Determining the measurement of the internal process in public universities according to BSC

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 M.Sc., Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.
2 M.Sc., Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran .
10.22034/jmaak.2026.23982
Abstract
Universities have realized that providing quality services is one of the strategic categories of the organization's survival. In recent years, the entry of public universities into international rankings such as The Times, as well as the requirement of the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology and the university trustees to prepare strategic and operational plans, has drawn their attention to the balance score card. Continuous improvement of university performance will not be possible without checking and knowing the progress and achievement of goals, and getting feedback and identifying processes that need serious improvement. The requirement of the mentioned items is to evaluate and measure the performance. In today's competitive and complex world, accounting and financial metrics that are generally retrospective are not enough to reflect the success or failure of organizations. The performance of universities should be evaluated with criteria related to customer satisfaction, internal processes and growth and learning capabilities. The main research question is "What are the criteria for evaluating balanced performance in the perspective of internal processes in public universities?" In this regard, after reviewing the literature and the background of the research, 6 main processes of the universities were determined and a total of 110 measurement were proposed in the perspective of the internal processes and by surveying the universities through an electronic questionnaire among the statistical population of the research, including academic staff members, scientific assistants, senior and middle managers of universities and students who were directly related to the internal processes of the universities were distributed. Then using statistical tests, 6 important internal processes were prioritized and a total of 107 important criteria were determined and prioritized
Keywords

فراستخواه، مقصود. (1387). بررسی چگونگی ارتقای کمی و کیفی دسترسی به آموزش عالی درایران، مجله آموزش عالی ایران، سال اول، شماره دوم پاییز، صفحه 95 تا 122.
کاپلان و نورتون (1384) سازمان استراتژی محو ر ترجمة پرویز بختیاری، تهران: سازمان مدیریت صنعتی.
جعفری، مصطفی. نوری، سیامک. طالبی، داود. (1390). تحلیل عاملی شاخص های موثر در نظام جامع ارزیابی عملکرد آموزش عالی کشور. پژوهش های مدیریت منابع سازمانی. شماره (1). صفحه 43 تا 64.
تقی پور ظهیری، علی. (1387). ارزیابی عملکرد وارائه مدلی برای رتبه بندی و اعتبارسنجی دانشگاه‌ها. کنفرانس بین المللی ارزیابی عملکرد. تهران.
نبی زاده کیوی، سهیلا. مومنی، عصمت. خانی پور، رضا. ملکی رضا. (1392). ارزیابی عملکرد اداره کل اطلاع رسانی کتابخانه ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران بر اساس مدل کارت امتیازی متوازن. فصلنامه مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات. شماره96. صفحه 6 تا 23.
مهرگان، محمد‌رضا. دهقان نیری، محمود. (1388). مدل راهبردی ارزیابی موسسات آموزش عالی، فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی درآموزش عالی، شماره 52، سال 1388، صفحه 55 تا 79.
مهرگان، محمدرضا. دهقان نیری، محمود. (1388). رویکرد منسجم BSC-TOPSIS جهت ارزیابی دانشکده‌های مدیریت برتر دانشگاه‌های استان تهران. نشریه مدیریت صنعتی (بهار و تابستان). دوره1، شماره 2، صفحه 168 تا 153.
احمدوند، علی محمد. تربتی، امیر. پوررضا، ناصر. (1391). طراحی الگوی مفهومی مدیریت عملکرد و تدوین راهبرد با بهره‌گیری از BSC و EFQM. مجله پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی (بهار و تابستان). شماره یازدهم، صفحه 86 تا 55.
Kaplan, R. S. and A. A. Atkinson. (2007). Advanced Management Accounting, 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi.
Usher. Alex, Savino. Massimo. (2007). "a global of university ranking and league tables, Higher Education in Europe", vol. 32. nom. april,routledge.
Kaplan, Robert s. ; Norton, David P. (1996). "Using balancedscorecard as a strategic management system". Harvard Business Review, 74: 75-85
Kaplan,R. S. and D. P. Norton (2001). The strategy Focused Organization.
Ghadikolaei, Abdolhamid Safaei. I-Shuo Chen. Zolfani, Sarfaraz Hashemkhani. Akbarzadeh, Zeinolabedin. Cause and Effect Relations of BSC in Universities of Iran. International Journal of Management & Innovation. 2011, Vol. 3 Issue 2, p16-25. 10p. 12 Charts, 5 Graphs
Sayed, N. (2013). "Ratify, reject or revise: balanced scorecard and universities". International Journal of Educational Management. Vol. 27 No. 3. pp. 203-220. https: //doi. org/10. 1108/09513541311306440
Naqi Sayed; Ratify, reject or revise. (2013). "balanced scorecard and universities; BSC and universities", International Journal of Educational Management Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 203-220
Camilleri MA. Using the balanced scorecard as a performance management tool in higher education. Management in Education. 2021;35(1):10-21.
Abdali S. Performance evaluation for private higher education institutions using balanced scorecard. 2017
Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Mousakhani S, Tavakoli M, Dalvand MR, Šaparauskas J, Antuchevičienė J. Importance-performance analysis based balanced scorecard for performance evaluation in higher education institutions: an integrated fuzzy approach. Journal of Business Economics and Management. 2020;21(3):647-78