MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156865538 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2012.05.004

Designing a performance appraisal system based on balanced scorecard for improving productivity: Case study in Semnan technology and science park

2012· article· en· W2156865538 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Hemati, Majid Mardani

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSemnan University
KeywordsBalanced scorecardProductivityPerformance appraisalProcess managementScience parkComputer scienceBusinessOperations managementKnowledge managementEnvironmental economicsManagementEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, organizations for holding and improving their competing merit use performance measurement for evaluation, control, supervision and improvement of their trading processes. Medium and small companies in technology and science parks are very useful in economic revivification and technology development. Technology and science parks have provided necessary consultations, information, suitable equipments, and services for developing technology unites and prepare them for independent presence in industry. One of the necessary elements for the success and improvement of performance in these companies is to establish and implement balanced scorecard, which can be used to reach desired goals, strategies and to improve performance. In this article, we use a structured method for calculating efficiency of four perspectives of balanced scorecard. Statistical society of this research was Semnan technology and Science Park and seven experts are selected for answering questions of the survey. We also complete questionnaire and determine index and relative importance of all indices. For developing strategic goals of Semnan technology and science park according to four perspectives of balanced score card (finance, growth and learning, internal process), six meetings were hold and finally all crisis macro goals index were identified and they were analyzed for evaluating performance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207