شناسایی ابعاد، مؤلفه‌ها و شاخص‌های بومی ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهش در دانشگاه‌های جامع (مطالعه موردی: دانشگاه‌های آزاد اسلامی شهر تهران)

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده مدیریت و زبان‌های خارجه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران شمال، تهران، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه برنامه‌ریزی درسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجایی، تهران، ایران

3 دانشیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده مدیریت و زبان‌های خارجه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران شمال، تهران، ایران

4 دانشیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد ساوه، ساوه، ایران

10.52547/MPES.14.1.13

چکیده

هدف: پژوهش کیفی حاضر با هدف شناسایی ابعاد، مؤلفه‌ها و شاخص‌های بومی ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهش در دانشگاه‌‌های جامع آزاد اسلامی شهر تهران انجام گرفته است.
مواد و روش‌ها: پژوهش حاضر از لحاظ هدف، کاربردی-توسعه‌ای و از لحاظ اجرا پدیدارشناختی و از نظر گردآوری داده‌ها روش کیفی بوده است. لذا ابتدا با بهره از ادبیات و پیشینه‌ی پژوهش، اقدام به شناسایی فاکتورهای تأثیرگذار بر ارزیابی عملکرد حوزه پژوهش دانشگاه‌ها گردید و سپس گردآوری داده‌ها از طریق مصاحبه نیمه‌ساختاریافته با خبرگان و متخصصان حوزه پژوهش و ارزیابی عملکرد، به‌ شیوۀ هدفمند از نوع گلوله برفی تا مرحله رسیدن به اشباع نظری ادامه پیدا کرده است. داده‌ها با تعداد 12 نفر خبره به اشباع نظری رسیده است و طی فرآیند تحلیل داده‌ها با استفاده از استراتژی استراوس کوربین از طریق سه مرحله کدگذاری (باز، محوری و تفسیری)، ابعاد، مؤلفه‌ها و شاخص‌های ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهش شناسایی گردیده است.
بحث و نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج بدست آمده، نشان داد که ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهش در دانشگاه‌های آزاد اسلامی وابسته به ابعاد سه گانه:    1- درون‌دادها با سه مؤلفه الف- نقش منابع انسانی (مشتمل بر 8 شاخص)، ب- نقش مدیریت و رهبری (مشتمل بر 5 شاخص)، ج- نقش زیرساخت‌ها (مشتمل بر 3 شاخص)، 2- بعد فرآیندها با پنج مؤلفه الف- برقراری سیستم انگیزش و پاداش‌دهی متناسب در حوزه فعالیت پژوهش (مشتمل بر 6 شاخص)، ب- ارتقای دانش، بینش و مهارت‌های پژوهشی (مشتمل بر 3 شاخص)، ج- اخلاق‌مداری و رعایت ارزش‌های ملی و حرفه‌ای (مشتمل بر 3 شاخص)، د- نوآوری، خلاقیت و کارافرینی (مشتمل بر 3 شاخص)، ه- استفاده از خرد جمعی، فعالیت‌های گروهی و مشارکتی (مشتمل بر 3 شاخص)، 3- بعد نتایج شامل مؤلفه‌های الف- اثربخشی پژوهش (مشتمل بر 4 شاخص)، ب- رقابت‌پذیر بودن پژوهش (مشتمل بر 3 شاخص)، ج- درآمدزایی از طریق پژوهش (مشتمل بر 3 شاخص) و د)- کمیت و کیفیت فعالیت‌ها و محصولات پژوهش (مشتمل بر 4 شاخص) بوده است. در کل ابعاد سه‌گانه ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهش شامل 12 مؤلفه و 48 شاخص بوده است. از آنجا که ارزیابی مرکز ثقل همه‌ی سیاست‌ها و راهبردهای بهبود کیفیت محسوب می‌شود، برای بهبود کیفیت یکی از مهم‌ترین اقدامات، ارزیابی است و ارزیابی نیازمند داشتن شاخص‌‌ها است تا علاوه بر تعیین کارایی و اثربخشی، توانایی تعیین نقاط قوت و ضعف سازمان را نیز داشته و راه کارهایی نیز برای رفع نقاط ضعف احتمالی موجود ارائه دهد. یافته‌های این مطالعه از طریق شناسایی ابعاد، مؤلفه‌ها و شاخص‌های ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهش در دانشگاه‌ها و با رویکردی سیستمی و با درنظرگرفتن شاخص‌های بومی، دستاوردهای نظری و کاربردی مناسبی را در اختیار سیاست‌گذاران، برنامه‌ریزان و مدیران دانشگاه‌ به‌منظور شناسایی نقاط قابل بهبود در عملکرد پژوهشی قرار داده و می‌تواند بستر لازم را جهت ارتقای کیفیت آن فراهم سازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying the native dimensions, components and indicators of research performance evaluation in university (A case study: Islamic Azad University in Tehran)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fereshteh Vosough 1
  • Gholamali Ahmadi 2
  • Narges Hassanmoradi 3
  • Amirhossein Mohammaddavoodi 4
1 Ph.D. student in educational management, Faculty of Management and foreign languages, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor of Curriculum Planning, Faculty of Humanities, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor of Educational Management, Faculty of Management and Foreign languages, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran branch, Tehran, Iran
4 Associate professor of Educational Management, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Saveh Branch, Saveh, Iran
چکیده [English]

Objectives: The present qualitative study aimed to identify the dimensions, components and indicators of research performance evaluation in Islamic Azad Comprehensive Universities of Tehran. Therefore, in the present study by literature and background of research, it was conducted to identify the factors influencing the performance evaluation of the university's research field and then by interviewing the experts and specialists of the field of research and performance evaluation and through three stages of coding (open, axial and interpretive), components and indicators of research performance have been identified.
Materials and methods: The method of this research is applied development and in terms of performance is phenomenological, and also it has a qualitative approach in terms of data collection. Data collection tools were structured interviews with experts and specialists in research and performance evaluation. The data collection on the purposeful method of snowball sampling has continued until the theoretical saturation was reached. The data or the number of 12 experts has reached theoretical saturation and the data analysis process was carried out using the Corbin's Stross strategy.
Discussion & Conclusions. The results of structured interview and its analysis in a qualitative manner through three coding stages, showed that evaluation of research performance in Islamic Azad universities affiliated to the three dimensions including: 1-Input with three components (a Component of the role of human resources (including 8 indicators), b) Management role and leadership component (including 5 indicators), C) The component of role of the infrastructure (consisting of 3 indicators), 2- Processes dimension with five components (a  the component of establishing motivation system and appropriate reward in the field of research activity (including 6 indicators), B) the component of knowledge promotion, insights and research skills (including 3 indicators), c) The component morality and observing national and professional values (including 3 indicators), D) the component of innovation, creativity and employment (including 3 indicators), E) The component of the use of collective wisdom, group and participatory activities (consisting of 3 indicators), 3- Results dimension includes a) the research effectiveness component (including 4 indicators), B) The competitive of the research component (consisting of 3 indicators), C)  Income generation component through research (including 3 indicators)  and D) Quantity and quality of activities and products of research (including 4 indicators).
In total, triple dimension of research performance evaluation included 12 components and 48 indicators. Since the evaluation of the center of gravity of all policies and strategies of quality improvement is considered to improve the quality of one of the most important measures, and the assessment requires that the index is able to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the organization in addition to determining the efficiency and effectiveness, and provide the ways to resolve existing weaknesses. Findings of this study with a systematic review and considering the local indicators, theoretical and practical approaches to the qualitatively, planners and managers of university to identify the points of improvement in research performance and can be a platform in order to prepare its quality promotion.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Performance Evaluation
  • research
  • Islamic Azad University
  • research performance
Aghjani, H.A., Kia Kojouri, D., & Yhahyatabar, F. (2014). Performance Apaisal of Islamic Azazd university branches of Mazandaran province Using data envelopment analysis, Journal of operational research and and its application, 4 (39), 111-125.
Ahmadi, V., Bakhtiari, J.,Oliaei, M. S., Zare, H.m Vaziri,A., Feizabadi, M .(2017). Research and technology performance of universities, research institutes and Technologies of science and technology parks, Deputy of research and Technology, Ministry of Science, Research and technology,Tehran, Academic Publishing Center(in persian(
Ajjawi, R., Crampton, P. E., & Rees, C. E. (2018). What really matters for successful research environments? A realist synthesis. Medical education, 52(9), 936-950.
Alam Tabriz, A. Faraji, R., & Saiedy, H. (2010). Efficiency evaluation faculties of Shahid Beheshti University using Composed Approach of DEA and Goal Programming Model, Journal of Industrial Management Studies, 19, 1-22
Amiran, H. (2004). The application of the organizational Excellence models INQA and EFQM. Tehran: Asia efficiency quality Publishing.
Andras, P. (2011). Research: metrics, quality, and management implications, Research Evaluation, Volume 20, Issue 2, 90–106, Available from: https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876265. Accessed September ,15,2018
Balal Zadeh, M. (2008). Comprehensive quality management system based on ISO 2000-9001 standard and customer orientation. National Conference on Monitoring and Evaluation of higher education. Iranian Higher Education Association, Retrieved from http://library.sbu.ac.ir
Bazeley, P. (2010). Conceptualising research performance. Studies in Higher Education, 35(8), 889-903.
Bonaccorsi, A., & Secondi, L. (2017). The determinants of research performance in European universities: a large scale multilevel analysis. Scientometrics, 112(3), 1147-1178.
Criteria for Performance Excellence. (2013-2014). the Baldrige National Quality Program at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Gaithersburg , MD.
Department of Higher Education and Training. (2016). Report on the Evaluation of the 2014 universitie’s research outputs, Available fromWebsite: http://www.dhet.gov.za Accessed August, 26,2019
Edgar, F., & Geare, A. (2013). Factors influencing university research performance. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 774-792
Ehsani Fard, A. As., Ehsani Fard, M. (2013). Presenting the strategic model of measurement, management and evaluation of the effective performance of the municipality by the combination of two models of Bscand EFQM,: 3 and 18districts of Tehran municipality. Journal of Urban Management, 31, 26-7
Farasatkhah, M., (2016). Higher Education Index. Tehran: Institute for Research and Planning of higher education.
Frenken, K., Heimeriks, G. J. & Hoekman, J. (2017). What drives university research performance? An analysis using the CWTS Leiden Ranking data. Journal of Informatics, 11(3), 859-872
Ghoorchian, N.g., & Shahrakipour, H. (2009). Evaluation of higher education assessment systems in the world in order to provide the appropriate model for higher education, Journal of Management Research, 85, 1-19
Ghomi, H. R., Rahmani, M., & Kakzad, M. (2017). Assessing the research performance of a State university using analytic hierarchy process and network data Envelopment analysis. Journal of Military Management, 3,167-141 (in Persian
Iran Scientific Research Center. (2017). Available from: http://www.nrisp.ac.ir, Accessed September .17, 2019.
Khaki,. G, R,. (2011). A research method with a dream to be a thesis. Tehran: Trackback
Khalili, F., & Rajaie, Y. (2008). Study of major barriers and problems in the Islamic Azad University of Abhar and providing appropriate solutions. Management Sciences, 6, 116-79
Kaplan, R., & Norton, D., (2010). Strategy map. Hossein Akbari, Amir Maleki, and Masoud Soltani (translators), Tehran: Ariana
Nabioo, A. (2020). The Fifth Generation University: Based on the Quintuple Helix of Carayannis and Campbell, Journal of Southern Medicine, No. 2, Page 165-194
Nameni, A. (2018). Explaining the characteristics of the University transition period from the second generation to the third generation Case study: One of Engineering Universities in the country, Journal of Management and Planning in Educational Systems, Vol. 12 (1), 47-68
Nelly, A. (2005). The evolution of performance measurement research, International Journal of Operation & Production Management, 25(12), 1267-1277
Norouzi, H., & Akraminaqsh, B. (2014). Performance evaluation with balanced BSC assessment indicators along with practical guide to preparing the Board report for the assemblies. Tehran: Remembrance of Aref.
Mahpaikar, M.R., & Yari, R. (2003). Organizational Excellence and Quality Awards of EFQM & MBNQA. Tehran: Virgo.
Momeni, M. (2013). New topics in operations research. Tehran: University of Tehran Press management
Pardakhtchi, M.H., Faraji Armaki, A., & Hassan Zadeh, S. (2011). Investigation of problems and distress of university leaders in the development of academic units and increasing the quality and research efficiency in industrial and non-industrial universities. Iran Engineering Education, 13 (50), 91-103.
Park, H., Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Longitudinal trends in networks of university– industry–government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives. Research Policy. 39(5) 640-649.
Rockart, J. (1979) Chif Executive Define Their Own Information Needs, In: HarvardBusiness Review, pp.91-92
Samari, E., Yaminidoozi Sorkhabi, M. R., Salehi, E., & Grari nejad, G. (2014).Investigating and identifying effective factors in the "academic development" process of Iranian, Educational Planning Studies,2(4),67-100
Shabankar, Kh, BaghJanti, M., & Hamidi, A. (2017). Research performance evaluation of faculty members of Bushehr University of Medical Sciences in Astnadi Google Askalar during 2009-2013. Journal of Science (Library and Information Technology), 39, 67-57
Shafiee, M., Amini, M., & Abuyi Ardakan, M. (2016). Developing a model for assessing and ranking of universities in the country using a hybrid index based on their budget performance. Journal of Strategic and macro policies,14(1-25)
Shoja, N., DarvishMotevalli, M H. (2015). Assessing the efficiency of research activities of Islamic Azad University units: A data envelopment analysis approach. Quarterly Journal of Economic Modeling, (32) 4, 141-123
Soltani, I. (1999). Performance management of the field of human resource development. . Tadbir publication, No. 92, 23-20, 14, 1-25
Strauss, A., Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of qualitative research, 17, 273-85.
Tabaei, Zi., Mahmoudian, F.(2007). Ethics in research. Ethics in Science and Technology,56-49 public level facilitators. Journal of Educational Planning Studies (4) 2, pp. 100-67
Tangen, S. (2004). Professional practice performance Measurement: from philosophy to practice. International Journal of Productivity and performance Management, 53(8,7), 26-37
Umashankar, V., Dutta, K.( 2007). Balanced scorecards in managing higher education institutions: an Indian perspective. International Journal of Educational Management, 21(1), 54- 67
Vernon, M. M., Andrew Balas, E., &. Momani, Sh. (2018). Are university rankings useful to improve research? A systematic review PLOS ONE, Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193762. Accessed November 16,2019
Yar Mohammadian, M. H., Karimi, M. (2001). Research activities in Islamic Azad Universities of Zone 4 and strategies for the development of these activities from the viewpoint of faculty members, Noor journals Database, 7, 92-69, reviewed in reviewed in: http:// www.noormags.ir
Zaker Salehi, G .(2004). Iranian University, Tehran: Kavir Publications.
Zong, F., Wang L. (2017). Evaluation of university scientific research ability based on the output of sci-tech papers: A D-AHP approach. PLoS ONE, 12(2): e0171437, Southwest University, CHINA. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171437. Accessed September 26,2019