IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/opsear/v57y2020i4d10.1007_s12597-020-00466-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Studying productivity using a synergy between the balanced scorecard and analytic network process

Author

Listed:
  • Sara Fanati Rashidi

    (Mathematics Department, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz Branch)

Abstract

In the competitive world of today, productivity, as a philosophy and viewpoint based on the strategy of improvement, is considered the most important approach available to service and manufacturing organizations for a stronger presence in the market, production growth, and expansion of activities. Indeed, total productivity management is the most important basis for activities in modern management. Low productivity levels are among the most serious issues in Iran, and all development plans emphasize the improvement of productivity as an important resource for economic growth. In this research, we study productivity and the influential factors in evaluating productivity in terms of human resources. We use the balanced scorecard (BSC) approach and the analytic network process for initial identification of effective indicators in productivity measurement. One of the advantages to this approach is that it uses all criteria and indicators in its evaluation process. Next, we use multiple-attribute decision-making methods to check our indicators. Moreover, we analyze our research findings across three scenarios, relying heavily on comments from experts in the oil industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Fanati Rashidi, 2020. "Studying productivity using a synergy between the balanced scorecard and analytic network process," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 57(4), pages 1404-1421, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:opsear:v:57:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s12597-020-00466-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s12597-020-00466-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12597-020-00466-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12597-020-00466-5?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. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    2. Eilat, Harel & Golany, Boaz & Shtub, Avraham, 2006. "Constructing and evaluating balanced portfolios of R&D projects with interactions: A DEA based methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(3), pages 1018-1039, August.
    3. García-Valderrama, Teresa & Mulero-Mendigorri, Eva & Revuelta-Bordoy, Daniel, 2009. "Relating the perspectives of the balanced scorecard for R&D by means of DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(3), pages 1177-1189, August.
    4. Eilat, Harel & Golany, Boaz & Shtub, Avraham, 2008. "R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 895-912, October.
    5. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    6. Fatemeh Zahedi, 1986. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---A Survey of the Method and its Applications," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 96-108, August.
    7. Yasheng Chen & Johnny Jermias & Tota Panggabean, 2016. "The Role of Visual Attention in the Managerial Judgment of Balanced‐Scorecard Performance Evaluation: Insights from Using an Eye‐Tracking Device," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 113-146, March.
    8. Saaty, Thomas L. & Takizawa, Masahiro, 1986. "Dependence and independence: From linear hierarchies to nonlinear networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 229-237, August.
    9. Liu, Fuh-Hwa Franklin & Hai, Hui Lin, 2005. "The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting supplier," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 308-317, September.
    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. Amado, Carla A.F. & Santos, Sérgio P. & Marques, Pedro M., 2012. "Integrating the Data Envelopment Analysis and the Balanced Scorecard approaches for enhanced performance assessment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 390-403.
    2. Youchao Tan & Yang Zhang & Roohollah Khodaverdi, 2017. "Service performance evaluation using data envelopment analysis and balance scorecard approach: an application to automotive industry," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 248(1), pages 449-470, January.
    3. Zervopoulos, Panagiotis D. & Brisimi, Theodora S. & Emrouznejad, Ali & Cheng, Gang, 2016. "Performance measurement with multiple interrelated variables and threshold target levels: Evidence from retail firms in the US," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 262-272.
    4. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2019. "An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Rafael Lizarralde & Jaione Ganzarain & Mikel Zubizarreta, 2020. "Assessment and Selection of Technologies for the Sustainable Development of an R&D Center," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, December.
    6. Dyckhoff, Harald & Souren, Rainer, 2022. "Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis and production theory for performance evaluation: Framework and review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 795-816.
    7. Bošković, Aleksandra & Krstić, Ana, 2018. "Combined Use of BSC and DEA Methods for Measuring Organizational Efficiency," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2018), Split, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Split, Croatia, 6-8 September 2018, pages 82-88, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    8. Basso, Antonella & Casarin, Francesco & Funari, Stefania, 2018. "How well is the museum performing? A joint use of DEA and BSC to measure the performance of museums," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 67-84.
    9. Madjid Tavana & Kaveh Khalili-Damghani & Amir-Reza Abtahi, 2013. "A fuzzy multidimensional multiple-choice knapsack model for project portfolio selection using an evolutionary algorithm," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 206(1), pages 449-483, July.
    10. García-Valderrama, Teresa & Mulero-Mendigorri, Eva & Revuelta-Bordoy, Daniel, 2009. "Relating the perspectives of the balanced scorecard for R&D by means of DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(3), pages 1177-1189, August.
    11. Ulucan, AydIn & BarIs AtIcI, KazIm, 2010. "Efficiency evaluations with context-dependent and measure-specific data envelopment approaches: An application in a World Bank supported project," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 68-83, February.
    12. Jahangoshai Rezaee, Mustafa & Jozmaleki, Mehrdad & Valipour, Mahsa, 2018. "Integrating dynamic fuzzy C-means, data envelopment analysis and artificial neural network to online prediction performance of companies in stock exchange," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 489(C), pages 78-93.
    13. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    14. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    15. Viera Roháčová, 2015. "A DEA based approach for optimization of urban public transport system," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(1), pages 215-233, March.
    16. Nomita Pachar & Jyoti Dhingra Darbari & Kannan Govindan & P. C. Jha, 2022. "Sustainable performance measurement of Indian retail chain using two-stage network DEA," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(2), pages 1477-1515, August.
    17. Jalao, Eugene Rex & Wu, Teresa & Shunk, Dan, 2014. "An intelligent decomposition of pairwise comparison matrices for large-scale decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 270-280.
    18. Amar Oukil & Srikrishna Madhumohan Govindaluri, 2020. "A hybrid multi‐attribute decision‐making procedure for ranking project proposals: A historical data perspective," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 461-472, April.
    19. Ahti Salo & Antti Punkka, 2011. "Ranking Intervals and Dominance Relations for Ratio-Based Efficiency Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 200-214, January.
    20. Saaty, Thomas L. & Shang, Jennifer S., 2011. "An innovative orders-of-magnitude approach to AHP-based mutli-criteria decision making: Prioritizing divergent intangible humane acts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(3), pages 703-715, November.

    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:spr:opsear:v:57:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s12597-020-00466-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.