طراحی و تدوین الگوی ساختاری برای شاخص‌های اندازه‌گیری عملکرد در آرشیوهای ملی جهان؛ کاربرد روش تحلیل موضوعی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری مدیریت (تحقیق در عملیات) دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

2 دکتری تاریخ ایران، عضوهیئت علمی سازمان اسناد و کتابخانۀ ملی ایران

3 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشکده مدیریت دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

4 دانشجوی دکتری زبان انگلیسی، پژوهشگر پژوهشکدۀ اسناد، سازمان اسناد و کتابخانۀ ملی ایران

10.30484/ganj.2021.2763

چکیده

هدف:به‌دلیل نبود نمونه‌ای علمی و یا استانداردی مشخص برای سیستم اندازه‌گیری عملکرد در آرشیوهای ملّی جهان، الگوی جامع و قابل‌ِاستنادی برای اقدام کاربردی دراین‌باره وجود نداشته‌است. پژوهش حاضر با احصای شاخص‌های اندازه‌گیری عملکرد در 12 آرشیو ملّی از اقصی نقاط جهان و عرضۀ الگویی ساختاری برای فهم اهمیت نسبی در راستای طراحی سیستم اندازه‌گیری عملکرد، اولین قدم را برای پوشش این شکاف نظری-عملی برداشته‌است
روش٫ رویکرد پژوهش:در فاز اول این مطالعه کهحدود یک سال به‌طول انجامید، اسناد راهبردی، اسناد سیستم مدیریت عملکرد و یا شاخص‌های اندازه‌گیری عملکردِ 12 آرشیو ملّی گردآوری شد. در فاز دوم با بهره‌گیری از روش تحلیل موضوعیدر نرم‌افزار NVivo10، الگویساختاریبرای شاخص‌های اندازه‌گیری عملکرد در آرشیوهای ملی جهان،طراحی و تدوینشد.
یافته‌ها و نتیجه‌گیری:تعداد 236شاخص اندازه‌گیری عملکرد معنادار در سطوح متفاوت ساختاری و محتوایی کدگذاری شد. این تعداد در مراحل بعدیِ تحلیل موضوعیدر قالب 33 تم فرعی و درنهایت6تم اصلی (شناسایی و ارزش‌یابی، تنظیم و توصیف، تعامل اسنادی-آرشیوی، حفاظت و نگهداری، شاخص‌های ستادی، و مرجعیت آرشیوی) طبقه‌بندی شد. با مرور فراوانی نسبی تم‌های اصلی مشخص شد که تم اصلی تعاملِ اسنادی–آرشیوی با 42 درصد بیشترین و تم اصلی تنظیم و توصیف با 3 درصد کمترین میزان اهمیت را در میان شاخص‌های عملکرد در آرشیوهای ملی جهان دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Designing and Developing a Structural Model of Performance Indicators for National Archives: Application and methodology for thematic Analysis

نویسندگان [English]

  • Babak Zendedel Nobari 1
  • Gholamreza Azizi 2
  • Ali Shoja 3
  • Zahra Zarghami 4
1 PhD in Management (Operations Research) University of Tehran, Tehran, I. R. Iran
2 PhD of Iranian History, Member of the faculty of the National Archives and Library of Iran, Tehran, I. R. Iran
3 PhD student in Business Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, I. R. Iran
4 PhD student in English, researcher at the Documentation Research Institute, Documents Organization and the National Library of Iran, Tehran, I. R. Iran
چکیده [English]

Purpose:Despite the emphasis of experts and general recognition of the importance of performance measurement systems and application of key performance indicators in organizations, no standard has been developed or scientific study found national archives.Here wepropose a structural model for this purpose.
Method and Research Design:In the first phase, which lasted about a year, strategic records, performance management system records and performance measurement indicators of twelve national archives were collected. In the second phase, using the thematic analysis method (context-based) in Nvivo10 software, the structural model of performance measurement indicators of these national archives was designed and developed.
Findings and Conclusion:236 significant performance measurement indicators were coded at different levels of structure and content. These codes were classified into 33 sub and 6 main themes (identification and appraisal, description and organization, records-archives interaction, preservation, staff index and archival authority).By reviewing the relative frequency of the main themes, it was found that the records-archives interaction theme with 42% had the highest and the main theme of description and organization with 3% had the lowest importance among the performance indicators in the national archives of the world.Due to the lack of a scientific sample or a specific standard for the performance measurement system, there is no aggregated and citable pattern and benchmark for practical action. So, this is the first step to cover the theoretical-practical gap by extracting performance measurement indicators of twelve national archives to understand the relative importance of designing a performance measurement system.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • National Archives
  • Thematic analysis
  • Performance measurement system
  • Performance measurement indicator
  • Key Performance Indicator (KPI)
 
کتاب
DeMarco, Tom. (1982). Controlling Software Projects: Management, Measurement and Estimation, Yourdon Press, New York.
Drucker, Peter F. (2001). The Essential Drucker. Harper Business.
Kaplan, Robert S; Norton, David P. (2001). The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Mills, Albert J; Durepos, Gabrielle; Wiebe, Elden. (Eds.). (2010). Encyclopedia of case study research (Vol. 1). California: SAGE Publications Inc.
Parmenter, David. (2015). Key performance indicators: developing, implementing, and using winning KPIs. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
Patton, Michael Quinn. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Rigby, Darrell; Bilodeau, Barbara. (2009). Management Tools and Trends. Bains and Co., US.
Trull, Timothy J; Prinstein, Mitch J. (2012). Clinical Psychology. Boston: Cengage Learning.
مقاله
Abu Eid, Emad Mohammad; Jirjees, Jassim Mohammed. (2015). “Application of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the UAE Public Libraries An Analytical Study”. QScience Proceedings, The Special Libraries Association-Arabian Gulf Chapter 21st Annual Conference 2015:2 http://dx.doi.org/10.5339/qproc.2015.gsla.2
Amaratunga, Dilanthi; Baldry, David. (2003).“A conceptual framework to measure facilities management performance”. Property Management, 21(2), pp171–189.
Attride-Stirling, Jennifer. (2001). “Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research”. Qualitative Research, 1, pp 385–405.
Badri, Masood A; Davis, Donald; Davis, Donna. (1994). “A study of measuring the critical factors of quality management”. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 12(2), pp 36–53.
Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria. (2006). “Using thematic analysis in psychology”. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp 77–101.
DeToni, Alberto Felice; Tonchia, Stefano. (2001). “Performance measurement systems-models, characteristics and measures”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(1/2), pp 46–71.
Fagan, Jody Condit. (2014). “The Suitability of Web Analytics Key Performance Indicators in the Academic Library Environment”. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(1), pp 25–34.
Flin, R; Mearns, K; O’connor, P; Bryden, R. (2000). “Measuring safety climate: identifying the common features”. Safety Science, 34(1-3), pp 177–192.
Ghalayini, Alaa.M; Noble, James.S. (1996). “The changing basis of performance measurement”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 16(8), pp 63–80.
Gosselin, Maurice. (2005). “An empirical study of performance measurement in manufacturing organizations”. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54(5/6), 419–437.
Hall, Matthew. (2008). “The effect of comprehensive performance measurement systems on role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance”. Accounting Organizations and Society, 33(2–3), pp 141–163.
Heckl, Diana; Moormann, Jürgen. (2010). “Process performance management”. In: Handbook on Business Process Management 2, pp 115–135. Springer, Berlin.
Holmes, Ann; Parsons, Fiona. (2016). “The Institutional HE Quality Perspective”. In:(Jeremy Atkinson, Editor.) Quality and the Academic Library: Reviewing, Assessing and EnhancingService Provision. London: Chandos, pp 17–26.
Ittner, Christopher D; Larcker, David F. (1998). “Are nonfinancial measures leading indicators offinancial performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction”. Journal of Accounting Research, 36, PP 1–35.
Leong, G.K; Snyder, D.L; Ward, P.T. (1990). “Research in the process and content ofmanufacturing strategy”. Omega, 18(2), PP 109–122.
Mapes, JohnN;New, Colin; Szwejczewski, Marek. (1997). “Performance trade-offs in manufacturing plants”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 17(10), PP 1020–1033.
Neely, Andy; Gregory, Mike; Platts, Ken. (2005). “Performance measurement system design: a literature review and research agenda”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(12), pp 1228–1263.
Poll, Roswitha. (2008).“The cat’s pyjamas? Performance indicators for national libraries”.Performance Measurement and Metrics, 9(2), pp 110-117.
Sadler-Smith, Eugene; Spicer, DavidP; Chaston, Ian. (2001). “Learning orientations and growth in smaller Firms”. Long Range Planning, 34(2), pp 139–158.
Star, Sequoia; Russ-Eft, Darlene; Braverman, Marc T; Levine, Roger. (2016). “Performance Measurement and Performance Indicators: A Literature Review and a Proposed Model for Practical Adoption”. Human Resource Development Review, 15(2), 151–181.
Swiatek, Cecile. (2019). “European academic libraries Key Performance Indicators (KPI): How comparison helps decision making”. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 20 (3), pp 143–158.
Velimirović, D; Velimirović, Milan; Stanković, Rade. (2011). “Role and importance of Key Performance Indicator Measurement”. Serbian Journal of Management, 6(1), PP 63–72.
White, GregoryP. (1996). “A survey and taxonomy of strategy-related performance measures for manufacturing”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 16(3), pp 42–61.
استانداردها
ISO 11620:2014:“Information and documentation — Library performance indicators”. (Retrieved from: https://www.iso.org/standard/56755.html)
ISO 21246:2019:“Information and documentation — Key indicators for museums”. (Retrieved from: https://www.iso.org/standard/70231.html)
ISO 21248:2019:“Information and documentation — Quality assessment for national libraries”. (Retrieved from: https://www.iso.org/standard/70233.html)
ISO 2789:2013: “Information and documentation — International library statistics”. (Retrieved from: https://www.iso.org/standard/60680.html)
ISO 9707:2008: “Information and documentation — Statistics on the production and distribution of books, newspapers, periodicals and electronic publications”. (Retrieved from: https://www.iso.org/standard/36314.html)
ISO/TR 28118:2009:“Information and documentation — Performance indicators for national libraries”. (Retrieved from: https://www.iso.org/standard/44512.html)
 
 
  • تاریخ دریافت: 06 اردیبهشت 1400
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 09 اردیبهشت 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 25 مرداد 1400
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار: 01 دی 1400