentive plans [3][4] - The committee must submit its compensation plans and equity incentive proposals to the board for approval before implementation [4] - The committee can hire external agencies for professional advice, with costs borne by the company [4] Group 3: Meeting Procedures - The committee is required to hold at least one meeting annually, with provisions for additional meetings as needed [5] - Meetings can be convened by the convenor or at the request of the chairman, general manager, or two or more committee members [5] - A quorum for meetings requires the presence of more than half of the committee members, and decisions are made by a majority vote [5][6] Group 4: Documentation and Confidentiality - Meeting minutes must be recorded and signed by attendees, with members having the right to request their statements be included [7] - Members are obligated to maintain confidentiality regarding company information that has not been publicly disclosed [7]

Core Insights - Performance management remains a significant challenge for companies, particularly in the engineering and design sector, which is characterized by knowledge and technology intensity [1][2] - Eight key difficulties in performance management for engineering and design firms have been identified, including conflicts between departments, the focus on results over processes, and the challenges of quantitative versus qualitative assessments [2][3][4] Group 1: Challenges in Performance Management - Difficulty one: Conflict and unity, where performance management often exacerbates divisions between departments and employees [2] - Difficulty two: Results versus process, highlighting the issue of focusing solely on outcomes without considering employee behavior [3] - Difficulty three: Quantitative versus qualitative measures, where the desire for measurable performance can overlook important qualitative aspects [3][4] - Difficulty four: Inconsistent standards, leading to subjective evaluations that can vary significantly between assessors [4] - Difficulty five: Effectiveness versus cost, where the costs of implementing performance management systems may not yield proportional benefits [4] - Difficulty six: Functional versus production differences, which complicate the assessment of performance across different types of departments [5] - Difficulty seven: Generalization and simplification, where an excessive number of performance indicators can dilute focus and effectiveness [5] - Difficulty eight: Reward and development, where performance assessments are too closely tied to punitive measures rather than fostering employee growth [5] Group 2: Solutions for Performance Management - Constructing three systems: A comprehensive performance management system should include goal management, performance process management, and performance result application systems [6][8] - Utilizing two tools flexibly: Companies should consider using both KPI and OKR systems to balance the rigidity of traditional performance metrics with more adaptable goal-setting approaches [17][18] - Balancing two differences: Addressing departmental and standard discrepancies through mechanisms like difficulty coefficients and performance benchmark scores can enhance fairness in evaluations [19][20]

Core Viewpoint - Performance evaluation is merely a management tool and not the sole measure of an individual's work capability [2] Group 1: Performance Evaluation System - Companies have their own performance evaluation systems, which ultimately rank employees and provide a basis for year-end bonuses, RSUs, and promotions [3] - The company conducts performance evaluations twice a year, with results categorized into five tiers: 1-5 stars, where 4-5 stars indicate high performance, 3 stars are average, and 1-2 stars are low performance [4] - High performance leads to higher year-end bonuses, more RSUs, better promotion prospects, and potential salary increases, while low performance results in the opposite outcomes [4] Group 2: Personal Experiences and Insights - The author reflects on their initial admiration for high performers at the company, believing they made significant contributions and excelled in their roles [5] - The transition to remote work during the pandemic hindered the author's ability to integrate into the team, resulting in a lower performance rating of 3 stars during their first evaluation [6] - The author later moved to another division within the company, achieving high performance and a promotion, but personal circumstances led to a decline in work engagement and eventual departure from the company [9] Group 3: Strategies for Performance Management - It is essential to communicate with leaders and key roles to understand the specific goals of the organization [13] - Confirming goals with leaders is crucial, as they should align with organizational objectives and be realistic [14][16] - Regular updates and proactive communication about progress are favored by leaders, as they help maintain awareness of team dynamics and individual contributions [21] - Acknowledging challenges and seeking assistance from leaders can foster a supportive environment and improve performance evaluations [22] - Building trust through consistent communication and achieving small goals can enhance an individual's standing in the eyes of their leader [23]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the concept of "painting a pie," which refers to managers using grand goals and visions to motivate employees and secure their commitment, especially in times of crisis or resource scarcity [2][4][24]. Group 1: Definition and Importance of "Painting a Pie" - "Painting a pie" is a strategic behavior where managers propose ambitious goals or visions to inspire employee motivation and attract talent [2][3]. - This behavior often includes future blueprints and expected outcomes, although the specific paths to achieve these goals may not be fully defined [3][4]. - The act of resource distribution after performance evaluations is seen as a way for managers to fulfill their promises, thereby increasing employee trust in the company and their superiors [1]. Group 2: Types of "Pies" - There are three types of "pies" that a manager can offer: 1. **Company System-Granted Pie**: Resources that can be promised within the company framework, such as key positions, critical projects, and salary increases [5][7]. 2. **Personal Emotional Bonds Pie**: Resources derived from personal relationships, where managers can leverage their connections to benefit certain team members [8][9]. 3. **Personal Influence Pie**: Resources that come from the manager's external influence, including professional development opportunities and trust-based recommendations [9][10]. Group 3: Characteristics of Effective "Pie Painters" - Effective "pie painters" possess certain traits: 1. **Proven Credibility**: A history of successfully fulfilling promises enhances trust [11][12]. 2. **Infectious Communicators**: Strong communication skills that inspire and energize the team [13][14]. 3. **Resource Controllers**: Managers who have access to essential resources can make their promises more likely to be fulfilled [16][17]. 4. **Professional Experts**: Those with deep expertise can guide teams in skill enhancement and problem-solving [18][19]. 5. **Human Touch**: Leaders who show genuine care can foster a sense of security and belonging among employees [20][21]. Group 4: Techniques for "Painting a Pie" - "Painting a pie" is a strategic tool that requires a balance of clarity and ambiguity to motivate teams effectively [24][25]. - Key techniques include: 1. **Purpose**: Establishing clear goals that align with team interests [26]. 2. **Audience Understanding**: Tailoring messages to meet the diverse needs of team members [26]. 3. **Inspiration**: Using vivid language to create an appealing vision of the future [27]. 4. **Navigation**: Setting clear paths and timelines for achieving goals [28]. 5. **Trust Building**: Ensuring that promises are credible and backed by actions [27][28]. Group 5: Balancing Expectations - Managers must balance the reality of resource availability with the psychological needs of employees [36]. - Partial fulfillment of promises can help build trust over time [37]. - Emotional connections and genuine care are crucial for successful "pie painting" [39][40]. Group 6: Conclusion - The essence of "painting a pie" is a negotiation between expectations and reality, where the art lies in finding a balance that excites employees while remaining feasible [48].

Core Viewpoint - Performance evaluation is a critical issue for managers, often leading to confusion and ineffective execution due to interpersonal dynamics and historical practices within organizations [2][3][4]. Group 1: Performance Evaluation Challenges - Many managers struggle to implement performance evaluation systems effectively, often resorting to superficial compliance rather than genuine assessment [3][4]. - The historical default of high performance ratings (A) leads to a lack of meaningful differentiation among employees, complicating the evaluation process [2][3]. - Employees often misunderstand the purpose of performance evaluations, believing that presentation skills alone can secure promotions, while the reality is that a ranking system is already in place [8][9]. Group 2: HR Misunderstandings - HR departments may not fully grasp the underlying logic of performance evaluations, leading to ineffective systems that do not enhance productivity [10][11]. - The focus on punitive measures rather than constructive feedback can create resentment among employees, undermining morale and productivity [13][14]. - A more equitable approach would involve redistributing withheld funds back to teams, fostering a sense of fairness and motivation [16][17]. Group 3: Talent Assessment - Performance evaluations serve as a means to identify top talent and assess team dynamics, focusing on individual strengths and weaknesses [19][20]. - The talent grid method is recommended for assessing employee performance without their direct involvement, allowing for a more objective evaluation [21][22]. - A healthy team should regularly conduct talent assessments to ensure proper resource allocation and identify key personnel [22][24]. Group 4: Employee Categorization - Employees can be categorized into different tiers based on performance and potential, with specific strategies for development tailored to each group [24][25][26]. - The categorization includes "superstars," "potential stars," and "performance stars," each requiring different management approaches to maximize their contributions [24][25][26]. - Understanding the nuances between these categories can help management make informed decisions regarding promotions and resource allocation [37][38]. Group 5: Effective Work Sensitivity - The distinction between effective and ineffective tasks is crucial in performance evaluations, as employees may engage in tasks that do not contribute meaningfully to organizational goals [41][70]. - Employees' sensitivity to effective tasks can significantly impact their performance ratings, with those lacking this sensitivity often receiving lower evaluations [38][41]. - Managers should prioritize evaluating the completion of effective work rather than merely the volume of tasks completed [71].