روش‌های کمی برای سنجش شاخص‌های کیفیِ بهره‌وری سازمانی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه مدیریت، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران.

2 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران.

چکیده

در سال‌های اخیر، سنجش بهره‌وری سازمانی به یکی از دغدغه‌های اصلی محققان و مدیران تبدیل شده است؛ با این حال، تمرکز عمده بر جنبه‌های فنی و اقتصادی، موجب نادیده‌گرفتن ابعاد اجتماعی و انسانی  بهره‌وری به عنوان یک مفهوم چندبعدی شده است. این پژوهش با تمرکز بر جنبه‌های اجتماعی و انسانی بهره‌وری، با هدف شناسایی و معرفی مناسب‌ترین روش‌های کمی، برای سنجش این ابعاد کیفی انجام شده است. در این پژوهش از رویکرد ترکیبی (کیفی-کمی) و منطق استقرایی-قیاسی بهره گرفته شده است. در گام نخست از طریق مرور سیستماتیک، مقالات مرتبط با سنجش بهره‌وری سازمانی تحلیل شده و با مدل چندسطحی تطبیق داده شدند و با استفاده از تکنیک آنتروپی شانون، وزن شاخص‌های کمی و کیفی استخراج گردید. در گام‌های بعدی با استفاده از روش مرور دامنه‌ای و با بهره‌گیری از نظر خبرگان در گروه کانونی، مناسب‌ترین روش‌های سنجش، برای هر یک از شاخص‌های کیفی تعیین شد. جامعه آماری در این مرحله از پژوهش خبرگان اجرایی و دانشگاهی با حداقل سه سال سابقه اجرایی و پژوهشی در زمینه مدیریت بهره‌وری هستند. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که سهم شاخص‌های کمی در سنجش بهره‌وری ۷۰ درصد و سهم شاخص‌های کیفی ۳۰ درصد است؛ ضمن آن‌که بسیاری از شاخص‌های کیفی به‌دلیل پیچیدگی در اندازه‌گیری، مورد غفلت قرار گرفته‌اند. یافته‌های این تحقیق، ضمن ارائه چارچوب عملیاتی برای سنجش کیفی بهره‌وری، امکان انتخاب روش سنجش را متناسب با ماهیت شاخص و داده‌های مورد نیاز فراهم می‌سازد. از منظر کاربردی، نتایج این پژوهش می‌تواند مبنایی برای تصمیم‌‌گیری مدیران و پژوهشگران در راستای ارزیابی جامع بهره‌وری باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Quantitative Methods for Measuring Qualitative Indicators of Organizational Productivity

نویسندگان [English]

  • Abbas Abbasi 1
  • Payam Shojaei 1
  • Haniyeh Khodaei 2
1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
2 PhD student in public administration, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Abstract
In recent years, measuring organizational productivity has become one of the main concerns of researchers and managers; however, the focus on technical and economic aspects has led to the neglect of the social and human dimensions of productivity as a multidimensional concept. This research, focusing on the social and human aspects of productivity, aims to identify and introduce the most appropriate quantitative methods for measuring these qualitative dimensions. This research uses a mixed methodology and inductive-deductive logic. In the first step, by analyzing the theoretical literature, the multilevel model of productivity was considered as the basis of the research, and then, using a systematic review method, articles related to measuring organizational productivity were analyzed and adapted to the multilevel model, and using the Shannon entropy technique, the weights of quantitative and qualitative indicators were extracted. In the next steps, the most appropriate measurement methods for each of the qualitative indicators were determined using the scope review method and the opinions of experts in the focus group. The statistical population in this stage of the research is executive and academic experts with at least three years of executive and research experience in the field of productivity management. The result of this study shows that in literature, the share of quantitative indicators in measuring productivity is about 70 percent and the share of qualitative indicators is 30 percent while many qualitative indicators have been neglected due to the complexity of measurement. The findings of this study, while providing an operational framework for qualitative measurement of productivity, provide the possibility of selecting a measurement method appropriate to the nature of the indicator and the required data. From practical perspective, the results of this study can be a basis for decision-making by managers and researchers in line with comprehensive productivity assessment.
Introduction
Productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness are distinct concepts. Efficiency emphasizes quantitative and short-term changes, and effectiveness emphasizes qualitative and long-term changes (Linna, Pekkola, Ukko & Melkas, 2010). Productivity is also a multidimensional concept with diverse interpretations that include efficiency, effectiveness, assets, profitability, quality, and value creation (Abbasi et al., 2024). In the classical period, productivity was measured based on the ratio between inputs and outputs and had a quantitative and mechanical concept (Abbasi et al., 2024). According to the social systems perspective in the neoclassical era, productivity is not only a technical or economic concept, but also a social phenomenon that is tied to human behavior and intra-organizational interactions (Mackenzie & Bititci, 2023). These new approaches push productivity measurement towards indicators that are qualitative and subjective in nature. However, existing studies focus on economic and quantitative dimensions, and these social and human dimensions have been ignored. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to answer the following questions:
1) Which qualitative indicators have been neglected in the studies?
2) What are the most appropriate measurement methods for each of the quality indicators?
Materials and Methods
This research was conducted in three phases. In the first phase, a systematic review and quantitative analysis was used to classify quantitative and qualitative indicators of productivity and neglected indicators. In the second phase, through a Scoping‎ Review and qualitative analysis, methods for measuring qualitative indicators were examined and the requirements, advantages and disadvantages of each method were determined. In the third phase, the most appropriate measurement methods for each qualitative indicator were determined in a focus group with the consensus of experts in two individual and group phases.
Discussion and Results
The first step involved examining the indicators measured in articles through a systematic review and comparing them with the indicators from Abbasi et al. (2024). The Shannon entropy method was used to calculate the weight of these indicators, revealing that 70% of productivity measurement indicators were quantitative, while only 30% were qualitative. Many qualitative indicators were ignored in the studies.
In the second step, methods for measuring quality indicators were analyzed through a domain review. The literature helped identify the requirements, advantages, and disadvantages of each method. The methods selected were based on their use in studies across various fields and included the LDA method, Shannon entropy, utility measurement, fuzzy Delphi method, multilevel clustering, and several others.
The third step involved surveying experts in a focus group to examine each productivity indicator and determine the most suitable method for each indicator based on expert consensus. The methods chosen considered each indicator's advantages, requirements, and necessary data. For example, to measure cooperation improvement in an organization, neural networks were suggested to evaluate managers' and employees' beliefs about cooperation. The LDA method was proposed for assessing organizational reputation through feedback from new employees and customers. Additionally, a data-driven method was introduced to measure customer loyalty and retention by analyzing repurchase rates and customer returns.
Conclusion
The multilevel model by Abbasi et al. (2024) defines productivity as a process involving both quantitative and qualitative indicators related to inputs, outputs, results, and effects. Ignoring quality indicators overlooks a significant part of productivity assessment. Current literature primarily emphasizes quantitative data, leaving qualitative aspects underexplored due to complexity. The study provides a matrix of qualitative indicators and suitable measurement methods to assist researchers and organizations in effectively measuring productivity. Future research should concentrate on measuring quality indicators across different industries to uncover variations and develop improved solutions.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Qualitative Indicators Measurement
  • Productivity
  • Quantitative Methods
  • Qualitative Indicators

مراجع

منابع فارسی
ایمان، محمد تقی. (1401).  روش‌شناسی تحقیقات کیفی. قم: پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه.
فقیهی، ابوالحسن؛ محمدرضایی، مهدی؛ سرلک، محمدعلی. (1400). ارائه مدلی جهت ارزیابی بهره وری کارکنان دانشی با به کارگیری روش دلفی فازی و روش بهترین – بدترین فازی (موردمطالعه: شرکت های دانش بنیان). مدیریت فرهنگ سازمانی، 19(2)، 377-404.
میرفخرالدینی، سیدحیدر؛ طاهری دمنه، محسن؛ منصوری، حسین. (1389). شبکه‌های مصنوعی، رویکردی نوین در سنجش کیفیت خدمات کتابخانه‌ای. کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، 13(1)،205-225.
 
References
Abbasi, A.; Shirazi, B. & Mohamadi, S. (2024). A multilevel model for organizational productivity management: an interpretive structural modeling approach. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.
Alchaer, E. & Issa, C.A. (2020). Engineering Productivity Measurement: A Novel Approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(8).
Allen, R. S., & Helms, M. M. (2006). Linking Strategic Practices and Organizational Performance to Porter’s Generic Strategies. Business Process Management Journal, 12, 433-454.
Al-Mehannah, H.G.; Jasim, F.A. & Al-Mousawi, H.A.H. (2019).  Social and economic impacts of supply chain performance measurement and productivity with particular reference to Iraq. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(2), 309–316.
Berhe, E.; Abebe, B. & Azene, D. (2017). A new perspective on productivity measurement. Total Quality Management and Business Excellenc, 28(1-2), 205–217.
Bernolak, I. (1997). Effective measurement and successful elements of company productivity: The basis of competitiveness and world prosperity. International Journal of Production Economics, 52(1-2), 203–213.
Bitran, Gabriel R. & Chang, Li. (1984). Productivity Measurement at the Firm Level. Interfaces, 14(3), 29–40.
Brondino, M., Bazzoli, A., Vander Elst, T., De Witte, H., & Pasini, M. (2020). Validation and measurement invariance of the multidimensional qualitative job insecurity scale. Quality & Quantity.
Chang, D.S.; Kuo, Y.C. & Chen, T.Y. (2008). Productivity measurement of the manufacturing process for outsourcing decisions: The case of a Taiwanese printed circuit board manufacturer. International Journal of Production Research, 46(24), 6981–6995.
Chau, K.W. & Walker, A. (1988). The measurement of total factor productivity of the Hong Kong construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 6(3), 209–224.
Chen, T.-Y. & Yeh, T.-L. (2000). A measurement of bank efficiency, ownership and productivity changes in Taiwan.  Service Industries Journal, 20(1), 95–109.
Chen, T.-Y. (2005). A measurement of Taiwan's bank efficiency and productivity change during the Asian financial crisis. International Journal of Services, Technology and Management, 6(6), 525–543.
Chiou, W.-C.; Kuo, H.-W. & Lu, I.-Y. (1999). Technology oriented productivity measurement model. International Journal of Production Economics, 60, 69–77.
Choi, D.O. & Kim, J.S. (2005). Productivity measurement and evaluation models with application to a military R&D organization. International Journal of Technology Management, 32(3-4), 408–436.
Choi, K.  & Kim, J. (2024). Measuring Hotel Service Productivity Using Two-Stage Network DEA. Sustainability.
Chung, Y. & Heshmati, A. (2015). Measurement of environmentally sensitive productivity growth in Korean industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 104, 380–391.
Cosa, M. & Torelli, R. (2024). Digital Transformation and Flexible Performance Management: A Systematic Literature Review of the Evolution of Performance Measurement Systems. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 25(3), 445–466.
Daneshjo, N.; & Malega, P. (2020). Measurement of productivity in small-series production and application of lean production elements. TEM Journal, 9(1), 107–116.
Deng, T.; Sharafat, A.; Lee, S. & Seo, J. (2024). Automatic Vision-Based Dump Truck Productivity Measurement Based on Deep-Learning Illumination Enhancement for Low-Visibility Harsh Construction Environment.  Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(11).
Djellal, F. & Gallouj, F. (2013). The productivity challenge in services: Measurement and strategic perspectives. Service Industries Journal, 33(3-4), 282–299.
Esmaeeli, J.; Amiri, M. & Taghizadeh, H. (2021). A New Approach in the Network DEA Models for Measurement of Productivity of Decision-Making Units Using Multi-Objective Programming Method. International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Production Research, 32(3).
Faghihi, A.; Mohammadrezayi, M. & Sarlak, M.A. (2021). Presenting a model to evaluate the productivity of knowledge workers by using the fuzzy Delphi method and the fuzzy best-worst method (case study: knowledge-based companies). Organizational Culture Management, 19(2), 377-404. (In Persian)
Forsythe, P.      (2018). Extending and operationalizing construction productivity measurement on building projects. Construction Management and Economics, 36(12), 683–699.
Fuchs, D.; Schlipphak, B.; Treib, O.; Long, L.N. & Lederer, M. (2020). Which Way Forward in Measuring the Quality of Life? A Critical Analysis of Sustainability and Well-Being Indicator Sets. Global Environmental Politics, 20(2). 12-36.
Ghahremanloo, M.; Hasani, A.; Amiri, M.; Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M. & Ustinovičius, L.  (2020). A novel DEA model for hospital performance evaluation based on the measurement of efficiency, effectiveness, and productivity. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 12(1), 7–19.  
Gidwani, B.D. & Dangayach, G.S. (2017). Productivity measurement and improvement - An overview. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 20(3), 316–343.
Gordon, J.; Zhao, Sh. & Gretton, P. (2015). On productivity: concepts and measurement. Productivity Commission Staff Research Note.
Guerreiro, É.D.R.; Fidelis, R., & Lima, R.H.P. (2024). Theoretical framework for strategic productivity in manufacturing: the primary transformation model (PTM). International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 73(2), 412–434.
Gupta R. &. Dey S. K. (2010). Development of a Productivity Measurement Model for Tea Industry. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences.
Hannula, M. (2002). Total productivity measurement based on partial productivity ratios. International Journal of Production Economics, 78(1), 57–67.
Helo, P.; Takala, J. & Phusavat, K. (2009). Productivity measurement for knowledge work in research and development. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 4(1), 39–54.
Hoque, Z. & Falk, H. (2000). Industry characteristics and productivity measurement systems - An empirical investigation in New Zealand-based manufacturing organisations. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 20(11), 1278–1292.
Houseman, S. (2007). Outsourcing, offshoring and productivity measurement in United States manufacturing.  International Labour Review, 146(1-2), 61–80.
Hou, C.; Chen, H & Huang, X. (2024). Measurement and distribution characteristics of urban green productivity: based on fuzzy rough set and spatial autocorrelation analysis. Environment, Development and Sustainability.
Hu, X. & Liu, C. (2017). Total factor productivity measurement with carbon reduction.  Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 24(4), 575–592.
Hur, T.; Kim, I. & Yamamoto, R. (2004). Measurement of green productivity and its improvement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(7), 673–683.
Ibrahim, N.H.; Tuan Ismail, T.N. & Ladisma, M. (2018). Assessing Employee Creativity and Innovation in Organization: Development of Measuring Item. Journal of Administrative Science, 15(1), 1-10.
Iman, M.T. (2022). Methodology of Qualitative Research. Qom: Research Center of hoze and University. (In Persian)
Jääskeläinen, A.  (2013). Implementing a component approach to productivity measurement in a large public service organization. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 14(2), 111–128.
James, Ch. (2024). Evaluating Developer Productivity in TDD and BDD Workflows.
Joppe, M. & Li, X.P. (2016). Productivity Measurement in Tourism: The Need for Better Tools. Journal of Travel Research, 55(2), 139–149.
Kapelko, M.; Horta, I.M.; Camanho, A.S. & Oude Lansink, A. (2015). Measurement of input-specific productivity growth with an application to the construction industry in Spain and Portugal. International Journal of Production Economics, 166, 64–71.
Kasim, M.M.; Kashim, R.; & Rahim, R.A. (2016). Development of a two-dimensional productivity measurement model for higher learning institutions.        International Review of Management and Marketing, 6(7), 91–94.
Kao, C. (2017). Measurement and decomposition of the Malmquist productivity index for parallel production systems. Omega (United Kingdom), 67, 54–59.
Kijpruek, M. & Ruangchoengchum, P. (2023). Measurement Service Productivity: The Case Study of the Wedding Photography Businesses in Khon Kaen Province. Economics and Business Administration Journal, Thaksin University, 16 (4).
Laitinen, I.; Kinder, T. & Stenvall, J. (2018). Local public service productivity and performance Measurement. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 9(1), pp. 49–75.
Lin, L.Zh. & Hsu, T.H. (2008). The Qualitative and Quantitative Models for Performance Measurement Systems: The Agile Service Development. Quality & Quantity (Springer), 42, 445–476.
Linna, P.; Pekkola, S.; Ukko, J. & Melkas, H. (2010). Defining and measuring
productivity in the public sector: managerial perceptions. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(3), 300-320.
Li, X.; Wang, K.; Liu, L.; Xin, J.; Yang, H. & Gao, Ch. (2011). Application of the Entropy Weight and TOPSIS Method in Safety Evaluation of Coal Mines. Procedia Engineering, 26, 2085 – 2091.
Lozano-Vivas, A. & Humphrey, D.B. (2002).  Bias in Malmquist index and cost function productivity measurement in banking. International Journal of Production Economics, 76(2), 177–188.
Lowe, J.G. (1987). Measurement of productivity in the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 5(2), 101–113.
Mackenzie, H., & Bititci, U.S. (2023). Understanding performance measurement and management as a social system: towards a theoretical framework. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 43(7), 1098–1120.
 Malikov, E.; Zhang, J.; Zhao, S. & Kumbhakar, S.C. (2022). Accounting for cross-location technological heterogeneity in the measurement of operations efficiency and productivity. Journal of Operations Management, 68(2), 153–184.
Mirfakhredini, S.H.; Taheri Damneh, M. and Mansouri, H. (2010). Artificial networks, a new approach in measuring the quality of library services. Library and information, 13(1), 205-225. (In Persian)
Mitropoulos, P. (2022). A metafrontier Global Malmquist framework for hospitals productivity and quality measurement: Evidence from the Greek economic recession.  EURO Journal on Decision Processes, 10.
Nachum, L. (1999). Measurement of productivity of professional services: An illustration on Swedish management consulting firms. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 19(9), 922–950.
Nath, T.; Attarzadeh, M. & Tiong, R.L.K. (2016). Precast workflow productivity measurement through BIM adoption. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 169(5), 208–216.
Novikova, S.V.; Kremleva, E.S.; Valitova, N.L. & Snegurenko, A.P. (2020). Soft measurements of qualitative integral indicators for monitoring quantitative dataset. International Conference on Soft Computing and Measurement.
Nur, F., Harrison, D., Deb, S., Burch V, R. F., & Strawderman, L. (2021). Identification of interventions to improve employee morale in physically demanding repetitive motion work tasks: A pilot case study. Cogent Engineering, 8(1), 1914287.
Oussalah, M. (2000). On the qualitative/necessity possibility measure. (I). Investigation in the framework of measurement theory. Information Sciences, 126, 205-275.
Phusavat, K. & Photaranon, W. (2006). Productivity/performance measurement: Case application at the government pharmaceutical organization.  Industrial Management and Data Systems, 106(9), 1272–1287.
Phusavat, K.; Anussornnitisarn, P.; Sujitwanit, S. & Kess, P. (2009). Profile-based circumstances for productivity measurement. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 109(6), 825–839.
Phusavat, K. (2013). Productivity Management in an Organization: Measurement and Analysis. ToKnowPress.
Pritchard, R. D. (1995). Productivity measurement and improvement: Organizational case studies. Praeger Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group.
Przybyłowski, A.; Kałaska, A. & Przybyłowski, P. (2022). Quest for a Tool Measuring Urban Quality of Life: ISO 37120 Standard Sustainable Development Indicators. Energies, 15(2841). 1-17.
Ragin, C. C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. University of California Press.
Ramli, N.A.; Radiah Shariff, S.S. & Hamid, N. (2019).  Productivity measurement of commercial banks in Malaysia with non-performing loans. Global Business and Economics Review, 21(5), 666–682.
Randeree, K., Al Youha, H. (2009). Strategic management of performance: an examination of public sector organizations in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 9(4), 123-134.
Rao, M. & Mandal, P. (2012). Evaluating the impact of IT investments: Use of a multi-period profit-linked productivity measurement model. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 9(3), 278–294.
Rathore, A.; Mohanty, R.P. & Lyons, A.C. (2003).  Managing total productivity: A practical application of measurement and optimisation. International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, 5(5-6), 459–471.
Salas, E.; Grossman, R.; Hughes, A.M. & Coultas, Ch. W. (2015). Measuring Team Cohesion: Observations from Science. The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(3), 365-374.
Salehi, M.; Shirouyehzad, H. & Dabestani, R. (2013).  Labour productivity measurement through classification and standardisation of products. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 11(1), 57–72.
Sanders, V.S.; Bamberg, R. & Grostick, S. (1992). Productivity methods and measurement standards in medical transcription: A study of Alabama hospitals. Journal of the American Health Information Management Association, 63(7), 71–74.
Sezer, A.A. & Bröchner, J. (2014). The construction productivity debate and the measurement of service qualities. Construction Management and Economics, 32(6), 565–574.
Shen, Z.; Wu, H.; Bai, K. & Hao, Y. (2022). Integrating economic, environmental and societal performance within the productivity measurement. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 176.
Stainer, A. & Nixon, B. (1997). Productivity and performance measurement in R&D. International Journal of Technology Management, 13(5-6), 486–496.
Stoneman, P. & Francis, N. (1994). Double Deflation and the Measurement of Output and Productivity in UK Manufacturing 1979–89. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 1(3), 423 437.
Sua, S.; Laia, M.-C. & Huangb, H.-C. (2009). Healthcare industry value creation and productivity measurement in an emerging economy. Service Industries Journal, 29(7), 963–975.
Talib, A.H.; Ahmed, H.A.A. & Al-msary, A.J.K. (2019). Evaluating the steps of building the organizational structure by supply chain performance measurement and productivity: A case of the general directorate of vocational education. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(1), 535–544.
Teng, H. S. (2014). Qualitative productivity analysis: Does a non-financial measurement model exist? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 63(2), 250–256.
Tischer, T.E. & Kuprenas, J.A. (2003). Bridge falsework productivity Measurement and influences. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(3), 243–250.
Tomal, D.R. and Jones, K.J. (2015). A comparison of core competencies of women and men leaders in the manufacturing industry. Coastal Business Journal, 14(1),13-25.
Van Der Post, W. Z., De Coning, T. J., & Smit, E. V. D. M. (1997). An instrument to measure organizational culture. South African Journal of Business Management, 28(4), 147–168.
Vuorinen, I., Järvinen, R., & Lehtinen, U. (1998). Content and measurement of productivity in the service sector: a conceptual analysis with an illustrative case from the insurance business. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(4), 337-396.
White, C.R. & Austin, J.S. (1989). Productivity measurements: Untangling white-collar web. Journal of Management in Engineering, 5(4), 371–378.
Yanchovska, I. (2022). Scales for Measuring Employee Job Satisfaction. Mechanics Communications Academic journal, 11(1), 30-38.
Young, S.T. (1992).  Multiple productivity measurement approaches for management. Health Care Management Review, 17(2), 51–58.
Zámečník, R. (2014). The Measurement of Employee Motivation by Using Multi-factor Statistical Analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109(1), 851-857.
Zhan, W.; Pan, W. & Hao, G. (2022). Productivity Measurement and Improvement for Public Construction Projects.  Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(6).
Zheng, S. & Bloch, H. (2014).   Australia's mining productivity decline: Implications for MFP measurement. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 41(2), 201–212.
Zhu, Y.; Tian, D. & Yan, F. (2020). Effectiveness of Entropy Weight Method in Decision-Making. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 7, 1-5.
Zriaa, R.; Sadiki, H.; Ertel, M.; Amali, S. & El Faddouli, N. (2023). Qualitative Recommender System Using Entropy-Weighted Pedagogical Criteria for Effective Training in E-Learning Platforms. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 101(9). 3516-3529.
 
 
پژوهش های مدیریت عمومی
دوره 18، شماره 70 - شماره پیاپی 70
(علمی -پژوهشی)
دی 1404
صفحه 95-126

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار