Search results

1 – 10 of over 77000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 January 2013

Iris Xie and Edward Benoit

The purpose of this study is to compare the evaluation of search result lists and documents, in particular evaluation criteria, elements, association between criteria and…

Downloads
1544

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to compare the evaluation of search result lists and documents, in particular evaluation criteria, elements, association between criteria and elements, pre/post and evaluation activities, and the time spent on evaluation.

Design/methodology/approach

The study analyzed the data collected from 31 general users through prequestionnaires, think aloud protocols and logs, and post questionnaires. Types of evaluation criteria, elements, associations between criteria and elements, evaluation activities and their associated pre/post activities, and time were analyzed based on open coding.

Findings

The study identifies the similarities and differences of list and document evaluation by analyzing 21 evaluation criteria applied, 13 evaluation elements examined, pre/post and evaluation activities performed and time spent. In addition, the authors also explored the time spent in evaluating lists and documents for different types of tasks.

Research limitations/implications

This study helps researchers understand the nature of list and document evaluation. Additionally, this study connects elements that participants examined to criteria they applied, and further reveals problems associated with the lack of integration between list and document evaluation. The findings of this study suggest more elements, especially at list level, be available to support users applying their evaluation criteria. Integration of list and document evaluation and integration of pre, evaluation and post evaluation activities for the interface design is the absolute solution for effective evaluation.

Originality/value

This study fills a gap in current research in relation to the comparison of list and document evaluation.

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 9 March 2010

Seyhan Sipahi and Oner Esen

The purpose of this paper is to provide a multi‐criteria bidding evaluation model based on Istanbul 2010 PR selection problem to strike a balance among conflicting criteria

Downloads
1584

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide a multi‐criteria bidding evaluation model based on Istanbul 2010 PR selection problem to strike a balance among conflicting criteria and to aggregate opinions held by a group of decision makers.

Design/methodology/approach

In the study, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) methodology was used to settle the conflict properly. The evaluation criteria were transformed into a hierarchical form and their relative weights were calculated and synthesized for the final ranking of the bidders. Then a linear interpolation‐based spreadsheet model was combined with findings of the AHP to fairly select best bidders.

Findings

The paper demonstrates that the hierarchical structure of the AHP methodology can successfully resolve the conflict among evaluation criteria and measure relative importance of the criteria by taking into account the preference of the decision makers. Moreover, a linear interpolation methodology can evaluate quoted bid prices fairly and can help to make the best decision.

Originality/value

In all areas of business management, there is a great need for fair bid evaluation systems. The method presented in the paper will help future studies in designing more intriguing systems and resolving conflicts in the area of bid evaluation.

Details

Management Decision, vol. 48 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0025-1747

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 28 January 2014

Chin-Feng Lai, Po-Sheng Chiu, Yueh-Min Huang, Tzung-Shi Chen and Tien-Chi Huang

The aim of this paper is to improve the service quality of digital libraries (DLs) through an evaluation model for DLs' user interfaces. This evaluation model can provide…

Downloads
2330

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this paper is to improve the service quality of digital libraries (DLs) through an evaluation model for DLs' user interfaces. This evaluation model can provide a useful reference for existing DLs or relevant research.

Design/methodology/approach

Relevant literature was synthesized, an evaluation framework was established, and the Fuzzy AHP was employed to investigate the evaluation model for DLs' user interfaces, obtain the relative weights for the importance of the evaluation criteria, and establish the priority ranking for the criteria of DLs' user interfaces.

Findings

The top five criteria are ease of use, searching, language, presentation, and design, respectively. For users, an interface should be intuitive. Good interface presentation and design are critical when users evaluate a digital library.

Practical implications

All of the students, teachers and experts considered that the presentation and design of DL user interfaces were what users had had contact with in the very beginning, and they were critical influential factors in DL user interfaces. Furthermore, ease-of-use and searching were fundamental interface functions, as well as important evaluation criteria. Interfaces should also provide interactive functions to improve interaction, while tailor-made services should be taken into account to establish an excellent interface in order to meet each user's need.

Originality/value

The evaluation model for DLs' user interfaces employed in this study will help developers of DL user interfaces discover the criteria that they should aim for as a reference, perform comprehensive criteria evaluation according to their actual needs, and employ top criteria for evaluation.

Details

The Electronic Library, vol. 32 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0264-0473

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 31 May 2013

Chiahsu Lin

The purpose of this research is to determinate the criteria weight in a fashion design scheme evaluation system.

Downloads
1032

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this research is to determinate the criteria weight in a fashion design scheme evaluation system.

Design/methodology/approach

The first stage is to use the fuzzy Delphi method (FDM) by fashion design experts of academia and industries for fashion design evaluation criteria. The second stage is based on the use of a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) to find the criteria weight. Finally, an empirical example is used to illustrate the procedure of obtaining the criteria weights for the evaluation of a fashion design scheme.

Findings

The result shows that there are eight evaluation criteria to be obtained for fashion design scheme selection. The evaluation characteristic weights of theme and innovation score almost 90 percent (88.93 percent), the criteria weights of the first five, fashion forecast theme story, best‐seller modification, new idea and product position, score almost 80 percent (79.96 percent) and the criteria weights of the first two, fashion forecast and theme story, score almost 40 percent (39.93 percent) when selecting a design scheme in the fashion design process.

Originality/value

This paper proposes the vital characteristic and criteria for the selection of the fashion design scheme. In selecting fashion design scheme, this study uncovers that the marketing is less important than theme and innovation characteristics. Additionally, the results of this study, indicate the important five criteria, offered designer a set of useful indicators in preparing fashion design scheme and improving the quality of fashion design decision.

Details

International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, vol. 25 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0955-6222

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 6 June 2016

Stefan Winter and Rainer Lasch

Companies have to assess the benefit of supplier innovation before realization. The specific situation of supplier innovation differs from conventional innovation…

Downloads
1392

Abstract

Purpose

Companies have to assess the benefit of supplier innovation before realization. The specific situation of supplier innovation differs from conventional innovation evaluation because a supplier innovation refers to a subproduct for which the supplier is responsible. To date, supplier innovation evaluation has not been comprehensively discussed in the literature. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to focus on how supplier innovation should be evaluated.

Design/methodology/approach

For this purpose, a case study based on expert interviews has been conducted to identify how supplier innovation is evaluated in practice. On the basis of the empirical findings the specific situation of supplier innovation is discussed in relation to theoretical basics about the object, objective, time, reference, person, recipient, criteria, and methods of evaluation as well as the evaluation and selection process.

Findings

Results are recommendations for the special situation of supplier innovation evaluation before their realization in the purchasing company.

Research limitations/implications

Based on the recommendations, a systematic and comprehensive approach with evaluation criteria and methods should be developed. Future research should address useful evaluation criteria and methods.

Practical implications

Managers can use the recommendations to evaluate supplier innovation in practice and to establish a systematic evaluation and selection process for supplier innovation.

Originality/value

The research findings contribute to the literature about innovation management and supplier management research by providing insights into the special situation of supplier innovation evaluation; in particular, this is the first paper which provides a systematic and comprehensive discussion about supplier innovation evaluation.

Details

International Journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 36 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0144-3577

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 21 October 2019

Adekunle Oluseyi Afolabi and Pekka Toivanen

The roles recommendation systems play in health care have become crucial in achieving effective care and in meeting the needs of modern care giving. As a result, efforts…

Abstract

Purpose

The roles recommendation systems play in health care have become crucial in achieving effective care and in meeting the needs of modern care giving. As a result, efforts have been geared toward using recommendation systems in the management of chronic diseases. Effectiveness of these systems is determined by evaluation following implementation and before deployment, using certain metrics and criteria. The purpose of this study is to ascertain whether consideration of criteria during the design of a recommendation system can increase acceptance and usefulness of the recommendation system.

Design/methodology/approach

Using survey-style requirements gathering method, the specific health and technology needs of people living with chronic diseases were gathered. The result was analyzed using quantitative method. Sets of harmonized criteria and metrics were used along with requirements gathered from stakeholders to establish relationship among the criteria and the requirements. A matching matrix was used to isolate requirements for prioritization. These requirements were used in the design of a mobile app.

Findings

Matching criteria against requirements highlights three possible matches, namely, exact, inferential and zero matches. In any of these matches, no requirement was discarded. This allows priority features of the system to be isolated and accorded high priority during the design. This study highlights the possibility of increasing the acceptance rate and usefulness of a recommendation system by using metrics and criteria as a guide during the design process of recommendation systems in health care. This approach was applied in the design of a mobile app called Recommendations Sharing Community for Aged and Chronically Ill People. The result has shown that with this method, it is possible to increase acceptance rate, robustness and usefulness of the product.

Research limitations/implications

Inability to know the evaluation criteria beforehand, inability to do functional analysis of requirements, lack of well-defined requirements and often poor cooperation from people living with chronic diseases during requirements gathering for fear of stigmatization, confidentiality and privacy breaches are possible limitations to this study.

Practical implications

The result has shown that with this method, it is possible to isolate more important features of the system and use them during the design process, thereby speeding up the design and increasing acceptance rate, robustness and usefulness of the system. It also helps to see in advance the likely features of the system that will enhance its usefulness and acceptance, thereby increasing the confidence of the developers in their ability to deliver a system that will meet users’ needs. As a result, developers know beforehand where to concentrate their efforts during system development to ascertain the possibility of increasing usefulness and acceptance rate of a recommendation system. In addition, it will also save time and cost.

Originality/value

This paper demonstrates originality by highlighting and testing the possibility of using evaluation criteria and metrics during the design of a recommender system with a view to increasing acceptance and enhancing usefulness. It also shows the possibility of using the metrics and criteria in system’s development process for an exercise other than evaluation.

Details

Journal of Systems and Information Technology, vol. 21 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1328-7265

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 5 October 2018

Nasir Bedewi Siraj, Aminah Robinson Fayek and Mohamed M. G. Elbarkouky

Most decision-making problems in construction are complex and difficult to solve, as they involve multiple criteria and multiple decision makers in addition to subjective…

Abstract

Most decision-making problems in construction are complex and difficult to solve, as they involve multiple criteria and multiple decision makers in addition to subjective uncertainties, imprecisions and vagueness surrounding the decision-making process. In many instances, the decision-making process is based on linguistic terms rather than numerical values. Hence, structured fuzzy consensus-reaching processes and fuzzy aggregation methods are instrumental in multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM) problems for capturing the point of view of a group of experts. This chapter outlines different fuzzy consensus-reaching processes and fuzzy aggregation methods. It presents the background of the basic theory and formulation of these processes and methods, as well as numerical examples that illustrate their theory and formulation. Application areas of fuzzy consensus reaching and fuzzy aggregation in the construction domain are identified, and an overview of previously developed frameworks for fuzzy consensus reaching and fuzzy aggregation is provided. Finally, areas for future work are presented that highlight emerging trends and the imminent needs of fuzzy consensus reaching and fuzzy aggregation in the construction domain.

Details

Fuzzy Hybrid Computing in Construction Engineering and Management
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78743-868-2

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 28 September 2020

Mohd Razali Ismail, Ming Sun and Graeme Bowles

This paper presents results of an empirical investigation involving private construction clients in Malaysia, which seeks to establish appropriate tender evaluation

Abstract

Purpose

This paper presents results of an empirical investigation involving private construction clients in Malaysia, which seeks to establish appropriate tender evaluation criteria and weightings for a risk-oriented tender evaluation system.

Design/methodology/approach

At the initial stage of this study, a list of significant risks is identified and gathered through literature review. These risks are then mapped onto tender evaluation criteria. Following this, the identified risks and their mappings are validated through a questionnaire survey to determine appropriate criteria for tender evaluation. Weightings for the selected evaluation criteria are established through an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) group decision-making (GDM) method.

Findings

In practice, different lists of criteria, covering tender's technical capability and financial performance, are often used by different client organisations. However, there is a paucity of research behind the selection of these criteria and the weighting being attributed to different criteria.

Originality/value

This study provides an important and a valuable insight into the actual criteria used during tender evaluation practice based on an analysis of documentary evidence. Both current practice and existing tender evaluation studies failed to address the risk element adequately. There is a lack of an explicit link between evaluation criteria and project risks. This study fills this knowledge gap by identifying tender evaluation criteria through reviewing criteria used in practice and examining their links to risk factors.

Details

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 28 no. 7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0969-9988

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 16 February 2015

Saleh Fahed Alkhatib, Robert Darlington and Trung Thanh Nguyen

The purpose of this paper is to provide an insight to the outsourcing decision-making through investigating if the old evaluation/selection criteria and methods still fit…

Downloads
2621

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide an insight to the outsourcing decision-making through investigating if the old evaluation/selection criteria and methods still fit with current business priorities or not and, therefore, to identify the appropriate criteria and methods to develop a new selection framework. Since the economic recession of 2008, logistics outsourcing decisions have become more prominent to avoid high fixed costs and heavy investment requirements and to achieve competitive advantages.

Design/methodology/approach

This is a focused literature review prepared after analyzing 56 articles related to the logistics service provider (LSP) evaluation and selection methods and criteria during 2008-2013. The academic articles are analyzed based on research focus/area, evaluation and selection methodology/methods and evaluation and selection criteria. Then reviewed result is compared with previous literature studies for the periods (1991-2008) to identify any possible shifts.

Findings

The review reveals that: several problems in current LSPs literature have been identified; the reviewed papers can be categorized into seven groups, the usage and importance of evaluation and selection criteria fluctuate during different periods; 12 crucial criteria have been identified, increasing the importance of specific selection methods and the integrated models and fuzzy logic in logistics literature. Then, a comprehensive LSPs’ evaluation and selection framework has been developed.

Originality/value

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first focused logistics outsourcing study that reviews the 2008-2013 period in detail, comparing results with previous literature studies, identifies current LSPs literature problems/gaps, new trends and shifts in the way that LSPs are evaluated and selected, identifies crucial selection criteria and proposes a new holistic LSPs evaluation and selection framework. In addition, it identifies important issues for future research.

Details

Strategic Outsourcing: An International Journal, vol. 8 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1753-8297

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 June 1990

Maling Ebrahimpour and Paul M. Mangiameli

Important evaluation criteria as they are perceived by quality managers in American and US‐based Japanese firms are examined. For this study, three different groups of…

Abstract

Important evaluation criteria as they are perceived by quality managers in American and US‐based Japanese firms are examined. For this study, three different groups of companies contained within four industries were considered. They included American firms using a traditional approach to manufacturing management, Japanese firms operating in the United States, and American firms attempting a Japanese approach to manufacturing management. This study identified price, on‐time delivery, and the supplier′s product quality as the three major criteria for evaluating vendors. The attitudes of quality managers concerning the importance of these variables were counter to the impressions portrayed in the academic and managerial press. Also differing from the literature was how much the managers in these different types of firms linked the evaluation criteria and overall organisational performance.

Details

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, vol. 7 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0265-671X

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 77000