IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v58y2016icp125-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A novel hybrid MCDM model for performance evaluation of research and technology organizations based on BSC approach

Author

Listed:
  • Varmazyar, Mohsen
  • Dehghanbaghi, Maryam
  • Afkhami, Mehdi

Abstract

Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a strategic evaluation tool using both financial and non-financial indicators to determine the business performance of organizations or companies. In this paper, a new integrated approach based on the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods are proposed to evaluate the performance of research centers of research and technology organization (RTO) in Iran. Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) are employed to reflect the interdependencies among BSC perspectives. Then, Analytic Network Process (ANP) is utilized to weight the indices influencing the considered problem. In the next step, we apply four MCDM methods including Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS), Complex Proportional Assessment (COPRAS), Multi-Objective Optimization by Ratio Analysis (MOORA), and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) for ranking of alternatives. Finally, the utility interval technique is applied to combine the ranking results of MCDM methods. Weighted utility intervals are computed by constructing a correlation matrix between the ranking methods. A real case is presented to show the efficacy of the proposed approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Varmazyar, Mohsen & Dehghanbaghi, Maryam & Afkhami, Mehdi, 2016. "A novel hybrid MCDM model for performance evaluation of research and technology organizations based on BSC approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 125-140.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:58:y:2016:i:c:p:125-140
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.06.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718915300367
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.06.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Abdolhamid Safaei Ghadikolaei, 2012. "Application of MCDM methods in short-term planning for private universities based on balanced scorecard: a case study from Iran," International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(2), pages 250-266.
    2. Tjader, Youxu & May, Jerrold H. & Shang, Jennifer & Vargas, Luis G. & Gao, Ning, 2014. "Firm-level outsourcing decision making: A balanced scorecard-based analytic network process model," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(PC), pages 614-623.
    3. Behrooz Noori, 2015. "Prioritizing strategic business units in the face of innovation performance: Combining fuzzy AHP and BSC," International Journal of Business and Management, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, vol. 3(1), pages 36-56, February.
    4. Emre Akyuz & Hristos Karahalios & Metin Celik, 2015. "Assessment of the maritime labour convention compliance using balanced scorecard and analytic hierarchy process approach," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 145-162, February.
    5. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834.
    6. Kailash Meena & Jitesh Thakkar, 2014. "Development of Balanced Scorecard for healthcare using Interpretive Structural Modeling and Analytic Network Process," Journal of Advances in Management Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 11(3), pages 232-256, October.
    7. Pierre Favardin & Dominique Lepelley & Jérôme Serais, 2002. "Borda rule, Copeland method and strategic manipulation," Post-Print halshs-00069522, HAL.
    8. Quezada, Luis E. & López-Ospina, Héctor A., 2014. "A method for designing a strategy map using AHP and linear programming," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 244-255.
    9. W-H Tsai & W-C Chou & W Hsu, 2009. "The sustainability balanced scorecard as a framework for selecting socially responsible investment: an effective MCDM model," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(10), pages 1396-1410, October.
    10. Mehrdad Nazari Asli & Vahid Majazi Dalfard & Kiarash Poursalik, 2013. "A combination model using strategic alignment model and balanced scorecard and strategies' prioritisation based on TOPSIS technique," International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(3), pages 313-326.
    11. Maria Cristina Gramani, 2014. "Inter-Regional Performance of the Public Health System in a High-Inequality Country," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, January.
    12. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    13. Wu, Hung-Yi & Lin, Yi-Kuei & Chang, Chi-Hsiang, 2011. "Performance evaluation of extension education centers in universities based on the balanced scorecard," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 37-50, February.
    14. Elham Keshavarz & Masumeh Ftahikenari & Abolfazl Rohani & Seyed Mohammad Bagheri, 2014. "Performance evaluation of banks using balanced scorecard," International Journal of Business Excellence, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(3), pages 371-393.
    15. Pierre Favardin & Dominique Lepelley & Jérôme Serais, 2002. "original papers : Borda rule, Copeland method and strategic manipulation," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 7(2), pages 213-228.
    16. L C Leung & K C Lam & D Cao, 2006. "Implementing the balanced scorecard using the analytic hierarchy process & the analytic network process," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(6), pages 682-691, June.
    17. Mansour Momeni & Mohammad Hassan Maleki & Mohammed Ali Afshari & Javad Siahkali Moradi & Javad Mohammadi, 2011. "A Fuzzy MCDM Approach for Evaluating Listed Private Banks in Tehran Stock Exchange Based on Balanced Scorecard," International Journal of Business Administration, International Journal of Business Administration, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(1), pages 80-97, February.
    18. Stefan Hajkowicz & Kerry Collins, 2007. "A Review of Multiple Criteria Analysis for Water Resource Planning and Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(9), pages 1553-1566, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barak, Sasan & Dahooei, Jalil Heidary, 2018. "A novel hybrid fuzzy DEA-Fuzzy MADM method for airlines safety evaluation," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 134-149.
    2. Jamali, Narjes & Feylizadeh, Mohammad Reza & Liu, Peide, 2021. "Prioritization of aircraft maintenance unit strategies using fuzzy Analytic Network Process: A case study," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    3. Heidary Dahooie, Jalil & Qorbani, Ali Reza & Daim, Tugrul, 2021. "Providing a framework for selecting the appropriate method of technology acquisition considering uncertainty in hierarchical group decision-making: Case Study: Interactive television technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    4. Nazli Ersoy, 2023. "Applying an integrated data-driven weighting system – CoCoSo approach for financial performance evaluation of Fortune 500 companies," E&M Economics and Management, Technical University of Liberec, Faculty of Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 92-108, September.
    5. Quezada, Luis E. & López-Ospina, Héctor A. & Ortiz, César & Oddershede, Astrid M. & Palominos, Pedro I. & Jofré, Paulina A., 2022. "A DEMATEL-based method for prioritizing strategic projects using the perspectives of the Balanced Scorecard," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    6. Ecer, Fatih, 2021. "A consolidated MCDM framework for performance assessment of battery electric vehicles based on ranking strategies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    7. Qi-Gan Shao & James J. H. Liou & Sung-Shun Weng & Yen-Ching Chuang, 2018. "Improving the Green Building Evaluation System in China Based on the DANP Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    8. Sarraf, Fatemeh & Nejad, Shabnam Hashemi, 2020. "Improving performance evaluation based on balanced scorecard with grey relational analysis and data envelopment analysis approaches: Case study in water and wastewater companies," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    9. Barak, Sasan & Javanmard, Shima, 2020. "Outsourcing modelling using a novel interval-valued fuzzy quantitative strategic planning matrix (QSPM) and multiple criteria decision-making (MCDMs)," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    10. Ehsan Pourjavad & Rene V. Mayorga, 2019. "A comparative study and measuring performance of manufacturing systems with Mamdani fuzzy inference system," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 1085-1097, March.
    11. Gawlik, Remigiusz, 2016. "Encompassing the Work-Life Balance into Early Career Decision-Making of Future Employees Through the Analytic Hierarchy Process," MPRA Paper 80260, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Kheybari, Siamak & Rezaie, Fariba Mahdi & Farazmand, Hadis, 2020. "Analytic network process: An overview of applications," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 367(C).
    13. Asir Ozbek & Emel Erol, 2017. "Ranking of Factoring Companies in Accordance with ARAS and COPRAS Methods," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 7(2), pages 105-116, April.
    14. Eva Benková & Peter Gallo & Beáta Balogová & Jozef Nemec, 2020. "Factors Affecting the Use of Balanced Scorecard in Measuring Company Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, February.
    15. Seyed Morteza Hatefi & Hamideh Asadi & Gholamreza Shams & Jolanta Tamošaitienė & Zenonas Turskis, 2021. "Model for the Sustainable Material Selection by Applying Integrated Dempster-Shafer Evidence Theory and Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.
    16. Yelda Ayrim & Kumru Didem Atalay & Gülin Feryal Can, 2018. "A New Stochastic MCDM Approach Based on COPRAS," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 857-882, May.
    17. Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Ayushi Chandel & Parvaneh Saeidi, 2022. "Low-carbon tourism strategy evaluation and selection using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy additive ratio assessment approach based on similarity measures," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 7236-7282, May.
    18. Jalil Heidary Dahooie & Ali Husseinzadeh Kashan & Zahra Shoaei Naeini & Amir Salar Vanaki & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "A Hybrid Multi-Criteria-Decision-Making Aggregation Method and Geographic Information System for Selecting Optimal Solar Power Plants in Iran," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    19. Afrasiabi, Ahmadreza & Chalmardi, Mazyar Kaboli & Balezentis, Tomas, 2022. "A novel hybrid evaluation framework for public organizations based on employees’ performance factors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. Seyed Hossein Razavi Hajiagha & Jalil Heidary-Dahooie & Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė & Kannan Govindan, 2022. "A new dynamic multi-attribute decision making method based on Markov chain and linear assignment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 159-191, August.
    21. Kim, Eungdo & Kim, Soyoung & Kim, Hongbum, 2017. "Development of an evaluation framework for publicly funded R&D projects: The case of Korea's Next Generation Network," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 18-28.
    22. Moraga, Javier A. & Quezada, Luis E. & Palominos, Pedro I. & Oddershede, Astrid M. & Silva, Hernán A., 2020. "A quantitative methodology to enhance a strategy map," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 43-53.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alireza Shahrasbi & Mehdi Shamizanjani & M. H. Alavidoost & Babak Akhgar, 2017. "An Aggregated Fuzzy Model for the Selection of a Managed Security Service Provider," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 625-684, May.
    2. Khanmohammadi, Ehsan & Malmir, Behnam & Safari, Hossein & Zandieh, Mostafa, 2019. "A new approach to strategic objectives ranking based on fuzzy logarithmic least squares method and fuzzy similarity technique," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    3. Andrés Calizaya & Oliver Meixner & Lars Bengtsson & Ronny Berndtsson, 2010. "Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in the Lake Poopo Basin, Bolivia," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(10), pages 2267-2289, August.
    4. Dominique Lepelley & Ahmed Louichi & Hatem Smaoui, 2008. "On Ehrhart polynomials and probability calculations in voting theory," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(3), pages 363-383, April.
    5. James Green-Armytage & T. Tideman & Rafael Cosman, 2016. "Statistical evaluation of voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 183-212, January.
    6. Yeawon Yoo & Adolfo R. Escobedo, 2021. "A New Binary Programming Formulation and Social Choice Property for Kemeny Rank Aggregation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 296-320, December.
    7. Mostapha Diss, 2015. "Strategic manipulability of self-selective social choice rules," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 229(1), pages 347-376, June.
    8. Bednay, Dezső & Moskalenko, Anna & Tasnádi, Attila, 2019. "Dictatorship versus manipulability," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 72-76.
    9. Rahimdel, Mohammad Javad & Noferesti, Hossein, 2020. "Investment preferences of Iran's mineral extraction sector with a focus on the productivity of the energy consumption, water and labor force," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    10. Jalil Heidary Dahooie & Ali Husseinzadeh Kashan & Zahra Shoaei Naeini & Amir Salar Vanaki & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "A Hybrid Multi-Criteria-Decision-Making Aggregation Method and Geographic Information System for Selecting Optimal Solar Power Plants in Iran," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    11. Marie-Louise Lackner & Martin Lackner, 2017. "On the likelihood of single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 717-745, April.
    12. Cervone, Davide P. & Dai, Ronghua & Gnoutcheff, Daniel & Lanterman, Grant & Mackenzie, Andrew & Morse, Ari & Srivastava, Nikhil & Zwicker, William S., 2012. "Voting with rubber bands, weights, and strings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 11-27.
    13. Green-Armytage, James, 2011. "Strategic voting and nomination," MPRA Paper 32200, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Aleksander Janeš & Armand Faganel, 2020. "Complementary Methods for Effective Decision Making," MIC 2020: The 20th Management International Conference,, University of Primorska Press.
    15. Punys, P. & Radzevičius, A. & Kvaraciejus, A. & Gasiūnas, V. & Šilinis, L., 2019. "A multi-criteria analysis for siting surface-flow constructed wetlands in tile-drained agricultural catchments: The case of Lithuania," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 1036-1046.
    16. William V. Gehrlein & Hemant V. Kher, 2004. "Decision Rules for the Academy Awards Versus Those for Elections," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 226-234, June.
    17. Constantin Zopounidis & Michael Doumpos, 2013. "Multicriteria decision systems for financial problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 21(2), pages 241-261, July.
    18. Fabio De Felice & Antonella Petrillo & Claudio Autorino, 2015. "Development of a Framework for Sustainable Outsourcing: Analytic Balanced Scorecard Method (A-BSC)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-21, June.
    19. Haris Aziz & Alexander Lam, 2021. "Obvious Manipulability of Voting Rules," Papers 2111.01983, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.
    20. Randhir, Timothy & Shriver, Deborah M., 2009. "Deliberative valuation without prices: A multiattribute prioritization for watershed ecosystem management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 3042-3051, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:58:y:2016:i:c:p:125-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.