Evaluating performance of national R&D organizations using integrated DEA‐AHP technique

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate and compare the performance of national R&D organizations in India in terms of their relative efficiencies using a multiple output measurement criteria incorporating the quality of the output measures.

Design/methodology/approach

An integrated data envelopment analysis (DEA) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been used.

Findings

The relative efficiency for national R&D organizations is obtained not only based on quantity of output, but also on the basis of quality of the output and provides more comprehensive and realistic results to the decision makers in identifying the benchmark national R&D organizations and inefficient organizations.

Research limitations/implications

Owing to difficulty in approaching all the departments, the application of the model is limited to a small group of Indian national R&D organizations. This model can be extended for various departments/agencies heading various national R&D organizations in India as well as in other countries according to their requirement and suitability.

Practical implications

This model provides a more comprehensive method to the policy makers for evaluating the performance of national R&D organizations in terms of their relative efficiencies also incorporating the quality of the output measures. The results provide the indicators to the policy makers for redesigning the R&D processes in the inefficient national R&D organizations.

Originality/value

In the context of R&D, an integrated DEA‐AHP model is applied for the first time to evaluate the performance of national R&D organizations in terms of their relative efficiency obtained not only on the quantity of the output taken, but also on the quality of the output.

Citation

Jyoti, Banwet, D.K. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2008), "Evaluating performance of national R&D organizations using integrated DEA‐AHP technique", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 57 No. 5, pp. 370-388. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400810881836