透過您的圖書館登入
IP:34.206.64.143
  • 學位論文

結合專家意見之台灣技職商學院績效評估-模糊層級與資料包絡分析法之應用

Evaluation of Junior Colleges of Business in Taiwan with Considering Expert Opinion-Fuzzy AHP and DEA Approach

指導教授 : 傅祖壇
共同指導教授 : 張靜貞(Ching-Cheng Chang)

摘要


本研究以層級的架構,建構衡量技職院校商學院績效表現之模型,調查不同教育關係人的專家意見,包含技職在校生、企業主管、技職商學院院長與教育專家,並合併在校生和企業主管為「教育需求者」;合併院長和教育專家為「教育供給者」;合併所有專家為「綜合教育者」。然後以模糊層級分析法,解決人類主觀意識具有模糊性與不確定性的特性,計算加入模糊概念後不同專家意見對於各個指標的權重分配。再以此權重搭配兩階層保證區間資料包絡分析法,計算不同專家觀點設限下,台灣地區技職院校商學院績效表現,並利用權數觀察各校商學院的優勢項目。而本研究依班級數將26所技職商學院分成大規模與小規模兩類,探討不同規模商學院的績效表現。最後,將各個指標對於效率值的貢獻度作為集群分析的變數,依此將台灣地區技職商學院根據不同的特色分群。 實證結果有以下發現: 一、 模糊層級分析結果: (一) 所有種類專家皆認為「畢業後職場表現」相對「多元能力培育」重要。 (二) 在校生和院長認為「技能」能力較重要;企業主管認為「認知」能力較重要;教育專家則較重視「情意」能力。 (三) 合併資料而言,「教育需求者」重視「技能」,「教育供給者」重視「認知」。 二、 兩階層保證區間資料分析結果: (一) 大規模學校的績效分數平均而言優於小規模學校。 (二) 第一階層結果,以「教育需求者」的角度,不管學校規模大小,優勢皆在培養學生「認知」能力;以「教育供給者」的角度,大規模學校強項在培養學生「情意」能力,小規模學校強項在培養學生「認知」能力。 (三) 第二階層結果,以「教育需求者」的角度,不管學校規模大小,優勢皆在培養學生的「畢業後職場表現」;以「教育供給者」的角度,大規模學校強項在學生「多元能力培育」,小規模學校則是培養學生「畢業後職場表現」。 三、 集群分析結果: (一) 依據各校特性可將26所商學院分成四大群,大部分的學校被分在第一群「提升職場表現」和第二群「培養認知」這兩類,第三群「培養技能」和第四群「培養情意」包含的學校佔少數。 (二) 第一群除了國立台北商業技術學院屬於台北地區學校,其餘皆是非台北地區學校;第二群大部分是由科技大學組成。

並列摘要


This paper use hierarchical structure to construct a measure of performance evaluation model of polytechnic junior colleges of business. First, we investigate opinion of different experts which contain students, business executives, deans of business colleges and educators. We combine the data of students and business executives as “education demander”, combine the data of deans and educators as “education supplier”, and combine all of the experts’ data as “integrated educators”. Because the subjective consciousness of mankind has the characteristics of ambiguity and uncertainty, so we use fuzzy AHP to solve it and calculate the weights of every indicators in the hierarchical structure.Second, we use two-level AR/DEA to conduct the performance evaluation of 26 business colleges in Taiwan, and observe the advantages of each business colleges using the weights calculated from two-level AR/DEA. In this paper, according to the number of classes, 26 business colleges are divided into large-scale and small-scale categories, to investigate the performance of business colleges of different sizes.Finally, a cluster analysis is applied to distinguish the dissimilarity of the 26 business colleges with respect to the efficiency contributions of each indicators. We have empirical results in the following findings: 1. The results of fuzzy AHP: (1) All types of experts hold the view that “performance of the workplace after graduation” is relative important than “performance of multi-capacity”. (2) Students and deans think that “psychomotor” ability is most important. Business executives think that “cognitive” ability is most important. Educators think that “affection” ability is most important. (3) From the “education demander “point of view, they put emphasis on “psychomotor” ability. From the “education supplier” point of view, they put emphasis on “cognitive” ability. 2. The results of two-level AR/DEA: (1) The efficiency score of the large-scale business colleges is higher than the small-scale business colleges. (2) The results in the first-level, regardless of school size, from the “education demander “point of view, the advantage is in the “cognitive” ability. From the “education supplier” point of view, the advantage of the large-scale business colleges is in the “affection” ability, the aadvantage of the small-scale business colleges is in the“cognitive” ability. (3) The results in the second-level, regardless of school size, from the “education demander” point of view, the advantage is in the “performance of the workplace after graduation”. From the “education supplier” point of view, the advantage of the large-scale business colleges is in the “performance of multi-capacity”. The advantage of the small-scale business colleges is in the “performance of the workplace after graduation”. 3. The results of cluster analysis: (1) The 26 business colleges are categorized into 4 clusters. Most of the schools are in the first group named “enhance workplace performance” and the second group named “cultivate cognitive”. The third group named “cultivate psychomotor” and the forth group named “cultivate affection” are in the minority. (2) Only National Taipei College of Business belonging to Taipei area in the first group. Most composition of the second group is university of science and technology.

參考文獻


盧永祥、傅祖壇,2007。「產出品質、組織特性與台灣高等技職院校之經營效率」,
Malmquist生產力指數之應用」,『技術及職業教育學報』。3卷,2期,73-105。
汪漢英、黃文聰、黃開義、畢威寧,2007。「應用資料包絡分析法之大學學系績效
康龍魁、李文清,2009。「台灣地區科技大學經營效率之研究-資料包絡法及
林容萱,2003。「台灣地區科技大學效率性之分析:資料包絡分析法的應用」,『國

延伸閱讀