Identifying and weighting of dimensions and indicators of individual job performance using fuzzy Delphi and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process techniques

IF 2.4 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

International Journal of Workplace Health Management Pub Date : 2021-12-27 DOI:10.1108/ijwhm-04-2020-0065

Milad Abbasi, M. Monazzam, H. Arabalibeik, M. Shamsipour

{"title":"Identifying and weighting of dimensions and indicators of individual job performance using fuzzy Delphi and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process techniques","authors":"Milad Abbasi, M. Monazzam, H. Arabalibeik, M. Shamsipour","doi":"10.1108/ijwhm-04-2020-0065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of the study was to identify and weight the dimensions and indicators of individual job performance (IJP).Design/methodology/approachTo identify dimensions and their measuring indicators, a literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase™, ProQest, Scopus®, Web of Science™ and Google Scholar. Based on the results of the literature review and consensus among the research team, dimensions and measuring indicators were identified and an IJP framework was constructed. For weighting dimensions and indicators, fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) and fuzzy Delphi technique (FDT) were conducted, respectively.FindingsBased on the results, the conceptual framework showed that IJP consisted of four dimensions as follows: task performance (TP), contextual performance (CP), counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) and adaptive performance (AP). The results of FAHP showed that TP (0.358) had the highest weighting in measuring IJP. The weight of CWBs, CP and AP was 0.302, 0.244 and 0.096, respectively. The results showed that 102 indicators were identified to measure the dimensions. Using the FDT, 45 indicators were accepted and 57 were rejected. Of the accepted indicators, 12 indicators belonged to TP. In addition, 11, 12 and 10 belonged to CP, CWBs and AP, respectively.Research limitations/implicationsThe results of the article can be useful in research and practice and bridge the gap between theory and practice. In the research area, the researchers can use this model to develop questionnaires for evaluating IJP in all occupations. The researchers can choose the most effective dimensions or indicators in accordance with the corresponding occupation. Moreover, the results can be used in practice (economic and commercial impact), teaching, influencing public policy and helping to establish a more complete knowledge system.Originality/valueIn order to select dimensions and their measuring indicators, the work in the study took the unique approach to employ powerful decision-making methods combined with fuzzy methods to remove any ambiguity in opinions.","PeriodicalId":45766,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Workplace Health Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Workplace Health Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijwhm-04-2020-0065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of the study was to identify and weight the dimensions and indicators of individual job performance (IJP).Design/methodology/approachTo identify dimensions and their measuring indicators, a literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase™, ProQest, Scopus®, Web of Science™ and Google Scholar. Based on the results of the literature review and consensus among the research team, dimensions and measuring indicators were identified and an IJP framework was constructed. For weighting dimensions and indicators, fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) and fuzzy Delphi technique (FDT) were conducted, respectively.FindingsBased on the results, the conceptual framework showed that IJP consisted of four dimensions as follows: task performance (TP), contextual performance (CP), counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) and adaptive performance (AP). The results of FAHP showed that TP (0.358) had the highest weighting in measuring IJP. The weight of CWBs, CP and AP was 0.302, 0.244 and 0.096, respectively. The results showed that 102 indicators were identified to measure the dimensions. Using the FDT, 45 indicators were accepted and 57 were rejected. Of the accepted indicators, 12 indicators belonged to TP. In addition, 11, 12 and 10 belonged to CP, CWBs and AP, respectively.Research limitations/implicationsThe results of the article can be useful in research and practice and bridge the gap between theory and practice. In the research area, the researchers can use this model to develop questionnaires for evaluating IJP in all occupations. The researchers can choose the most effective dimensions or indicators in accordance with the corresponding occupation. Moreover, the results can be used in practice (economic and commercial impact), teaching, influencing public policy and helping to establish a more complete knowledge system.Originality/valueIn order to select dimensions and their measuring indicators, the work in the study took the unique approach to employ powerful decision-making methods combined with fuzzy methods to remove any ambiguity in opinions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

运用模糊德尔菲和模糊层次分析法对个体工作绩效的维度和指标进行识别和加权

目的本研究的目的是确定和衡量个人工作表现（IJP）的维度和指标。设计/方法/方法为了确定维度及其测量指标，在PubMed、Embase™, ProQest、Scopus®、Web of Science™ 和谷歌学者。基于文献综述的结果和研究团队之间的共识，确定了维度和测量指标，并构建了IJP框架。对于权重维度和指标，分别采用模糊层次分析法（FAHP）和模糊德尔菲法（FDT）。研究结果表明，IJP由四个维度组成：任务绩效（TP）、情境绩效（CP）、反作用工作行为（CWB）和适应绩效（AP）。FAHP的结果表明，TP（0.358）在测量IJP中具有最高的权重。CWBs、CP和AP的重量分别为0.302、0.244和0.096。结果表明，确定了102个指标来衡量维度。使用FDT，接受了45项指标，拒绝了57项指标。在接受的指标中，有12个指标属于TP。此外，11、12和10分别属于CP、CWB和AP。研究局限性/含义本文的结果可用于研究和实践，并弥合理论与实践之间的差距。在研究领域，研究人员可以使用该模型开发问卷，用于评估所有职业的IJP。研究人员可以根据相应的职业选择最有效的维度或指标。此外，研究结果可用于实践（经济和商业影响）、教学、影响公共政策以及帮助建立更完整的知识体系。独创性/价值为了选择维度及其衡量指标，研究中的工作采取了独特的方法，采用了强有力的决策方法和模糊方法相结合，以消除意见中的任何歧义。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Journal of Workplace Health Management PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

22.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Coverage includes, but is not restricted to: ■Best practice examples of successful workplace health solutions ■Promoting compliance with workplace health legislation ■Primary care and primary prevention ■Promoting health in the workplace ■The business case for workplace health promotion ■Workplace health issues and concerns, such as mental health, disability management, violence and the workplace, stress, workplace hazards, risk factor modification and work-life balance ■Workplace Culture ■Workplace policies supporting healthy workplace ■Inducing organizational change ■Occupational health & safety issues ■Educating the employer and employee ■Promoting health outside of the workplace