ارائه مدل مدیریت عملکرد برای دانشگاهها و مؤسسات آموزشی عالی دولتی کشور با تأکید بر ابعاد فردی، شغلی و سازمانی | ||
| مدیریت و برنامه ریزی در نظام های آموزشی | ||
| مقاله 3، دوره 16، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 31، 1402، صفحه 59-88 اصل مقاله (1.34 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: علمی - پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48308/mpes.2023.103921 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| مریم بختیار* 1؛ اباصلت خراسانی2؛ اسماعیل جعفری3 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت آموزش عالی، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران | ||
| 2دانشیار، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران | ||
| 3استادیار،مدیریت منابع انسانی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف: این پژوهش با هدف ارائه مدل مطلوب مدیریت عملکرد برای دانشگاهها و مؤسسات آموزش عالی دولتی کشور انجام شد. مواد و روشها: روش انجام پژوهش حاضر، از نوع اکتشافی و از حیث رویکرد، یک پژوهش آمیخته (کیفی–کمی) به شمار میرود. در بخش کیفی مبتنی بر اجرای مصاحبه اکتشافی نیمهساختاریافته با خبرگان، ابعاد و مؤلفهها شناسایی و بخش کمی با بهرهگیری از پرسشنامه، نسبت به جمعآوری دادهها اقدام شده است. مشارکتکنندگان در بخش کیفی 15 خبره حوزه مدیریت دانشگاهی و اعضای هیئت علمی را شامل میگردید که با استفاده از شیوه نمونهگیری غیراحتمالی هدفمند انتخاب شدند. در بخش کمی جامعه آماری شامل مدیران و هیئت علمی دانشگاههای آموزش عالی وابسته به وزارت علوم، تحقیفات و فناوری شامل 141 دانشگاه بود که با استفاده از روش نمونهگیری خوشهای چند مرحلهای، نمونهگیری انجام و برای مشخص شدن حجم نمونه از جدول مورگان استفاده شد که 338 نفر به دست آمد. با توجه به دو بخشی بودن تحقیق (کیفی و کمی) لذا روایی و پایایی ابزارهای تحقیق نیز در دو بخش مطرح شد به گونهای که در بخش کیفی برای سنجش روایی دادههای کیفی از معیارهای قابلیت (گوبا و لینکلن، 2000) استفاده شد و از منظر اعتبار، انتقالپذیری، اطمینانپذیری و تأییدپذیری، مورد تأیید قرار گرفت. همچنین برای محاسبه پایایی در این بخش، 5 مصاحبه بهطور نمونه انتخاب و سپس هر کدام از آنها در فاصله زمانی مشخص دوباره انجام و کدگذاری شدند، سپس کدهای مشخص شده در فواصل زمانی با هم مقایسه شدند. پایایی بازآزمایی مصاحبههای انجام شده 0.86 محاسبه گردید که نشان از پایا بودن کدگذاریهاست. در بخش کمی برای سنجش روایی از روشهای روایی محتوا، آزمون روایی همگرا و روایی واگرا و برای سنجش پایایی از ضریب الفای کرونباخ استفاده گردید. همچنین روش تحلیل دادهها در بخش کیفی، استفاده از روش تحلیل تم و در بخش کمی، اطلاعات موجود در پرسشنامهها کدگذاری و با استفاده از نرمافزار آماری Spss و Smart PLS، در دو بخش توصیفی و استنباطی مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. ضمناً سطح معناداری در تمامی فرضیهها تحقیق )0.5) در نظر گرفته شده است. بحث و نتیجهگیری: یافتههای به دست آمده از تحلیل دادههای کیفی نشان داد که مدل مدیریت عملکرد دانشگاهها و مؤسسات آموزش عالی در بعد فردی دارای (3 بعد اصلی و 6 بعد فرعی) در بعد شغلی دارای (2 بعد اصلی و 5 بعد فرعی) و بعد سازمانی دارای (2 بعد اصلی و 8 بعد فرعی) میتواند ابعاد مدیریت عملکرد در دانشگاهها و مؤسسات آموزش عالی را به خوبی تببین نمایند. ضمن اینکه براساس نتایج کمی در میان 3 مضمون پایه (متغییرمستقل) مدل پژوهش، تأثیر بعد سازمانی بر عملکرد فردی دارای بیشترین واریانس به مقدار 0.729 و پس از آن بعد شغل بر فرد با واریانس 0.571 قرار دارند. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| طراحی مدل؛ مدیریت عملکرد؛ دانشگاهها و مؤسسات آموزش عالی دولتی؛ تحلیل مضمون | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Providing a Performance Management Model for Iran’s Universities and State Higher Educational Institutions with an Emphasis on the Individual, Job, and Organizational dimensions | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Maryam Bakhtiar1؛ Abasalt Khorasani2؛ Esmail Jafari3 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Student in Higher Education Management, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 3Assistant Professor, Human Resource Management, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Objectives: This study aimed to identify and present the performance management model in Iran’s universities and higher education institutions. Materials and Methods: The method of conducting the current research is descriptive and exploratory; in terms of approach, it is considered mixed research (quantitative-qualitative). In the qualitative part based on conducting semi-structured exploratory interviews with experts, dimensions and components were identified, and in the quantitative part, data was collected using a questionnaire. The participants in the qualitative part included 15 experts in academic management and faculty members who were selected using a non-probability sampling method. In the quantitative part, the statistical population included managers and faculty members of higher education universities affiliated with the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, including 141 universities, which were sampled by using the multi-stage cluster sampling method; to determine the sample size, the table Morgan was used and 338 people were obtained. Due to the two parts of the research (qualitative and quantitative), the validity and reliability of the research tools were also discussed in two parts, so in the qualitative part, capability criteria (Guba and Lincoln, 2000) were used to measure the validity of qualitative data. From the point of view of validity, transferability, reliability and verifiability, it was approved. Also, to calculate the reliability in this section, 5 interviews were selected as a sample and then each of them was re-conducted and coded at a specific time interval, then the specified codes were compared with each other at the time intervals. The test-retest reliability of the conducted interviews was calculated to be 0.86 which shows the reliability of coding. In the quantitative part, content validity methods, convergent validity, and divergent validity tests were used to measure validity; also, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to measure the reliability. The method of data analysis in the qualitative part was the theme analysis method; in the quantitative part, the information in the questionnaires was coded and analyzed using statistical software SPSS and Smart PLS, in two descriptive and inferential parts. In addition, the level of significance in all research hypotheses (0.5) has been considered. Discussion and Conclusions: The findings obtained from qualitative data analysis showed that the performance management model of universities and higher education institutions in the individual dimension has 3 main dimensions and 6 sub-dimensions; in the job dimension, it has 2 main dimensions and 5 sub-dimensions; in the organizational dimension, it has 2 main dimensions and 8 sub-dimensions. These dimensions can explain performance management dimensions in universities and higher education institutions well. Besides, based on the quantitative results, among the 3 basic themes (independent variable) of the research model, the impact of the organizational dimension on individual performance has the highest variance of 0.729, followed by the job dimension on the individual with a variance of 0.571. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Designing the Model, Performance Management, University and Public Higher Institutions, Theme Analysis | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abzari, R, Hatempour. D. (2014). The effect of electronic human resource management subsystems on talent management strategies. Health Information Managemen;10(7) (special letter of political and economic challenges in health management):13-1007. Aladdin Rose, Nasser M.(2020) Designing a performance management model with an emphasis on higher education. Armstrong M.(2006). A handbook of human resource management practice Baker K, Thomas C, Casey D, Khan S, Spears B, Nora R, et al.(2018). High-performance indirect-drive cryogenic implosions at high adiabat on the National Ignition Facility. Physical review letters. 2018;121(13):135001. BIRUNGI H, KATUMBA P. (2021).Evaluating the effectiveness of human resource information system (s)(HRIS) in improving employee performance at Stanbic Bank Uganda. Journal of Global Economics, Management and Business Research. 2021:18-36. Broucker,B.(2023). About the rise, the characteristics and future of New Public Management in Higher Education,Editor(s): Robert J Tierney, Fazal Rizvi, Kadriye Ercikan,International Encyclopedia of Education (Fourth Edition).145-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.02116-3. Caixote CB, Mothusi B, Molokwane T. (2020).Performance Management System in Mozambican Universities: A Literature Review of Theories, Origin and Evolution. International Journal of Business Administration. Cosenz F, Bianchi C, editors.(2013) Designing performance management systems in academic institutions: A dynamic performance management view. Fazl Elahi Sa, Elah S.(2012). Evaluation of Islamic Azad University and Qom University as a leading learning organization from the perspective of faculty members. Scientific Quarterly Journal of Educational Research. Golsanamlu M, Naeimi E, Khorsandi Tasko A, Seyyed Sadraddin SS. Designing a good teacher model based on the Fundamental Reform Document of Education (FRDE). Basij Strategic Studies. Hashemi Petrudi, S. H. , Ghomi,H ., Mazaheriasad,M.(2022). An Integrated Fuzzy Delphi and Best Worst Method (BWM) for performance measurement in higher education,Decision Analytics Journal,49(2772-6622). 100121, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2022.100121. Hedwiga H.(2016) Developing a model of employee’s Performance rogramme in Experience, HAAGA HELIA Universmanagement process For Tallinn hotel businesses: Bachelor’s Thesis Degree Pity of Applied sciences; Helmold M.(2022). Performance Management in Operations Management. Strategic Performance Management: Springer. Lazić Z., Ðorđević, A. Gazizulina, ,A.(2021). Improvement of quality of higher education institutions as a basis for improvement of quality of life, Sustainability 13 (8) Leišyte L.(2022).Performance management under surveillance capitalism in higher education Research Handbook on Academic Careers and Managing Academics, Edward Elgar Publishing. Nazari-Shirkouhi ,S., Mousakhani S., M. Tavakoli, M.R. Dalvand, J. Šaparauskas, J.(2020). Antuchevičiene, Importance-performance analysis based balanced scorecard for performance evaluation in higher education institutions: an integrated fuzzy approach, J. Bus. Econ. Manage. Nazari-Shirkouhi ,S., Mousakhani S., M. Tavakoli, M.R. Dalvand, J. Šaparauskas, J.(2020). Antuchevičiene, Importance-performance analysis based balanced scorecard for performance evaluation in higher education institutions: an integrated fuzzy approach, J. Bus. Econ. Manage. 21 (3) (2020) 647–678. Pechmann, P., Haase, S.(2021). How policy makers employ the term quality in higher education policymaking.Scand.J. Educ.Res.https://doiorg.ezp3.ezdata.ml/10.1080/00313831.2020.1869 Plummer R., Witkowski S., Smits A., Dale G.(2022).The issue of performance in higher education institution - community partnerships: A Canadian perspectiveJ. Higher Educ. Policy Manage. pp. 1-20 Srivastava, S. , Prakash ,G., Gauba, R.J.B.P. (2022).Research, Modelling Teachers Account- ability in the Higher Educational Institutions Using Decision-making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Approach. 10 (1) 2022, pp. 164-184. Tahar ,A., H. Sofyani, E.N. Arisanti, F.A Amalia,(2022). Maintaining higher education institution performance amid the covid-19 pandemic: The role of it governance, it capability and process agility. 10 (1) 2022, pp. 45-61. Tin,M. , Panwar A. ,Pant,,M. (2022).DEA for measuring the performance of higher education sector: A case study of myanmar, in: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Mathematics and Computing, Springer, 2022. Vinajera-Zamora A., Gaus N., Rodríguez-Martínez Y.(2022).Framework and analysis of key performance indicators in Cuban higher educationJ. Hispanic High. Educ.15381927221074505 Jayamohan, K., & AB, B. (2022). Development of a Tool for Measuring Performance of Higher Educational Institutions by Applying Six Sigma Methodology in Teaching-Learning Process. Int. J. Mech. Eng., 6(3), 3525-3531. azić, Z., Đorđević, A., & Gazizulina, A. (2021). Improvement of quality of higher education institutions as a basis for improvement of quality of life. Sustainability, 13(8), 4149. Tin, M., Panwar, A., & Pant, M. (2022). DEA for Measuring the Performance of Higher Education Sector: A Case Study of Myanmar. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Mathematics and Computing: ICMC 2021, Behmadi, Al-Raaya, V., Yunus, Razi, F., & Farshad. (2021). Development of market-oriented capabilities with an emphasis on innovation and entrepreneur-oriented; The role of knowledge management in the production companies of Mashhad city with the structural equation model approach. Quarterly Journal of Iranian Society of Management Sciences, 16(62), 29-54. Dadash Karimi, Mirspasi, & Najafbeigi. (2018). Investigating the evolution of governance theories in the higher education system and universities to improve productivity. Educational Management Innovations, 53(14), 7-26. Mohammadi, Sharifzadeh, & Fattah. (2017). Designing a performance management model with a human resource development approach in the public sector. Human Resources Education and Development, 15(4), 133-159. Vahid, Y., & Al Sadat, Z. Sh. Designing a conceptual model of organizational performance management for governmental and non-profit organizations. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 6,153 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 4,174 |
||