Development of a decision­making method to form the indicators for a university development plan

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2019.169193

Keywords:

assessment, system, indicator, management, strategy, development, hierarchy, cognitive map, decision

Abstract

The problems of decision-making support in the course of designing a university development plan have been studied. This is important because modern tendencies in the development of higher educational institution are constantly changing and getting more complicated. Organization management under modern conditions is becoming adaptive, proactive, strategic, requiring a revision of management tools. The basis of strategic planning is indicative planning, which in turn is a form that solves the problem of imperfect information through the indicators that describe an object, a process, or a phenomenon. Effective management of the activity of a higher educational institution in the framework of planning includes the forms and the methods for creating a system of indicators that reflect the picture of the organization state.

The process of the development of a university development plan faces the problem of selecting and ranking the indicators of the development of a higher educational institution, covers both tangible and intangible sides and is a multi-criterion problem of decision making. To solve this problem, it is necessary to select a method for decision making support to form the system of indicative indicators. Evaluation of indicative indicators are carried out through the construction of a cognitive map, a priori ranking and the hierarchy analysis method, involving experts from the field of higher education management. The results obtained are compared taking into account the strengths and weaknesses of the selected methods. The decision made on the choice of the method for the formation of indicators implies the joint use of the hierarchy analysis method and the construction of a cognitive map. During the hybrid application of the methods, the mutual influence of the indicators and the compliance of the indicators with directions of the university development should be taken into account. It is not worthwhile applying a priori ranking in order to form an indicator because there are no data on the joint influence of several studied indicators on each other.

The results of the study are aimed at simplifying the decision-making process in planning: consideration of bottlenecks when designing a development plan, improvement of operation and learning quality, effective use of tangible and intangible resources.

Author Biographies

Valentina Kulikova, M. Kozybayev North Kazakhstan State University Pushkin str., 86, Petropavlovsk, Kazakhstan, 150000

PhD, Associate Professor

Department of Information and Communication Technologies

Kainizhamal Iklassova, M. Kozybayev North Kazakhstan State University Pushkin str., 86, Petropavlovsk, Kazakhstan, 150000

Doctoral student

Department of Information and Communication Technologies

Albina Kazanbayeva, M. Kozybayev North Kazakhstan State University Pushkin str., 86, Petropavlovsk, Kazakhstan, 150000

Doctoral student

Department of Information and Communication Technologies

References

  1. Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (2010). Sbalansirovannaya sistema pokazateley. Ot strategii k deystviyu. Moscow: Olimp-Biznes, 320.
  2. Strategicheskiy plan razvitiya. Severo-Kazahstanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. M. Kozybaeva na 2016–2019 gody (2016). Petropavlovsk, 65. Available at: http://www.nkzu.kz/files/documents/stratplan_2016-2019.pdf
  3. Zakon Respubliki Kazahstan «Ob obrazovanii». Available at: http://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=30118747
  4. Gosudarstvennaya programma razvitiya obrazovaniya Respubliki Kazahstan na 2011–2020 gody. Available at: http://ru.government.kz/ru/programmy/2254-gosudarstvennaya-programma-razvitiya-obrazovaniya-respubliki-kazakhstan-na-2011-2020-gody.html
  5. Astafurova, I. S., Antonenkova, S. Yu. (2014). Otsenka metodik formirovaniya sistemy pokazateley deyatel'nosti organizatsiy. Journal of Economy and entrepreneurship, 12, 850–854.
  6. Metodologicheskie rekomendatsii po provedeniyu analiza finansovo-hozyaystvennoy deyatel'nosti organizatsiy. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/420357097
  7. Ionova, A. F., Selezneva, N. N. (2006). Finansoviy analiz. Moscow: Prospekt, 623.
  8. Pis'marov, A. F. (2006). Kak otsenit' effektivnost' raboty. General'niy direktor, 2.
  9. Razrabotka i vnedrenie sbalansirovannoy sistemy pokazateley. Available at: https://www.mag-consulting.ru/asp/maps
  10. Hladchenko, M. (2015). Balanced Scorecard – a strategic management system of the higher education institution. International Journal of Educational Management, 29 (2), 167–176. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem-11-2013-0164
  11. Golovko, N. V., Zinevich, O. V., Ruzankina, E. A. (2018). University's third mission and stakeholder governance for regional development. Comparative Politics Russia, 9 (1), 5–17. doi: https://doi.org/10.24411/2221-3279-2018-00001
  12. Ponomarenko, T., Tohochynskyi, O., Kaminska, T., Kadol, L., Okhrimenko, I. (2018). Strategic planning in universities: a case of Ukraine. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 16 (4), 365–374. doi: https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.16(4).2018.30
  13. Mazelis, L., Lavrenyuk, K. (2017). Devising a fuzzy model for compiling a plan of activities aimed at developing human capital in university. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 4 (3 (88)), 35–44. doi: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2017.103979
  14. Edmunds, L. D., Gluderer, S., Ovseiko, P. V., Kamerling, R., Ton, J., Vis, L. et. al. (2019). New indicators and indexes for benchmarking university–industry–government innovation in medical and life science clusters: results from the European FP7 Regions of Knowledge HealthTIES project. Health Research Policy and Systems, 17 (1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0414-5
  15. Al-Zoubi, M. T. (2012). Generating benchmarking indicators for employee job satisfaction. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23 (1), 27–44. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2011.637780
  16. Alonso, K. R., Morales, G. B. C., Lopez, C. J. G. (2015). Indicators for the strategic control at cienfuegos university. Revista Universidad Y Sociedad, 7 (3), 56–62.
  17. Saule, K., Indira, U., Aleksander, B., Gulnaz, Z., Zhanl, M., Madina, I., Györök, G. (2018). Development of the information and analytical system in the control of management of university scientific and educational activities. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 15 (4), 27–44.
  18. Pupysheva, T. N. (2014). Analiz strategicheskogo planirovaniya deyatel'nosti kazahstanskih vuzov. Nauchnoe soobschestvo studentov XXI stoletiya. Ekonomicheskie nauki, 2 (17), 76–85. Available at: http://sibac.info/archive/economy/2(17).pdf
  19. Silov, V. B. (1995). Prinyatie strategicheskih resheniy v nechetkoy obstanovke. Moscow: INPRO-RЕS, 22.
  20. Kulikov, V. P., Iklassova, K. Е. (2019). Cognitive model analysis of the development strategy of higher educational institution. Vestnik PGU, 1, 196–207.
  21. Belov, P. G. (2019). Upravlenie riskami, sistemniy analiz i modelirovanie. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Yurayt, 272.
  22. Taha, H. (2005). Vvedenie v issledovanie operatsiy. Moscow: Izdatel'skiy dom "Vil'yame", 912.
  23. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1 (1), 83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1504/ijssci.2008.017590
  24. Porter, M. Е. (2005). Konkurentnaya strategiya: Metodika analiza otrasley i konkurentov. Moscow: Al'pina Biznes Buks, 454.

Downloads

Published

2019-05-30

How to Cite

Kulikova, V., Iklassova, K., & Kazanbayeva, A. (2019). Development of a decision­making method to form the indicators for a university development plan. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3(3 (99), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2019.169193

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 3 (99) (2019): Control processes

Section

Control processes

License

Copyright (c) 2019 Valentina Kulikova, Kainizhamal Iklassova, Albina Kazanbayeva

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The consolidation and conditions for the transfer of copyright (identification of authorship) is carried out in the License Agreement. In particular, the authors reserve the right to the authorship of their manuscript and transfer the first publication of this work to the journal under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY license. At the same time, they have the right to conclude on their own additional agreements concerning the non-exclusive distribution of the work in the form in which it was published by this journal, but provided that the link to the first publication of the article in this journal is preserved.

A license agreement is a document in which the author warrants that he/she owns all copyright for the work (manuscript, article, etc.).
The authors, signing the License Agreement with TECHNOLOGY CENTER PC, have all rights to the further use of their work, provided that they link to our edition in which the work was published.
According to the terms of the License Agreement, the Publisher TECHNOLOGY CENTER PC does not take away your copyrights and receives permission from the authors to use and dissemination of the publication through the world's scientific resources (own electronic resources, scientometric databases, repositories, libraries, etc.).
In the absence of a signed License Agreement or in the absence of this agreement of identifiers allowing to identify the identity of the author, the editors have no right to work with the manuscript.
It is important to remember that there is another type of agreement between authors and publishers – when copyright is transferred from the authors to the publisher. In this case, the authors lose ownership of their work and may not use it in any way.