Search results

The purpose of this study is to analyze the integration of sustainable practices in the strategies and operations of world-class higher education institutions (HEIs) under the theoretical guidance of Max Weber's instrumental and value rationalities.

The results of the Quacquarelli-Symonds World University Ranking, Times Higher Education World University Rankings, THE Impact Rankings and GreenMetric World University Ranking rankings from 2019 to 2022 were paired, and the correlation between them was verified. Institutions with simultaneous occurrence in the four rankings in at least one of the years were also classified. A quantitative and qualitative methodology was used to explore how elite HEIs integrate sustainable practices into their operations and strategies, under the theoretical guidance of Max Weber's instrumental and value rationalities. Furthermore, multivariate regression models with supervised data mining techniques were applied, using the SMOReg algorithm on 368 instances with multiple attributes, to predict the numerical value of sustainability in the rankings. Coefficients were assigned to variables to determine their relative importance in predicting rankings.

The results of this study suggest that although many HEIs demonstrate a commitment to sustainability, this rarely translates into improvements in traditional rankings, indicating a disconnect between sustainable practices and global academic recognition.

The research has limitations, including the analysis being restricted to data from specific rankings between 2019 and 2022, which may limit generalization to future editions or rankings. The predictive models used selected data and, therefore, cannot cover the full complexity of metrics from other rankings. Furthermore, internal factors of HEIs were not considered, and the correlations identified do not imply direct causality. The limited sample and potential methodological biases, together with the heterogeneity of the rankings, restrict the generalization of the results. These limitations should be considered in future studies.

The theoretical contributions of this study include an in-depth understanding of the intersection between academic excellence and environmental and social responsibility. From a management perspective, guidance is provided on integrating sustainability into HEI strategies to enhance visibility and classification in global rankings, while maintaining academic integrity and commitment to sustainability.

This highlights the importance of reassessing academic rankings criteria to include sustainability assessments, thereby encouraging institutions to adopt practices that genuinely contribute to global sustainable development.

The originality lies in the predictive analysis between these rankings, examining the link between the level of sustainability of an HEI and its classification as a World Class University. Furthermore, it combines theories of rationality with the analysis of sustainability integration in elite HEIs, introducing new analytical perspectives that can influence future educational policies and institutional practices.

The purpose of this study is to measure the awareness of the global university ranking and its parameters among the faculty members at Dhaka University. This also identifies the challenges linked to university ranking and explores opportunities to overcome these challenges.

The target population of this study is the faculty members of Dhaka University. This study used the online survey questionnaire method, contacting approximately 2,000 faculty members individually through their email addresses. In total, 311 faculty members responded, and the response rate was 15.55%. Data were collected from September to December 2022, and the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences was used to analyze the survey data.

The findings indicate that a majority of the faculty members are acquainted with global university rankings, with Times Higher Education being the most recognized. Faculty members at Dhaka University are confident in their ability to excel in research and citation weighting scores in the ranking parameters. However, challenges such as a lack of incentives, inadequate recruitment policies, limited research funding, minimal collaboration, a scarcity of international students and faculty and limited local journal publications hinder the university’s ranking.

Due to the limited number of responses, the findings may not accurately represent the entire faculty. The findings of this study can guide Dhaka University and other universities to design policies for overall improvement of university ranking.

This is the first time an attempt has been made to measure the awareness of university ranking by collecting primary data in the context of a public university in Bangladesh.

The best workplaces have been left out from the literature of social sustainability. These companies may cause a significant impact on society given their excellent human resources practices and the employer brand reputation derived from them. This study aims to fill this gap by analysing the social sustainability for the best organisations to work for in Spain.

Using data from an annual ranking for the best workplaces in Spain during 2013–2021, it is proposed to analyse critical social sustainability indicators, comparing organisations within and outside the ranking. Therefore, the authors ask whether companies from the ranking have greater female presence in CEO positions, generate more employment, pay higher salaries and contribute more to the public sector. Methodology comprehends descriptive, exploratory and inference techniques.

Although companies within the ranking achieve a higher score on it when the CEO is female, it does not translate into a greater female CEO presence with respect to companies outside the ranking. On the other hand, best workplaces achieve higher employment rates and pay higher salaries, almost all the time. Also, these excellent companies to work for generate more contributions to the public sector.

This research covers the relation between best human resources practices and social sustainability development, because the former is a great opportunity for pursuing the innovative and long-term policies necessary for the latter. Therefore, findings are valuable for managers and policymakers.

This study explores the use and perceptions of scholarly journal ranking lists in the management field based on stakeholders’ lived experience.

The results are based on a survey of 463 active knowledge management and intellectual capital researchers.

Journal ranking lists have become an integral part of contemporary management academia: 33% and 37% of institutions and individual scholars employ journal ranking lists, respectively. The Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality List and the UK Academic Journal Guide (AJG) by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) are the most frequently used national lists, and their influence has spread far beyond the national borders. Some institutions and individuals create their own journal rankings.

Management researchers employ journal ranking lists under two conditions: mandatory and voluntary. The forced mode of use is necessary to comply with institutional pressure that restrains the choice of target outlets. At the same time, researchers willingly consult ranking lists to advance their personal career, maximize their research exposure, learn about the relative standing of unfamiliar journals, and direct their students. Scholars, academic administrators, and policymakers should realize that journal ranking lists may serve as a useful tool when used appropriately, in particular when individuals themselves decide how and for what purpose to employ them to inform their research practices.

The findings reveal a journal ranking lists paradox: management researchers are aware of the limitations of ranking lists and their deleterious impact on scientific progress; however, they generally find journal ranking lists to be useful and employ them.

Research on green certificate rankings in the MENA region primarily focuses on building scale, relying on the certified project count. This assessment approach overlooks the spatial factor, failing to capture their influence on the urban built environment, thus potentially undermining other efforts not reflected by the project count. This research aims to rank countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region based on their ongoing efforts regarding green neighbourhood certification.

This study employs a three-phase methodology to rank MENA countries' adoption of green neighbourhood certification systems: content analysis, multicriteria analysis (MCA) using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and spatial analysis.

Based on the content analysis, four major performance indicators were identified and the conventional ranking using projects count was presented. Using AHP, the MCA could rank the countries in the region according to their unique performance indicators score, clarifying the differences between conventional and AHP-based rankings. Finally, the spatial analysis phase uncovers shortcomings in the traditional ranking method, revealing inaccuracies and misrepresentations for several countries.

The study presents an innovative ranking methodology to monitor the green neighbourhood actions of countries in future development and establish a pioneering framework to evaluate the impact of green certifications within the region.

The purpose of this research is to determine the competitive advantages of higher education institutions (HEIs) and create a new methodology to rank universities according to the competitive advantages.

The research determines the competitive advantages of HEIs by analysing expert opinions through a semi-structured interview form, matches codes and themes to performance indicators using Saldana's two-cycle coding methods, evaluates content validity through Lawshe and reveals the item weights of the ranking with analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Simple additive weighting (SAW) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity (TOPSIS) methods were used for ranking universities.

Seven dimensions stand out in regard to what should be considered while ranking HEIs: research and publication, education, management, infrastructure, financial resources, human resources and social and economic contribution. Under the 7 dimensions, 69 indicators were determined.

The research provides a scientific reference point where HEIs can compare themselves with other HEIs regarding where they are in the sector, especially in terms of competitive advantages.

Although there are many different ranking methods that rank universities in the national and international literature, almost all these methods are largely based on the outputs of the university such as the number of publications, the number of patents, the number of projects, etc. A framework which ranks universities by considering different aspects of the institution, such as management, human resources and financial resources, has not been developed yet. In this respect, this research aims to fill this gap in the literature.

Multi-criteria methods represent an adequate tool for solving complex decision problems that provide real support to the decision maker in the choice process. This paper analyzes a decision problem that recurs over time using one of the newer methods as the Parsimonious AHP.

In this paper we integrated the P-AHP with: (1) the weighted average which takes into account the objectivity of the data; (2) ordered weighted average (OWA) aggregation operators that address the subjective nature of the data; (3) the Choquet integral and (4) the Sugeno integral which also considers the uncertain nature of the final ranking as it is defined on a fuzzy measure.

The present paper proves that variations in the final ranking, due to the different mathematical properties of the selected aggregators, are fundamental to select the best alternative without neglecting any characteristic of the input data. In fact, it is discussed and underlined how and why the best alternative is one that never excels but has very good positions with respect to all aggregation operator rankings.

The aim and innovation presented in this work is the use of the Parsimonious AHP (P-AHP) method in a dynamic way with the use of different aggregation techniques.

This study presents a systematic framework for maintenance strategy development of manufacturing process machinery. The framework is developed based on the reliability-centred maintenance (RCM) approach to minimise the high downtime of a production line, thus increasing its reliability and availability. A case study of a production line from the ghee and soap manufacturing industry in Taiz, Yemen, is presented for framework validation purposes. The framework provides a systematic process to identify the critical system(s) and guide further investigation for functional significant items (FSIs) based on quantitative and qualitative analyses before recommending appropriate maintenance strategies and specific tasks.

The proposed framework integrates conventional RCM procedure with the fuzzy computational process to improve FSIs criticality estimation, which is the main part of failure mode effect criticality analysis (FMECA) applications. The framework consists of four main implementation stages: identification of the critical system(s), technical analysis, Fuzzy-FMECA application for FSIs criticality estimation and maintenance strategy selection. Each stage has its objective(s) and related scientific techniques that are applied to systematically guide the framework implementation.

The proposed framework validation is summarised as follows. The first stage results demonstrate that the seaming system (top and bottom systems) caused 50% of the total production line downtime, indicating it is a critical system that requires further analysis. The outcomes of the second stage provide significant technical information on the subject (seaming system), helping team members to identify and understand the structure and functional complexities of the seaming system. This stage also provides a better understanding of how the seaming system functions and how it can fail. In stage 3, the application of FMECA with the fuzzy computation integration process presents a systematic way to analyse the failure mode, effect and cause of items (components of the seaming system). This stage also includes items’ criticality estimation and ranking assessment. Finally, stage four guides team members in recommending the appropriate countermeasures (maintenance strategies and task selection) based on their priority level.

This paper proposes an original maintenance strategies development framework based on the RCM approach for production system equipment. Specifically, it considers a fuzzy computational process based on the Gaussian function in the third stage of the proposed framework. Adopting the fuzzy computational process improves the risk priority number (RPN) estimation, resulting in better criticality ranking determination. Another significant contribution is introducing an extended item criticality ranking assessment process to provide maximum levels of criticality item ranking. Finally, the proposed RCM framework also provides detailed guidance on maintenance strategy selection based on criticality levels, unique functionality and failure characteristics of each FSI.

Prospective students and other stakeholders in the education system use global and national rankings as a measure of the quality of education offered by different higher educational institutions. The ranking of an Institution is seen as a measure of reputation and has a significant role in attracting students. But are students happy in the top-ranked institutions? Does a high rank translate into high student satisfaction? This study answers this question taking data from top educational institutions in India.

This study examines how the top-ranked higher education institutions in India fare on student satisfaction. Using the data on key performance indicators published by the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) and student satisfaction scores of these institutions reported by NAAC, the study explores a possible relationship between the ranking of an institution and its student satisfaction score.

The study finds no significant relationship between the ranking of an institution and its student satisfaction score. The only institutional performance dimension which has a positive correlation with student satisfaction is graduate outcome. The diversity dimension is seen to be negatively correlated with student satisfaction.

The importance of modifying the ranking frameworks to account for the real drivers of student satisfaction is highlighted. The items in the student satisfaction survey should be regularly updated to reflect the actual concerns of the students. This is very important given the fact that the number of Indian students going abroad for higher education recorded a six-year high in 2022 at 750,365.

With more than 50,000 institutions catering to over 40 million students, India has the largest higher education system in the world. Given the high level of competition among these institutions, ranking and accreditation have become important parameters used by students for selection of an institution. But do top-ranked higher education institutions have the most satisfied student community? The assumption is disproved using the most credible secondary data. This study is the first of its kind in the Indian context. It has huge implications for the most respected ranking frameworks.

This paper aims to examine whether the position of universities in the times higher education (THE) impact rankings (IR) is related to the different dimensions of academic quality of universities according to the THE world universities ranking.

The research, based on universities ranked in the top 100 of THE IRs, uses a regression model obtained by the panel data method, using the fixed effects approach, to identify the relationship of academic quality dimensions with that ranking.

The results show an increase in the dissemination of information on sustainable development goals (SDGs) by universities. In addition, it is shown that research, number of citations and international outlook are positively associated with a higher score obtained by universities in THE IRs, which implies a higher impact on the SDGs by these universities.

Based on multifaceted theories, the study highlighted the universities that are best positioned in the THE IRs in relation to their contribution to the SDGs.