| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立高雄師範大學 === 事業經營系 === 103 === Under the impact of low birth rate and pressure of competitiveness among school organizations in Taiwan, private universities are confronted with critical challenges, particularly in the domains of financial affairs and operations. It’s an urgent priority for private universities to strengthen their efficiency, competitiveness and to promote their management performance. The purpose of this study focuses on establishing the management performance indicators of private technology universities, namely the balanced scorecard methodology, the administrative directors of the southern private technology universities are as interviewees. Balanced Scorecard methodology, can break through the restriction of the financial dimension which be considered as the main performance domain, and then take into account non-financial dimensions of the customer, internal process, learning and growth dimension, in order to provide technology universities as a guide to future sustainable operation. This study employed literature analysis approach, Delphi method and AHP. We will first present the theory and the application of Balanced Scorecard with literature analysis approach. In empirical research, administrative directors of the southern private technology universities, were questioned by the Delphi method (DM) expert questionnaire, and then through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) that analysis of the index weight and sorted, completed the construction of management performance index of private technology universities. Above all will be transformed effectively into policy objectives, and then into concrete actions. It will be essential for private universities to develop the competitive advantages of management. This study was completed with conclusions below obtained: The construction of management performance index of private technology universities includes 4 levels, namely, finance, customers, internal process, learning and growing, and 19 indicators, all of which are with appropriateness. The order of the highest weights of the levels from high to low is “Finance”, “Customers”, “Internal process” and then “Learning and growing”. The highest weights of the indexes among the four levels are, “Increasing the registration of students”; “Improving the learning efficacy of students”; “Enhancing administrative efficiency”; and “Creating organizational cohesion”.
|
|---|
