高校教师绩效评估的多标准决策分析工具

Hadal Kumaraswamy Mamatha, Ramakrishna Sridhar, Balasubramanian Somanatha
{"title":"高校教师绩效评估的多标准决策分析工具","authors":"Hadal Kumaraswamy Mamatha, Ramakrishna Sridhar, Balasubramanian Somanatha","doi":"10.31893/multiscience.2024118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Higher education institutions (HEIs), which are the major economic drivers in a nation, rely on their faculty for quality. The quality of faculty performance is assessed through performance appraisal methods. Performance appraisal methods help management assess the performance of employees and further the scope of improvement. Traditional methods of performance evaluation based on quantitative data involve more mathematical calculations than scientific approaches. The drawback of these methods is that they consider overall scores and not the individual factors of performance. This is exceptionally relevant when there are multiple disciplines in HEIs. In this study, the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) model using MACBETH is used to explore its usefulness in explicitly dealing with the trade-offs between performance measures, making the process of performance measurement and management more transparent and defendable. Faculty performance across different disciplines was considered in this study, and faculty performance was evaluated using the MACBETH score. The advantage of MACBETH is that weight can be assigned to specific criteria, and accordingly, analysis can be carried out. Based on which criteria are assigned the highest weight, that factor is considered for the final output. In this study, the results obtained showed significant differences in the performance rankings of the faculty members when compared to those of the traditional methods, suggesting that the FSTs are useful tools for performing performance appraisals.","PeriodicalId":218411,"journal":{"name":"Multidisciplinary Science Journal","volume":"266 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multicriteria decision analysis tool for faculty performance evaluation in higher education institutions\",\"authors\":\"Hadal Kumaraswamy Mamatha, Ramakrishna Sridhar, Balasubramanian Somanatha\",\"doi\":\"10.31893/multiscience.2024118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Higher education institutions (HEIs), which are the major economic drivers in a nation, rely on their faculty for quality. The quality of faculty performance is assessed through performance appraisal methods. Performance appraisal methods help management assess the performance of employees and further the scope of improvement. Traditional methods of performance evaluation based on quantitative data involve more mathematical calculations than scientific approaches. The drawback of these methods is that they consider overall scores and not the individual factors of performance. This is exceptionally relevant when there are multiple disciplines in HEIs. In this study, the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) model using MACBETH is used to explore its usefulness in explicitly dealing with the trade-offs between performance measures, making the process of performance measurement and management more transparent and defendable. Faculty performance across different disciplines was considered in this study, and faculty performance was evaluated using the MACBETH score. The advantage of MACBETH is that weight can be assigned to specific criteria, and accordingly, analysis can be carried out. Based on which criteria are assigned the highest weight, that factor is considered for the final output. In this study, the results obtained showed significant differences in the performance rankings of the faculty members when compared to those of the traditional methods, suggesting that the FSTs are useful tools for performing performance appraisals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":218411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multidisciplinary Science Journal\",\"volume\":\"266 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multidisciplinary Science Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024118\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multidisciplinary Science Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

高等教育机构(HEIs)是一个国家的主要经济驱动力,其质量依赖于教师。教师的工作质量通过绩效考核方法进行评估。绩效考核方法有助于管理层评估员工的绩效,并进一步确定改进的范围。传统的绩效评估方法以量化数据为基础,更多涉及数学计算而非科学方法。这些方法的缺点是只考虑总分,而不考虑绩效的个别因素。当高等院校有多个学科时,这一点尤为重要。在本研究中,我们使用了MACBETH的多标准决策分析(MCDA)模型,以探索其在明确处理绩效衡量标准之间的权衡方面的实用性,从而使绩效衡量和管理过程更加透明和可辩护。本研究考虑了不同学科的教师绩效,并使用 MACBETH 分数对教师绩效进行评估。MACBETH 的优势在于可以为特定标准分配权重,并进行相应的分析。根据哪个标准被赋予的权重最高,最终的产出就会考虑该因素。本研究的结果表明,与传统方法相比,教职员工的绩效排名存在显著差异,这表明 FST 是进行绩效考核的有用工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Multicriteria decision analysis tool for faculty performance evaluation in higher education institutions
Higher education institutions (HEIs), which are the major economic drivers in a nation, rely on their faculty for quality. The quality of faculty performance is assessed through performance appraisal methods. Performance appraisal methods help management assess the performance of employees and further the scope of improvement. Traditional methods of performance evaluation based on quantitative data involve more mathematical calculations than scientific approaches. The drawback of these methods is that they consider overall scores and not the individual factors of performance. This is exceptionally relevant when there are multiple disciplines in HEIs. In this study, the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) model using MACBETH is used to explore its usefulness in explicitly dealing with the trade-offs between performance measures, making the process of performance measurement and management more transparent and defendable. Faculty performance across different disciplines was considered in this study, and faculty performance was evaluated using the MACBETH score. The advantage of MACBETH is that weight can be assigned to specific criteria, and accordingly, analysis can be carried out. Based on which criteria are assigned the highest weight, that factor is considered for the final output. In this study, the results obtained showed significant differences in the performance rankings of the faculty members when compared to those of the traditional methods, suggesting that the FSTs are useful tools for performing performance appraisals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A study on ethical implications of using technology in ESG investing and ensuring unbiased decision making Positive psychological studies of Riau Malay poem and its nntegration in literary appreciation learning Determining the land valuation model for peri-urban areas in Central Vietnam Improved lightweight DL algorithm for biometric identification from EEG signal Internal control system, innovation and performance of Moroccan public organizations: structural equation modeling based on the PLS approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1