1. Introduction

Organizational performance, on the one hand, is a reference indicator for the achievement of the organization's overall long-term goals, and short-term business performance is measured by a number of short-term indicators, which, when combined, can determine the organization's ultimate business situation and reflect the progress toward the ultimate goal in a timely manner or can reflect the likelihood of achieving success, and on the other hand, the organization has performance outputs to sustain its own survival and further development.

Organizational performance has long been an indicator that is of great concern to organizations. However, due to the unique nature and assessment standards of each industry, the antecedent variables of organizational performance are often special in nature and lack systematic organization and summary. This paper integrates the origin, definition, classification, connotation characteristics, variability of influencing factors and diversity of evaluation mechanisms of organizational performance, and integrates the antecedent variables of organizational performance in each industry and proposes an analytical framework to gain insight into the shortcomings of this research field and pave the way for enriching the research development in this field.

2. Origin, Definition and Classification of Organizational Performance

2.1. Origin

Under the business assumption of integrating organizational and personal goals through strong leadership, organizational performance is generated by pre-determining organizational goals based on resources and capabilities in the external steady-state environment; designing organizational structure to take over the goals on the basis of goal determination, decomposing organizational goals into each organizational unit, matching the right people to each unit, and ensuring that each person is fully motivated and mobilized. Thus it can ensure the efficient operation of each unit to achieve the organizational goals. Under this assumption, performance is derived from efficiency, i.e., the organization is committed to ensuring the high efficiency of the organization through the effective matching of people and jobs and the efficient operation of each node to create organizational performance and achieve organizational goals based on the predetermined goals of resources and capabilities.

Under the operating assumption, organizational performance is generated by supporting individual innovation, capturing and responding quickly to external opportunities, meeting customer needs, and realizing individual value through customer recognition. We believe that there is an important context for this operating assumption, where the relationship between people and organizations has changed from a purely employment-based system to a more collaborative one. Organizational value is reflected in the process of supporting individuals to efficiently meet customer needs and achieve higher customer value. Under this assumption, organizational performance is derived from effectiveness.

2.2. Definition

Organizational performance has been an important indicator in the field of management and has guided the development of corporate strategies since the spread of scientific management. However, scholars have long been divided by their own research perspectives and do not have precise definitions. After sorting out, the main views on the definition of organizational performance are as follows.

The organizational performance consists of organizational effectiveness, efficiency, and member satisfaction [1]; organizational performance is the result of employees' efforts to achieve the goals set by the organization [2]; financial performance, business performance, and organizational effectiveness constitute an organizational performance, where organizational effectiveness refers to the extent to which the goals of various internal and external stakeholders of the organization and various organizational conflicts are met [3]. Organizational performance is a set of behaviors similar to strategic goals [4]; organizational performance is defined based on three specific areas: participants, system resources, and goal attainment [5]; when the goals and expectations of an organization's stakeholders are met in a "balanced" manner, the degree to which the organization's goals are accomplished is organizational performance [6]; organizational performance includes perceived organizational performance and perceived market performance [7]; organizational performance is an overall assessment of the extent to which individuals meet the expectations of organizational goals [8]; organizational performance is the degree to which non-financial performance goals are achieved, such as product quality, customer satisfaction, and effective teamwork [9]; organizational performance is the quantitative, qualitative, efficient, and cost-effective results of an organization's tasks over time, that is, the effectiveness of achieving organizational benefits [10]; when an individual or a group of individuals accomplish their goals and objectives in the organization, it can be determined as organizational performance [11].

2.3. Classification

Organizational performance indicators, as a measure of organizational performance, must themselves reflect the comprehensive requirements for organizational management. From the perspective of organizational development process, a systematic and orderly evaluation feedback system plays a vital role in the survival and development of an organization. Organizational performance is defined differently by the specificity of the nature of the organization, and the criteria for measuring organizational performance vary. Thus the categories of organizational performance also vary.

Most organizations do not have a single goal, but a variety of goals, and some of them are in conflict with each other [12]. For example, the ultimate goal of the organization itself may be multiple, as for the organization's short-term goals and sub-goals, it is more likely to be multiple, these are precisely what we need to study. In order to ensure the comprehensiveness of information, when evaluating the performance of an organization, a variety of indicators should be considered to measure the degree of accomplishment of organizational goals, and some indicators should be used in a focused manner to determine a greater weight. Therefore, indicators should be differentiated according to different criteria and purposes.

According to the division of objectives and means, some indicators represent the results or goals of the organization's business activities, while other indicators are the conditions or means for the organization to achieve its goals. Generally speaking, goal-oriented indicators should take up a larger weight in the indicator system, and means-oriented indicators have a relatively smaller weight.

Divided according to time, first, attention should be paid to whether the indicators examine the past, present or future. Second, the time span of the indicators should also be considered. For enterprises with large demand changes, long-term indicators and short-term indicators often differ greatly.

The division is based on hard and soft indicators. Hard indicators are usually quantitative indicators that can more objectively reflect the tangible aspects of organizational performance. However, hard indicators are mostly applicable to the short-term goals of the organization and do not reflect such things as customer perception of the company and employee satisfaction, which are usually measured by soft indicators, so sometimes soft indicators may be more appropriate for evaluating business activities.

According to value judgments, there is usually no uniform standard whether many indicators are high or low, and different people often have different value judgments. In this case, the internal and external environment of the organization and the law of change of the indicators themselves should be weighed together to determine the degree of their applicability.

3. Antecedents of Organizational Performance

From the current articles on factors affecting organizational performance in various industries, I have summarized 4 antecedent variables of organizational performance.

3.1. Risks to the Organization

Organizational risks include risks internal to the organization (risks related to management control within the organization) and risks external to the organization (risks of supply or demand disruptions, process disruptions, etc.). The way specific internal and external risks act on a particular industry has variability in the study of the way risks act on organizational performance. We define organizational risk as a risk that occurs inside or outside the organization, either as expected or unanticipated, and that affects the normal functioning of the organization and related organizations [13]. We find that a single organizational risk has a significant impact on organizational performance upstream and downstream across the industry in the following ways: the risk of supply disruptions such as delivery reliability and upstream order fulfillment capacity for single or multiple organizations in the industry; demand disruptions such as unanticipated customer demand and payment delays; process disruptions such as industrial accidents and loss of production capacity due to technology; and environmental disruptions such as policy and natural environment have a negative relationship with organizational performance and supply chain performance [13]. In general, the impact of organizational risk on organizational performance is two-sided. In the short term, organizational risks such as organizational supply, demand and process risks often have a direct negative economic impact on the performance of their own organizations, and may even cause harm to the supply chain network, industry profitability, supply and demand relationships, etc., which in turn affects the performance of upstream and downstream organizations in the supply chain and the industry as a whole in the long run, but the indirect improvement of the organization's environmental disruption risk has a positive moderating effect, which can significantly regulate the relationship between supply, demand, process disruption risk and business performance.

3.2. The Human Resource Management Within the Organization

The human resource management within the organization cannot directly bring benefits to the enterprise, but indirectly affects the organizational performance. Human resource is the core competitiveness of an enterprise. Generally speaking, human resource management in an enterprise can be divided into six modules, or subdivided into six directions, namely: human resource planning and management, recruitment and allocation management, training and development management, compensation management, performance management, and labor relations management [14]. These six modules affect the performance of the organization in different ways.

Human resource management planning is the process of using scientific methods to forecast the supply and demand of the human resources belonging to the organization according to the changes in the internal and external environment in order to achieve the organizational development strategy, and to formulate suitable policies and measures so as to balance the supply and demand of human resources of the enterprise. The purpose is to help the company get the right people in the right positions at the right time, and ultimately to obtain an effective allocation of human resources. This represents the smooth operation within the organization and is directly related to the performance of the organization. Human resources are the core resources for companies to gain competitive advantage, and organizations can achieve their competitive human resources allocation through human resources planning and other practices; companies can also achieve organizational strategic flexibility through human resources management activities to align human resources with organizational strategies, so as to achieve organizational goals [14]. Human resource planning provides a guarantee for enterprises to achieve their strategic goals. Human resource planning can enable enterprises to achieve their strategic development goals [15]. Human resource planning can facilitate the achievement of strategic goals of enterprises [16]. Human resource planning is a guarantee to ensure the long-term development of enterprises, and human resources that have been rationally and scientifically allocated can promote the sustainable development of enterprises [17]. Human resource planning of an organization can often have a positive effect on organizational performance if it is linked to the development strategy of the company, takes into account the internal and external context of the organization, and takes into account practicality and relevance.

Personnel recruitment is the process of attracting qualified personnel to the organization through a variety of channels and means, based on the personnel needs identified in the organization's human resource planning [18]. Personnel selection is the process of selecting personnel who meet the appropriate criteria from the list of job seekers based on the current environmental conditions and the positions offered by the organization. The effective implementation of personnel recruitment and selection is of great significance to the organization; it is an important means of acquiring human resources for the organization; it is an important element of human resource management, and can improve the visibility of the organization and directly affect organizational performance. Specifically, recruitment is the basic way to replenish human resources in the organization. The flow of human resources to the society in the organization, the change of personnel within the organization and the continuous expansion of the organization's strategic planning all make the human resources in the organization in a scarce state, and if the talent can be replenished through recruitment, it will help the organization to achieve a long-lasting and sustainable high-performance level [19]. In addition, the organization's opponent in the recruitment process is not only the candidate, but also other organizations in the same industry, and recruitment is, to a certain extent, a window for the organization to show the organization's culture to the outside world.

Training and development refer to a planned and continuous activity of the organization to equip employees with the knowledge, skills and change their work attitudes needed to complete their present or future jobs in various ways, in order to improve their performance in their current or future positions, and ultimately to achieve overall organizational performance [18]. Training and development is an important part of human resource management, which provides external conditions for members of the organization to obtain qualification level advancement and professionalized behavioral competence [19].

Compensation management is a process by which an organization determines the total amount of compensation that all employees should receive for the services they provide, as well as the structure and form of compensation, and it is one of the most central elements of the organization's human resource management [18]. In modern companies, the goal of compensation management is to retain valuable employees, motivate them and make them work more efficiently and perform better, in line with the relevant national legislation and regulations. In general, efficient compensation management can create a good organizational culture, keep the organization's operating costs within a certain range, attract external talents more easily, increase the probability of recruiting excellent talents, encourage employees to improve their skills, improve the efficiency of motivation, reduce the turnover rate of employees, especially to effectively retain core talents, improve employee satisfaction, reduce various internal conflicts, and finally achieve the development of organizational performance.

Performance management is the main basis for implementing corporate human resource management policies and an important expression of the intrinsic value of the company. Performance management provides a scientific basis for employees' performance, helps employees understand their own strengths and weaknesses in their work, motivates them to actively perform in their work and correct their weaknesses, and provides goals and directions for employees' career development planning, thus better matching the relevant requirements of enterprise managers, unifies the enterprise employees with the enterprise culture and promotes the growth of organizational performance. Performance management can make scientific and reasonable management strategies according to the actual development of the enterprise, which includes not only staff training, salary and compensation, but also the construction of an excellent human resource team for the enterprise, so that the enterprise can better move toward the development goals, and can help the enterprise find the deficiencies in internal management and correct them in time to promote the long-term and stable development of organizational performance [19].

Employee relationship is expressed as the sum of cooperation, conflict, power and rights, and in the human resource management within the organization, this relationship also includes all organizational members, not only the relationship between the organization's managers and workers, but also the relationship between workers. We classified interpersonal relationships within organizations into five dimensions, which are closeness, recognition, trust, shared vision, and environment [20]. If organizational performance is divided into three dimensions: innovation, attitude, and competence, the closeness, mutual trust, and shared vision among organizational members will have a direct positive impact on work attitude, and mutual trust and mutual recognition will have a direct positive impact on work competence; work attitude and work competence will affect employees' work results, while the performance dimension of work innovation is mainly influenced by employees' work competence, and managing good interpersonal relationships in the organization is conducive to improving and establishing new organizational relationships of equality and cooperation, building a harmonious atmosphere and improving organizational performance [20].

As mentioned above, high-quality human resource management within the organization can enhance the sense of crisis and motivation of employees, specifically through the reward and punishment system and personnel irregular inspection, etc., so that employees who originally treat their work positively and conscientiously can cherish their work more at the moment. In addition, it can improve the motivation of employees to work in the field they are good at; through human resource management methods to improve the efficiency of employees, it can guide the organization members to form a correct role perception through formal or informal communication, form an informal organization that is conducive to the development of the organization on the original structure, improve the group cohesion of the organization, and indirectly improve the organizational performance by influencing the organization members.

3.3. Heterogeneity of Organizations

Heterogeneity refers more to the incommensurability or differential properties between human individuals or between groups and groups [21]. Organizational heterogeneity includes the three aspects of human resources, organizational resources, and top team heterogeneity of the organization [21]. Heterogeneity is the different characteristics of individual performance on certain attributes, which include not only demographic variables that cannot be easily changed, such as age, gender, and race, but also some characteristics that can be changed, such as educational background, expertise, and individual personality [22].

Heterogeneity among organizational members has an "inverted U-shaped" moderating effect on organizational performance [23]. In a review of previous studies, most scholars believe that member heterogeneity can effectively contribute to team creativity, knowledge sharing behavior, and smooth team decision-making. On the other hand, it can compensate for the high level of information homogeneity that results from the cascade between leaders and members. Protecting and nurturing employee diversity can significantly reduce turnover, absenteeism and labor lawsuits. Indirectly, diverse organizational membership can lead to cost savings and operational improvements. The higher the rank in an organization, the more members tend to value and perform their jobs, increasing their willingness to stay and their commitment to work, which in turn affects organizational performance, due to their desire for fulfillment, challenge and status. However, higher team member heterogeneity is not always better. Differences among team members in terms of education, knowledge background, job experience, values, and perceptions of task goals will inevitably bring about conflicts and negative effects on collaborative innovation and knowledge sharing behaviors among team members, which will affect team creativity [23]. Excessive member heterogeneity can enhance task conflict, undermine team task coherence and behavioral wholeness, reduce intra-team coordination and innovation efficiency, and affect team knowledge sharing behaviour [24]. Similarly, there may be personal biases of some individuals in the diversity of people within the organization, such as in the daily operation of the organization, employees usually tend to bring many preconceived ideas to the workplace, which bring a certain degree of disruption to normal work. This is partly due to employees' own cultural backgrounds and personality traits, and partly based on their own perceptions of the group to which they belong, known as "stereotypes" [25]. Both bias and stereotypes can lead to discrimination. The presence of discriminatory behaviors in an organization can lead to lower employee productivity, escalate negative and destructive interpersonal conflicts, increase employee turnover and create an overall negative climate in the workplace that is detrimental to organizational performance. Overall, employee diversity has both positive and negative effects on organizations [25]. By leveraging the benefits of employee diversity, we can enhance the collective identity of our employees, stimulate interest in their work, and create a harmonious and positive work environment, thereby improving organizational performance. In contrast, individual discrimination due to diversity in an organization, if not effectively controlled, can affect organizational identity and thus reduce organizational performance. Thus, the impact of heterogeneity of organizational members on organizational performance will reach its extreme value at a certain point, showing an "inverted U shape". From the perspective of explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge, work experience and work values, when the heterogeneity of organizational members is too low, the knowledge, work experience and values among organizational members are too consistent, and there is too little content that can be exchanged and learned from each other to effectively promote the degree of knowledge sharing and the enhancement of team creativity; while when the heterogeneity of organizational members is too high, team members not only when the heterogeneity of organizational members is too high, team members not only have little "common language" but also have too many cognitive and behavioral differences, making it difficult to share knowledge among members.

Organizational heterogeneous resources refer to those resources that are valuable, scarce, difficult to imitate and difficult to replace [25]. Heterogeneity is not only manifested in the uneven distribution of resources among enterprises, but also in the usefulness of creating value for customers. Resources exchanged in the market are homogeneous and become heterogeneous only when they cross the boundaries of the organization [26]. Partners in different countries tend to have a low level of resource similarity, or a high level of resource heterogeneity. The human, technological, physical and organizational resources available to firms in different countries are even more different [27]. The heterogeneity of organizational resources is mainly divided into exogenous resource heterogeneity and endogenous resource heterogeneity. Exogenous resource heterogeneity refers to the different resources obtained from outside the company, mainly including human resources, organizational resources and natural resources. And endogenous resource heterogeneity refers to the endogenous non-natural human resources, organizational resources and natural resources of the enterprise. For an organization, its main competitive advantage comes from the heterogeneous resources owned by the enterprise. Heterogeneous resources constitute the core competencies of an organization and play a decisive role in achieving a competitive advantage position [28]. When an organization possesses heterogeneous competitive advantage, it can directly bring about improvement in organizational performance.

The impact of organizational top team heterogeneity on organizational performance is two-sided. Organizational top management heterogeneity positively affects the team's ability to innovate; the greater the demographic heterogeneity in the top management team, the less cooperative the work team members are, but this effect slowly fades over time [29]. In organizational strategic alignment, heterogeneous teams run better organizational performance compared to homogeneous teams. Because their teams have different experiences, skills, and competitive capabilities, they are able to respond more successfully to complex economic environments. Although heterogeneous teams may have higher levels of task conflict, they may also make better decisions [30]. But on the other hand, heterogeneity may lead to increased emotional conflict among team members and can increase the level of difficulty during task execution. The impact of organizational top team heterogeneity on organizational performance is two-sided and cannot be generalized.

3.4. Leadership Style of the Organization

Leadership style is a characteristic, relatively stable and tendentious way of behavior that reflects the leader. It is a habitual work method and practical experience with personal characteristics, influenced by the work environment and experience, accumulated by leaders over time in the course of their own management [31]. According to Burns' classic transformational-transactional theory, leadership styles are divided into two types: transformational and transactional. Leadership style is a more abstract factor that does not directly affect organizational performance, but regardless of the mediating variables such as organizational climate, organizational culture, or motivation, ultimately leadership style has an impact on organizational performance by changing the psychological factors of organizational members [32].

Figure 1: The path of leadership style on organizational performance.

Transformational leadership is defined as the leader's ability to motivate employees to work hard for the organization to achieve its goals by making them aware of their importance and sense of mission in the organization. The effect of transformational leadership style on organizational performance is positive [33]. Transformational leadership is divided into four dimensions: leadership charisma, visionary motivation, intellectual stimulation, and personalized care. Transformational leaders are able to stimulate employees' enthusiasm for their work while tapping their innovative potential by adopting verbal motivation, material rewards, and spiritual encouragement in order to improve innovative performance [34]. Transformational leaders are good at paying attention to and discovering employees' inner needs, enhancing their motivation and enthusiasm for innovation through motivational means, and can guide employees to consider different perspectives when analyzing problems, focus on shaping employees' personalities, and give them space to give full play to their imagination, which can motivate employees to give play to their creativity and make them work more actively to achieve the organization's innovation goals and willingly contribute to the organization. These motivate employees to be creative, make them work harder to achieve the organization's innovation goals, and willingly contribute to the organization's innovation goals, thus promoting organizational performance, especially in innovation.

Transactional leadership is defined as a negotiated approach between leaders and employees that constitutes a mutually beneficial model of cooperation in which leaders and employees collaborate to accomplish organizational goals with the principle of maximum benefit and minimum loss [35]. Its role in organizational performance remains controversial. Some scholars believe that the rational use of reward programs and systems by transactional leaders can promote the shaping of employees' creativity to a certain extent and thus improve organizational performance [36], and that transactional leadership style can promote employees' innovative behavior and have a positive impact on innovation performance by forming a good exchange relationship with employees through various rewards [37]. Some other scholars believe that when a transactional leadership style is adopted, it will have a negative impact on employees' innovative behavior, arguing that transactional leadership neglects intellectual stimulation when focusing on employee performance, which is detrimental to employees' innovation [38]; and transactional leadership that focuses only on results will have a negative impact on inhibiting knowledge-based employees' innovative behavior, but when combined with goal orientation, transactional leadership can promote the innovative behavior of knowledge employees [39]. Both transactional leadership's weighted rewards and active exception management are significantly and positively correlated with innovation performance, while passive exception management is not significantly correlated with innovation performance, but overall it can be basically concluded that transactional leadership has a significant correlation with organizational innovation performance [31].

4. Conclusion

After a thorough review of the relevant literature affecting organizational performance, this paper identifies four common factors that influence organizational performance. The literature review highlighted four antecedent variables of organizational performance, namely: organizational risk, organizational human resource management, organizational heterogeneity, and organizational leadership style.

The impact of organizational risk on organizational performance is twofold; in the short term, organizational internal and external risks tend to have a direct negative impact on organizational performance, and may even cause harm to the supply chain network, industry profitability, and supply and demand relationships in which the organization is located, which in turn affects organizational performance in the long run; however, the indirect enhancement of the organization's environmental disruption risk has a positive moderating effect and can significantly regulate the supply, demand process disruption risk in relation to firm performance.

The human resource management of the organization affects the organizational performance. The six segments of human resource management in the organization: human resource planning and management, recruitment and allocation management, training and development management, compensation management, performance management, and labor relations management, help the company to get the right people in the right positions at the right time, and finally get the effective allocation of human resources. The human resource management of an organization represents whether it can run smoothly within the organization and is directly related to the performance of the organization.

The heterogeneity of the organization includes the heterogeneity of organizational members, the heterogeneity of organizational resources and the heterogeneity of the organization's top team. Moderate heterogeneity of members can improve organizational performance by increasing organizational innovation and reducing operating costs, while too low or too high heterogeneity of members is not conducive to the exchange of explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge and work experience and the fit of work values within the organization, thus reducing organizational performance. In turn, it reduces organizational performance. Heterogeneous resources constitute the core competence of an organization and play a decisive role in achieving a competitive advantage. The impact of organizational top team heterogeneity on organizational performance is two-sided. Top management heterogeneity has a positive impact on the team's ability to innovate, but at the same time heterogeneity may lead to an increase in emotional conflicts among team members and a decrease in cooperation among work team members, which can increase the degree of difficulty during task execution.

The impact of leadership style on organizational performance is more abstract, it does not directly affect organizational performance, but regardless of the mediating variables such as organizational climate, organizational culture or motivation, ultimately leadership style has an impact on organizational performance by changing the psychological factors of organizational members. The impact of transformational leadership style on organizational performance is positive; transactional leadership can only facilitate the shaping of employees' creativity to a certain extent if the reward program and system are properly used, and only when combined with goal orientation, transactional leadership can promote the innovative behavior of knowledge workers and thus improve organizational performance.

There are many factors that influence organizational performance, which is influenced by time and industry, and different scholars have studied in different directions. But in fact, there is a great commonality in the factors influencing organizational performance among different times and industries, and this paper is to organize and summarize these factors from an overarching perspective. In the future, I believe that the research on organizational performance antecedent variables can refer to the idea of moving from generality to specificity and from abstraction to concreteness in this paper, and when studying a specific variable, we can divide it into its own section.

Since there are many studies on the antecedents of organizational performance, it is difficult to cover all the previous studies in this review study. Most of the literature referred to again used questionnaires, for example, much of the data in the sections on organizational heterogeneity and leadership style came from questionnaires, which may lead to an amplification of the relationships between variables and make the conclusions somewhat subjective. In addition, the data in the literature are mostly cross-sectional, revealing static patterns among variables, and cannot reflect the relationships among variables in a more dynamic and three-dimensional way. As well, the section on leadership styles, for example, may not summarize more diverse leadership styles and is not comprehensive enough to consider only from the perspective of transformational and transactional leadership, and should be added more comprehensively in the future.