Performance measurement of employee using an integrated 360° feedback system and AHP method: A case study of municipality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Performance measurement plays an essential role on accelerating the efficiency of any organization. There are literally different methods for measuring the relative performance of a particular unit and many of them are involved considering various criteria. In this paper, we propose 360 feedback system for performance measurement of all employees who work for municipality of the city of Tabas located in east part of Iran. The proposed model of this paper also uses hierarchical method to cluster different attributes based on various characteristics and implements analytical hierarchy process to find the relative importance of all items. The survey uses five personal characteristics including cognitive, technical, personal and human skills and for each major item, the proposed model considers various sub-criteria. The results indicate that technical and cognitive skills are the most important personal characteristics followed by human and personal characteristics. The results of this survey show that responsibility and quality of work are the most important employee characteristics.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it