Cargando…
Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method
A collaborative Ph.D. project, carried out by a doctoral candidate, is a type of collaboration between university and industry. Due to the importance of such projects, researchers have considered different ways to evaluate the success, with a focus on the outputs of these projects. However, what has...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5124053/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27942084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2121-0 |
_version_ | 1782469797732155392 |
---|---|
author | Salimi, Negin Rezaei, Jafar |
author_facet | Salimi, Negin Rezaei, Jafar |
author_sort | Salimi, Negin |
collection | PubMed |
description | A collaborative Ph.D. project, carried out by a doctoral candidate, is a type of collaboration between university and industry. Due to the importance of such projects, researchers have considered different ways to evaluate the success, with a focus on the outputs of these projects. However, what has been neglected is the other side of the coin—the inputs. The main aim of this study is to incorporate both the inputs and outputs of these projects into a more meaningful measure called efficiency. A ratio of the weighted sum of outputs over the weighted sum of inputs identifies the efficiency of a Ph.D. project. The weights of the inputs and outputs can be identified using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method. Data on inputs and outputs are collected from 51 Ph.D. candidates who graduated from Eindhoven University of Technology. The weights are identified using a new MCDM method called Best Worst Method (BWM). Because there may be differences in the opinion of Ph.D. candidates and supervisors on weighing the inputs and outputs, data for BWM are collected from both groups. It is interesting to see that there are differences in the level of efficiency from the two perspectives, because of the weight differences. Moreover, a comparison between the efficiency scores of these projects and their success scores reveals differences that may have significant implications. A sensitivity analysis divulges the most contributing inputs and outputs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5124053 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer Netherlands |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51240532016-12-09 Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method Salimi, Negin Rezaei, Jafar Scientometrics Article A collaborative Ph.D. project, carried out by a doctoral candidate, is a type of collaboration between university and industry. Due to the importance of such projects, researchers have considered different ways to evaluate the success, with a focus on the outputs of these projects. However, what has been neglected is the other side of the coin—the inputs. The main aim of this study is to incorporate both the inputs and outputs of these projects into a more meaningful measure called efficiency. A ratio of the weighted sum of outputs over the weighted sum of inputs identifies the efficiency of a Ph.D. project. The weights of the inputs and outputs can be identified using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method. Data on inputs and outputs are collected from 51 Ph.D. candidates who graduated from Eindhoven University of Technology. The weights are identified using a new MCDM method called Best Worst Method (BWM). Because there may be differences in the opinion of Ph.D. candidates and supervisors on weighing the inputs and outputs, data for BWM are collected from both groups. It is interesting to see that there are differences in the level of efficiency from the two perspectives, because of the weight differences. Moreover, a comparison between the efficiency scores of these projects and their success scores reveals differences that may have significant implications. A sensitivity analysis divulges the most contributing inputs and outputs. Springer Netherlands 2016-09-17 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5124053/ /pubmed/27942084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2121-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Article Salimi, Negin Rezaei, Jafar Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method |
title | Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method |
title_full | Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method |
title_fullStr | Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method |
title_full_unstemmed | Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method |
title_short | Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method |
title_sort | measuring efficiency of university-industry ph.d. projects using best worst method |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5124053/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27942084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2121-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT saliminegin measuringefficiencyofuniversityindustryphdprojectsusingbestworstmethod AT rezaeijafar measuringefficiencyofuniversityindustryphdprojectsusingbestworstmethod |