科研管理系统中科研人员满意度模型的构建——以某军医大学为例

Q3 Medicine
M. Mohammadian, M. Meskarpour-Amiri, M. Bahadori, Mansour Babaei
{"title":"科研管理系统中科研人员满意度模型的构建——以某军医大学为例","authors":"M. Mohammadian, M. Meskarpour-Amiri, M. Bahadori, Mansour Babaei","doi":"10.30491/JMM.22.7.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aim: Investigating the dimensions and components of research management satisfaction can identify appropriate executive solutions for the qualitative and quantitative enhancement of research projects. The purpose of the present study was to provide an appropriate theoretical and practical framework for evaluating satisfaction with research management and its application for evaluating researchers' satisfaction in a selected military medical university. Methods: The present study was an applied study in terms of purpose and was a mixed qualitative-quantitative study in terms of methodology. In the first step, the main dimensions and components of researchers' satisfaction with research management extracted using literature review and expert opinion survey. In the second step, a structured questionnaire designed and standardized to measure the satisfaction of researchers in each of these dimensions. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to assess the content validity of the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha used to assess questionnaire reliability. Finally, the questionnaire distributed randomly among 150 researchers and faculty members of a military medical university. The relationship between satisfaction with demographic and occupational characteristics of the respondents evaluated by ANOVA at SPSS-16 software. Results: Six dimensions and 15 components were identified to measure satisfaction with the research management system. The main dimensions of measuring satisfaction with research management included research leadership, capacity building, creating hope, organizational communication, research organization, and resource allocation. The highest satisfaction was related to creating hope (2.71±0.82) and the least satisfaction was related to resource allocation (1.79±0.31). There was no statistically significant relationship between demographic and occupational variables of respondents and satisfaction with research management (P>0.05). Conclusion: Given that the least satisfaction of the researchers were in two dimensions of resource allocation and capacity building, it is recommended that research managers pay more attention to equitable distribution of resources in addition to creating new resources and developing financial and non-financial research capacities simultaneously.","PeriodicalId":16394,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Military Medicine","volume":"22 1","pages":"708-718"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing the Model of Researchers Satisfaction with Research Management System: A Case Study in a Military Medical University\",\"authors\":\"M. Mohammadian, M. Meskarpour-Amiri, M. Bahadori, Mansour Babaei\",\"doi\":\"10.30491/JMM.22.7.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background and Aim: Investigating the dimensions and components of research management satisfaction can identify appropriate executive solutions for the qualitative and quantitative enhancement of research projects. The purpose of the present study was to provide an appropriate theoretical and practical framework for evaluating satisfaction with research management and its application for evaluating researchers' satisfaction in a selected military medical university. Methods: The present study was an applied study in terms of purpose and was a mixed qualitative-quantitative study in terms of methodology. In the first step, the main dimensions and components of researchers' satisfaction with research management extracted using literature review and expert opinion survey. In the second step, a structured questionnaire designed and standardized to measure the satisfaction of researchers in each of these dimensions. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to assess the content validity of the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha used to assess questionnaire reliability. Finally, the questionnaire distributed randomly among 150 researchers and faculty members of a military medical university. The relationship between satisfaction with demographic and occupational characteristics of the respondents evaluated by ANOVA at SPSS-16 software. Results: Six dimensions and 15 components were identified to measure satisfaction with the research management system. The main dimensions of measuring satisfaction with research management included research leadership, capacity building, creating hope, organizational communication, research organization, and resource allocation. The highest satisfaction was related to creating hope (2.71±0.82) and the least satisfaction was related to resource allocation (1.79±0.31). There was no statistically significant relationship between demographic and occupational variables of respondents and satisfaction with research management (P>0.05). Conclusion: Given that the least satisfaction of the researchers were in two dimensions of resource allocation and capacity building, it is recommended that research managers pay more attention to equitable distribution of resources in addition to creating new resources and developing financial and non-financial research capacities simultaneously.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16394,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Military Medicine\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"708-718\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Military Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30491/JMM.22.7.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Military Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30491/JMM.22.7.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:调查研究管理满意度的维度和组成部分,可以为研究项目的定性和定量改进确定合适的执行解决方案。本研究的目的是为评估研究管理满意度提供一个合适的理论和实践框架,并将其应用于评估某所军医大学的研究人员满意度。方法:本研究在目的上是一项应用研究,在方法上是一个定性-定量的混合研究。第一步,通过文献综述和专家意见调查,提取研究人员对研究管理满意度的主要维度和组成部分。在第二步中,设计并标准化了一份结构化问卷,以衡量研究人员在每个维度上的满意度。采用定性和定量方法对问卷内容的有效性进行评估。Cronbachα用于评估问卷的可靠性。最后,在某军医大学的150名研究人员和教职工中随机发放了问卷。在SPSS-16软件中通过方差分析评估受访者对人口统计学和职业特征的满意度之间的关系。结果:确定了六个维度和15个组成部分来衡量对研究管理系统的满意度。衡量研究管理满意度的主要维度包括研究领导力、能力建设、创造希望、组织沟通、研究组织和资源分配。最高满意度与创造希望有关(2.71±0.82),最低满意度与资源配置有关(1.79±0.31)。受访者的人口学和职业变量与研究管理满意度之间没有统计学意义(P>0.05)资源分配和能力建设,建议研究管理人员除了创造新的资源和同时发展金融和非金融研究能力外,还应更多地注意资源的公平分配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Developing the Model of Researchers Satisfaction with Research Management System: A Case Study in a Military Medical University
Background and Aim: Investigating the dimensions and components of research management satisfaction can identify appropriate executive solutions for the qualitative and quantitative enhancement of research projects. The purpose of the present study was to provide an appropriate theoretical and practical framework for evaluating satisfaction with research management and its application for evaluating researchers' satisfaction in a selected military medical university. Methods: The present study was an applied study in terms of purpose and was a mixed qualitative-quantitative study in terms of methodology. In the first step, the main dimensions and components of researchers' satisfaction with research management extracted using literature review and expert opinion survey. In the second step, a structured questionnaire designed and standardized to measure the satisfaction of researchers in each of these dimensions. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to assess the content validity of the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha used to assess questionnaire reliability. Finally, the questionnaire distributed randomly among 150 researchers and faculty members of a military medical university. The relationship between satisfaction with demographic and occupational characteristics of the respondents evaluated by ANOVA at SPSS-16 software. Results: Six dimensions and 15 components were identified to measure satisfaction with the research management system. The main dimensions of measuring satisfaction with research management included research leadership, capacity building, creating hope, organizational communication, research organization, and resource allocation. The highest satisfaction was related to creating hope (2.71±0.82) and the least satisfaction was related to resource allocation (1.79±0.31). There was no statistically significant relationship between demographic and occupational variables of respondents and satisfaction with research management (P>0.05). Conclusion: Given that the least satisfaction of the researchers were in two dimensions of resource allocation and capacity building, it is recommended that research managers pay more attention to equitable distribution of resources in addition to creating new resources and developing financial and non-financial research capacities simultaneously.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Military Medicine
Journal of Military Medicine Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Journal of Military Medicine is a Bimonthly peer-reviewed medical journal covering research and developments in the field of health and medicine in military and crisis settings. The journal was established in 1999. It publishes original research reports, editorials, letters to the editor, and reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信