A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation
In the context of increasing demands for social and financial accountability of universities, the required implementation of transparent faculty evaluation systems constitutes a challenge and an opportunity for universities strategically aligning the activity of academic staff with the university goals. However, despite growing interest in the performance appraisal of faculty, only a few reported studies propose models that cover the full range of academic activities and the models in use are typically based on ad hoc scoring systems that lack theoretical soundness. This article approaches faculty evaluation from an innovative comprehensive perspective. Based on the concepts and methods of multiple criteria value measurement, it proposes a new faculty evaluation model that addresses the whole range of academic activities and can be applied within and across distinct scientific areas, while respecting their specificities. Constructed through a socio-technical process, the model was designed for and adopted by the Instituto Superior Técnico, the engineering school of the Technical University of Lisbon. The model has a two-level hierarchical additive structure, with top-level evaluation areas specified by second-level evaluation criteria. A bottom non-additive third level accounts for the quantitative and qualitative dimensions of academic activity related to each evaluation criterion. The model allows (a) the comparison of the performance of academic staff with performance targets reflecting the strategic policy concerns of university management; (b) the definition of the multicriteria value profile of each faculty member at the top level of the evaluation areas; (c) the computation of an overall value score for each faculty member, through an optimisation procedure that makes use of a flexible system of weights and (d) the assignment of faculty members to rating categories.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 40 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:40:y:2012:i:4:p:424-436. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.