IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation

  • Bana e Costa, Carlos A.
  • Oliveira, Mónica D.

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.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048311001265
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Omega.

Volume (Year): 40 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Pages: 424-436

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:40:y:2012:i:4:p:424-436
DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2011.08.006
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
Web: https://shop.elsevier.com/order?id=375&ref=375_01_ooc_1&version=01

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Pilar Murias & José Miguel & David Rodríguez, 2008. "A Composite Indicator for University Quality Assesment: The Case of Spanish Higher Education System," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 129-146, October.
  2. Julia Lane, 2010. "Let’s make science metrics more scientific," Working Paper Series of the German Council for Social and Economic Data 137, German Council for Social and Economic Data (RatSWD).
  3. Coccia, Mario, 2008. "Measuring scientific performance of public research units for strategic change," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 183-194.
  4. Politis, Y. & Siskos, Y., 2004. "Multicriteria methodology for the evaluation of a Greek engineering department," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 223-240, July.
  5. Donohue, Joan M. & Fox, Jeremy B., 2000. "A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 17-36, February.
  6. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2010. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?," Post-Print hal-00388319, HAL.
  7. Lawrence Phillips & Carlos Bana e Costa, 2007. "Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 51-68, October.
  8. Etzkowitz, Henry, 2003. "Research groups as 'quasi-firms': the invention of the entrepreneurial university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 109-121, January.
  9. Claire Donovan, 2007. "The qualitative future of research evaluation," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(8), pages 585-597, October.
  10. Mustafa, A. & Goh, M., 1996. "Multi-criterion models for higher education administration," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 167-178, April.
  11. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2947 is not listed on IDEAS
  12. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Rui Carvalho, 2002. "Assigning priorities for maintenance, repair and refurbishment in managing a municipal housing stock," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 380-391, April.
  13. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Ensslin, Leonardo & Correa, Emerson C. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1999. "Decision Support Systems in action: Integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 315-335, March.
  14. Meredith, Jack R. & Steward, Michelle D. & Lewis, Bruce R., 2011. "Knowledge dissemination in operations management: Published perceptions versus academic reality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-446, August.
  15. Edwards, Ward & Barron, F. Hutton, 1994. "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 306-325, December.
  16. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Corrêa, Émerson C. & De Corte, Jean-Marie & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2002. "Facilitating bid evaluation in public call for tenders: a socio-technical approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 227-242, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

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: (Shamier, Wendy)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.