IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5696-d811205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Does Supervision Technique Affect Research? Towards Sustainable Performance: Publications and Students from Pure and Social Sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Iszan Hana Kaharudin

    (Centre for Liberal Studies (CITRA), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
    Research Advancement and Strategic Planning (RASP), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Mohammad Syuhaimi Ab-Rahman

    (Research Advancement and Strategic Planning (RASP), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
    Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Roslan Abd-Shukor

    (Department of Applied Physics, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Azamin Zaharim

    (Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Mohd Jailani Mohd Nor

    (Fakulti Kejuruteraan Mekanikal, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia (UTeM), Melaka 76100, Malaysia)

  • Ahmad Kamal Ariffin Mohd Ihsan

    (Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Shahrom Md Zain

    (Research Advancement and Strategic Planning (RASP), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
    Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Afiq Hipni

    (Research Advancement and Strategic Planning (RASP), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
    Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Kamisah Osman

    (Department Teaching and Learning Innovation, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Ruszymah Idrus

    (Department of Fisiology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

Abstract

Supervision without effective monitoring and strategy planning can lead to zero output. The fear of productivity losses, combined with the horror of massively declining performance, has encouraged many leaders to increase their subordinates’ monitoring efforts. This article explores the techniques used by lecturers in managing their research and how they affect the outcome and performance. Some techniques might sound familiar while some will be new. Two sets of questionnaires were developed to investigate the relationship between techniques and performance. One set was distributed to 15 lecturers and the other set was distributed to 100 students from different fields to get input from them on the best supervision characteristics. Fourteen outputs were outlined to show the weight of techniques used by the lecturers. From the survey results, lecturers who applied more than three techniques were able to produce more than three graduating students and more than 20 publications. The aim of the study is to list the most effective techniques for sustainable supervision which lead to output production.

Suggested Citation

  • Iszan Hana Kaharudin & Mohammad Syuhaimi Ab-Rahman & Roslan Abd-Shukor & Azamin Zaharim & Mohd Jailani Mohd Nor & Ahmad Kamal Ariffin Mohd Ihsan & Shahrom Md Zain & Afiq Hipni & Kamisah Osman & Ruszym, 2022. "How Does Supervision Technique Affect Research? Towards Sustainable Performance: Publications and Students from Pure and Social Sciences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5696-:d:811205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5696/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5696/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brocklesby, John, 2009. "Ethics beyond the model: How social dynamics can interfere with ethical practice in operational research/management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1073-1082, December.
    2. Arnold Reisman & Frank Kirschnick, 1994. "The Devolution of OR/MS: Implications from a Statistical Content Analysis of Papers in Flagship Journals," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(4), pages 577-588, August.
    3. Salvatore Zappalà & Ferdinando Toscano & Simone Alfio Licciardello, 2019. "Towards Sustainable Organizations: Supervisor Support, Commitment to Change and the Mediating Role of Organizational Identification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, February.
    4. Ormerod, R. J., 1997. "An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 599-603, October.
    5. Ormerod, R. J., 1996. "Combining management consultancy and research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-12, February.
    6. White, Leroy, 2009. "Challenge of Research Ethics Committees to the nature of operations research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1083-1088, December.
    7. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Journal evaluation methodologies: A balanced response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 607-612, October.
    8. Ormerod, R. J., 2000. "Is content analysis either practical or desirable for research evaluation?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-245, April.
    9. Jones, Michael John, 1999. "Critically evaluating an applications vs theory framework for research quality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 397-401, June.
    10. Vastag, Gyula & Montabon, Frank, 2002. "Journal characteristics, rankings and social acculturation in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 109-126, April.
    11. L White, 2006. "Evaluating problem-structuring methods: developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 842-855, July.
    12. Oz, Effy & Glass, Richard & Behling, Robert, 1999. "Electronic workplace monitoring: What employees think," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 167-177, April.
    13. Brinn, Tony & Jones, Michael John & Pendlebury, Maurice, 2000. "Measuring research quality: peer review 1, citation indices 0," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 237-239, April.
    14. Mingers, J. & O'Brien, F. A., 1995. "Creating student groups with similar characteristics: A heuristic approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 313-321, June.
    15. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J., 1995. "Judging the quality of research in business schools: The UK as a case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 257-270, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Holsapple, Clyde W. & Lee-Post, Anita, 2010. "Behavior-based analysis of knowledge dissemination channels in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 167-178, June.
    2. Biehl, Markus & Kim, Henry & Wade, Michael, 2006. "Relationships among the academic business disciplines: a multi-method citation analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 359-371, August.
    3. Meltem Denizel & Behlul Usdiken & Deniz Tuncalp, 2003. "Drift or Shift? Continuity, Change, and International Variation in Knowledge Production in OR/MS," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 711-720, October.
    4. R J Ormerod, 2010. "Research contribution: Citation and content analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(4), pages 705-707, April.
    5. Vastag, Gyula & Montabon, Frank, 2002. "Journal characteristics, rankings and social acculturation in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 109-126, April.
    6. Ormerod, R. J., 2000. "Is content analysis either practical or desirable for research evaluation?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-245, April.
    7. Rosenstreich, Daniela & Wooliscroft, Ben, 2009. "Measuring the impact of accounting journals using Google Scholar and the g-index," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 227-239.
    8. Jones, Michael John, 1999. "Critically evaluating an applications vs theory framework for research quality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 397-401, June.
    9. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    10. Chiang Kao, 2009. "The authorship and country spread of Operation Research journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(3), pages 397-407, March.
    11. Geert Campenhout & Tom Caneghem & Steve Uytbergen, 2008. "A comparison of overall and sub-area journal influence: The case of the accounting literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(1), pages 61-90, October.
    12. J Mingers, 2008. "Exploring the dynamics of journal citations: Modelling with s-curves," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(8), pages 1013-1025, August.
    13. Brocklesby, John & Midgley, Gerald, 2016. "Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of interventionAuthor-Name: Velez-Castiblanco, Jorge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 968-982.
    14. Meinard, Y. & Cailloux, O., 2020. "On justifying the norms underlying decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 1002-1010.
    15. Doyle, John R., 1999. "Evaluating OR/MS research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 403-405, June.
    16. Ormerod, R. J., 1997. "An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 599-603, October.
    17. Arnold Reisman & Muhittin Oral, 2005. "Soft Systems Methodology: A Context Within a 50-Year Retrospective of OR/MS," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 164-178, April.
    18. S Gattoufi & M Oral & A Kumar & A Reisman, 2004. "Content analysis of data envelopment analysis literature and its comparison with that of other OR/MS fields," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(9), pages 911-935, September.
    19. Yi-Ching Liaw & Te-Yi Chan & Chin-Yuan Fan & Cheng-Hsin Chiang, 2014. "Can the technological impact of academic journals be evaluated? The practice of non-patent reference (NPR) analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 17-37, October.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5696-:d:811205. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.