Providing a model for assessing the performance of senior managers using multi-criteria decision-making techniques (AHP)

Transcription

1 Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue.,5 Providing a model for assessing the performance of senior s using multi-criteria decision-making techniques (AHP) Majid Saberirad, Industrial Management Institution. DBA student Ali Mohammad Sobhani Industrial Management Institution. DBA student Abstract In the present era, the importance of s' role as main designers, leaders, and administrators of the organization is no secret, and implementing an effective system of selection, recruitment, retention and particularly their assessment is very important. No doubt that identifying the strengths and of s and using them, identifying their and trying to resolve and rectify them, can play an undeniable role in the growth and development of the organization. And by evaluating s, it would be one of the most effective tools to evaluate and judge in Management Science. In the present study, we tried to adhere to the scientific framework and management theoretical topics and s' performance, in order to develop a model in Bonny Chow Company and, indicators have been considered for evaluation. In this study, we tried to rate senior s' competencies; according to the 6 model using AHP and AHP group decisionmaking. Keywords: s' competencies, performance evaluation, 6 Degree Model, AHP group Introduction In the current era, milestones in management knowledge made evaluation system existence inevitable; in such a way that lack of assessment in various aspects of the organization, including the assessment of using resources, personnel, objectives and strategies are considered as one of the organizations' disorder symptoms. Each organization need to evaluation system, to determine the degree of acceptance and quality of its, especially in complex and dynamic s. On the other hand, lack of systematic evaluation and control in a system is considered as no communication with internal and external, which leads to aging and death consequently. Death may not be felt by the senior of the organization due to its sudden occurrence, but studies have found no possibility of conducting necessary information for growth, development and improvement of the organization's as there is a lack in obtaining feedbacks, which consequently leads to organizational death.at the same time, with regard to creation, we can see that the assessment is in its context. The very harmonious world order suggests a thoughtful complete feedback loop. And evaluation system is considered as one of these loops. Although human may not be able to explain it due to a defect in human's knowledge. But the strength and durability of a system is subjected to monitoring and evaluation system.scholars and researchers believe that performance evaluation is a major issue in all organizational analysis. And it is difficult to imagine an organization that is not subjected to evaluation and performance assessment. They refer to "organization performance" to describe the causes in organizational theory development. As a result researchers, economists and executives are attracted to this issue. Evaluation and performance assessment leads to smarter system and motivate people to have more favorable behavior, and it is the main part in development and implementation of corporate policies.performance evaluation background has two phases: the first phase was until 98, where the financial indicators such as profitability, return on investment and productivity were emphasized. The second phase was formed in the late 98s as a result of rapid changes in the global market business. In this period old companies lost their market shares, and new companies with the ability to provide high quality products and services with lower costs and greater diversity were established instead. 6

2 Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue.,5 6 degree feedback 6 degree feedback is a suitable method for the development of leadership quality and development management. this process is complete a cycle, which provides a feedback summary of all people (supervisors, peers and subordinates and the person) about different aspects of leadership and management styles and their performance. Some organizations obtain feedback from a part of the organization and carry it out systematically. Feedbacks help people to compare their perception of the job with the perception of evaluators. These evaluators can include colleagues, subordinates, s and even customers, suppliers and members of trade unions. Multi-source feedback and 6 degree feedback programs are extracted from developed methods of performance evaluation processes, organizational studies and customers' feedback (part of total quality management).6 degree feedback systems have been developed due to the popularity of team and organizational structures and also in response to the problems with the traditional performance management systems. (Ran Caspion, ).The 6-degree feedback or multi-source feedback, is an performance evaluation approach, which is based on the data collected from supervisors, colleagues, and one's own and even one's own subordinates, customers and suppliers. (Mac Karti, ).Lapsinger & Lossia (997) suggest that 6-degree feedback process is a total the behavior of an individual's perceptions. Thus, the 6- degree feedback tries to make people to pay attention to their behavior in the work in a way that influences other members of the organization (whom they are working with).6 degree feedback evaluation extends the input data from one-dimensional top-down approach to multi-dimensional approach (subordinates, colleagues, s and the ones own), and can be an "Evaluation without Borders". Therefore, it can be said that 6 degree feedback concept seems to fit without borders organization theory approach. common words that are used for 6 degree feedback, include: "Evaluation of the beneficiaries", " multi-criteria feedback ", "full-cycle assessment", "multi-source assessment," "peer subordinate assessment ", " Group Performance Evaluation "," multi-perspective evaluation "((Mac Karti, ).Lapsinger & Lossia noted that the 6-degree feedback is consistent with multi-source feedback. They provided a multi-source assessment with the most common materials used in the evaluation: bosses, subordinates, the person him/herself, colleagues and so on. Competency By a literature review on the competency and the definitions of competency, the first thing that is very clear is the lack of single definition and specific terminology for the competency and its meaning. The following definitions provided mainly by leading experts in the field clarify this issue. Oxford Dictionary () defines competency as power, capability and ability to perform a task. Q (99) defines competency as the result of applying the knowledge and skills appropriately. In other words: competency = skill + knowledge National Park Service employees Institute (4) defines competency as a set of knowledge, skills and abilities in a specific job that allows a person to achieve success in the tasks. As can be seen, this definition added the component of ability to the components of competency. Competency is a measurable characteristic of a person which is linked with an effective performance in job, organization and the culture (Hi group, ).A ial competency is a set of knowledge, skills and abilities and incentives, so the administrator can perform the duties well. (Jijian Counseling Center, 4). Through s periodic performance evaluation based on based on competencies indicators, one can identify their strengths and use them to increase productivity, and also by identifying their, their problems can be solved. Defining the problem and the mathematical model In this section, s' assessment was developed by the competency indicators in the 4 sides of 6 degree model and using a hierarchical AHP group through distributed questionnaire in 4 groups to rank senior s. 4 competency's indicators Competency's indicators in this are chosen from the studies and interviews with experts in the assessment management science.. Professional Skills: The knowledge and the skill and expertise of the task.. Communication skills: Inter-organizational and communication skills and good public relations. 6

3 Providing a model for assessing the performance of senior The decision-making skills: Includes problem solutions (finding optimal solution), solving the problem (finding a satisfactory answer), problem disposal (changing the purpose and performing corrective action), problems absorption or digestion (hope for not solving the problem) 4. Leadership Skills: One sign of a good leader is to provide a strong incentive to keep his or her team to achieve quality and superior product. A good leader is always looking for ways to promote products and standards. 5. Encourage, innovation and change skills: Encourage skills include creating incentives to improve the business affairs and grow individuals and organizations Innovation and change skills: the ability to create something so unique from other things and to create an for the development of talents. 6. Job communication skills: Improve working relationships and develop teamwork. Communication skills Decision making skills Leadership Skills Encourage, innovation and change Work Communications Professional Skills Table - Competency Assessment indicators Responding Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper Decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragement Create effective changes Establish effective working relationships Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and The ability to monitor, control and evaluate The population to assess the s competency consists of four groups as follows:. The person (self-assessment). Colleagues. Supervisors 4. Subordinates Each of these four groups filled out the questionnaires. The studies found that the responses of the 4 groups are not the same, but they have different importance s. 6

4 Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue.,5 Table () - the importance of evaluators groups groups The person (self-assessment) Colleagues Supervisors Subordinates 4 4. Analytical Hierarchy Process AHP Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a logical framework that makes the understanding and analysis of complex decision making easy by analyzing the hierarchical structure. Analytical Hierarchy Process can be used when the act of decision making has several competing options and decision criteria. Criteria can be both quantitative and qualitative. This decision is based on paired comparisons. Decision maker starts to make decision by providing a hierarchical decision tree, and then comes a series of paired comparisons. These comparisons show the s in each factor, considering evaluated competing alternatives in the decisionmaking. Finally, analytic hierarchy process mixes the obtained matrix of paired comparisons so that the optimal decision can be reached. 4. Analytical Hierarchy Process AHP group There might be more than one decision maker result in a decision-making process, so all of their comments and views should be considered in the comparison matrix. In these cases, i.e. group decision-making, the geometric mean can be used for comparison matrix elements. If any decision maker regarding to his or her necessary expertise and position has a greater impact on the votes, the (w) can be given to him or her. 4 Model implementation steps In the analytic hierarchy process, the first step is to create a graphical representation of the problem where the objectives, criteria and options are shown (Figure ). The model was carried out in the Bonny Chow Company (the company distributing Kaleh dairy products). The model was surveyed using questionnaire-based approach based on the analysis model requirements of this study. Then paired comparisons questionnaires were prepared and were distributed among the four decision makers groups, and the results were used for the model. To calculate the in AHP process, elements in each level are compared with higher level related elements and the s are calculated. Then, by integrating the relative s, according to a comparative table, the final of each item is determined. In these comparisons decision makers have expressed their judgments orally. As compared to the element i to element j in terms of preferred modes expressed on a scale from to 9: Preferences (oral judgment) The numerical value Table - ranges of paired comparisons scoring Equal Slightly Strong very strong preference or preferable or preference preference or importance slightly or importance or desirability above or importance or desirability of slightly or better desirability Quite preferable or important or favorable Preferences between these intervals 5 7 9,4,6,8 6

5 Communication skills Decision making skills Leadership Skills Encourage, innovation and change Work Communications Professional Skills geometrical mean Weight to the level of Providing a model for assessing the performance of senior In the preference matrix derived from the questionnaire, the geometric mean of each row and then the normalized value is calculated. Finally, the vector (last column) is obtained. By combining with higher level vector, the final vector of each level is achieved. Tables (4) and (5), show the calculation for level two, three and four of analysis model, respectively (ND does not mean not defining the relationship between the row and column components of one table cell according to the analysis model): Table (4) - calculations of level two compared to level one level Communicati skills on Decision making skills Leadership Skills Encourage, innovation and change Work Communicati ons Professional Skills Table 4 compares the level indicators. The geometric mean of each row is calculated, and column to the level is normalized. Therefore the s of level two are standard.

6 Responding Colleagues Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragement Create effective changes Establish effective working relationships Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and The ability to monitor control and evaluate Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue.,5 Table 6 - Final Table of s' comparisons in colleagues group at level

7 Responding Subordinates Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue., Table 7 - Final Table of s' comparisons in subordinates group at level

8 Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragem ent Create effective changes Establish effective working relationships Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and The ability to monitor control and evaluate Responding Supervisors Create open communicati on Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Truth Seeking Organizatio nal commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue., Table 8 - Final Table of s' comparisons in supervisors group at level 4 7-7

9 Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragement Create effective changes Establish effective working relationships Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and The ability to monitor control and evaluate Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue.,

10 Responding Self-assessment Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragem ent Create effective changes Establish effective working relationships Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and The ability to monitor control and evaluate Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue.,5 Table 9 - Final Table of s' comparisons in self-assessment group at level

11 self-assessment Responding Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Create an atmosphere innovation and of encouragement Create effective changes Establish effective working relationships Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and The ability to control,monitor and evaluate geometrical Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue., And in tables (), (), (), () after calculating the geometric mean and the relative, the final scores for s in each group of decision makers have been obtained. Table () Table of the final score calculations in level of self-assessment group total score

12 relative self-assessment Responding Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragement Create effective changes working relationships Establish effective Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and,the ability to monitor control and evaluate geometrical Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue., total score Table () Table of the final score calculations in level of colleagues group

13 relative self-assessment Responding Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragement Create effective changes working relationships Establish effective Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and,the ability to monitor control and evaluate geometrical relative Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue., total score Table () Table of the final score calculations in level of subordinates group

14 self-assessment Responding Create open communication Explicit reporting Timely Decisions right and proper decisions Ability to solve problems Organizational commitment Delegate authority Foster creative staff Create an atmosphere of innovation and encouragement Create effective changes working relationships Establish effective Develop Teamwork Encourage qualified staff Planning and organizing Identify strengths and,the ability to monitor control and evaluate geometrical relative Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue., total score Table () Table of the final score calculations in level of Supervisors group

15 Jurnal UMP Social Sciences and Technology Management Vol., Issue.,5 And in table (4) for each Manager of,,, accumulated points for each of the level 4 tables are multiplied by the of responding importance. Table (4) - Final table of choosing competent (s' competency rankings) total Supervisors Subordinates Colleagues selfassessment score And thus is selected as the most qualified or competent. Finally we reached to the s rankings. Conclusion Managers are counted as strategic asset of organizations. In this study, a new mathematical method and model was presented for the election of directors. In the past three decades, the use of mathematical approach and AHP models were used in various decision-making s, including the election of directors or s. However, the model and mathematical approach presented in this paper has major advantages compared to previous models and related mathematical approaches. The present model has also a hierarchical structure. But there are nomological limits of maximum three criteria in each node. And therefore the vertical structure has higher levels. And it is tried to select key indicators in assessing the competency of senior s, in order to assess all aspects of management competence. The result of this research is that in the proposed method (6 degrees) s were evaluated and ranked for sure and %. Discussion and suggestions The conceptual model and the proposed method can certainly be improved in future studies. We suggest that the conceptual model be developed by industry and university experts on a national scale. And special attention should be paid to the characteristics of the model applied in the "Government Offices", "Industry" and "Services". In addition, group decision-making method used in four levels, can also be used at higher levels.for the evaluation of the performance one can use mathematical modeling and mathematical programming (linear, nonlinear, etc.) and in large-scales, innovative techniques can be used. References - Oshagbemi, T. (997). Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in higher education, Education+ Training, 9(9), pp Jackson, M. P. (999). The role of the head of department in managing performance in UK universities, International Journal of Educational Management, (), Brugha, C.,. Theory and 4- Methodology Relative measurement and the power function. European Journal of Operational Research Robbins, S. P. and Decenzo, D. A., 6-, Human Resource Management. 7- Edited by Jeef Marshal. 7thEd. John 8- Wiley & sons. USA. 9- Using 6 feedback and the integral model to develop leadership,cacioppe.r, - Roberts, Gary E. and Pavlak, T. (5). Municipal government Personnel Professional and Performance appraisal: Is there a consensus on the characteristics of an effective appraisal system? Public Personnel Management, Vol. 5. No., Fall - Abili, khodayar (8) analysis on the evaluation system of government's employees. Knowledge Management. No. 58: _5 - Alirezaei, MohammadReza, bank 's performance evaluation using data envelopment analysis, the Second International Conference of Rajai, Shahrivar 89 85