Performance evaluation in Public Administration: P-AHP and PROMETHEE a comparative analysis

Gerarda Fattoruso, Antonio Violi, Stefania Pizzimenti, Sonia Suraci, Marco Vesperi

Abstract


The performance evaluation is a crucial phase for each organization, and nowadays this is particularly relevant also for Public Administrations (PAs), where a high level of efficiency and effectiveness has a meaningful impact on citizens and companies. In this work we propose the adoption of Multi Criteria Decision Making approaches, in particular PROMETHEE I-II and Parsimonious AHP, for the performance evaluation of PA's services. The methods have been tested on a real PA in Southern Italy, and the results show their effectiveness as control and planning support tools.

Keywords


Multi-criteria methods, Parsimonious AHP, PROMETHEE I-II, Performance Evaluation; Public Administration

Full Text:

PDF

References


Francesca Abastante, Salvatore Corrente, Salvatore Greco, Alessio Ishizaka, and Isabella M Lami. Choice architecture for architecture choices: Evaluating social housing initiatives putting together a parsimonious ahp methodology and the choquet integral. Land Use Policy, 78:748–762, 2018.

Francesca Abastante, Salvatore Corrente, Salvatore Greco, Alessio Ishizaka, and Isabella M Lami. A new parsimonious ahp methodology: Assigning priorities to many objects by comparing pairwise few reference objects. Expert Systems with Applications, 127:109–120, 2019.

Jean-Pierre Brans and Yves De Smet. Promethee methods. Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys, pages 187–219, 2016.

Jean-Pierre Brans, Ph Vincke, and Bertrand Mareschal. How to select and how to rank projects: The promethee method. European journal of operational research, 24(2):228–238, 1986.

JP Brans. Mareschal (2005). promethee methods. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, pages 163–195.

John Dawes. Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? an experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International journal of market research, 50(1):61–104, 2008.

Amadou Diabagate, Abdellah Azmani, and Mohamed El Harzli. The choice of the best proposal in tendering with ahp method: case of procurement of it master plan’s realization. International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science (IJITCS), 7(12):1–11, 2015.

Mariagrazia Dotoli, Nicola Epicoco, and Marco Falagario. Multi-criteria decision making techniques for the management of public procurement tenders: A case study. Applied Soft Computing, 88:106064, 2020.

Gerarda Fattoruso and Gabriella Marcarelli. A multi-criteria approach for public tenders. electre iii and parsimonious ahp: a comparative study. Soft Computing, 26(21):11771–11781, 2022.

Gerarda Fattoruso, Paola Mancini, and Gabriella Marcarelli. The ahpsort ii to evaluate the high level instruction performances. Ratio Mathematica, 42:283, 2022.

Isabel C Gil Garcıa, Ana Fernandez-Guillamon, M Socorro GarcıaCascales, and Angel Molina-Garcıa. Multi-factorial methodology for wind power plant repowering optimization: A spanish case study. Energy Reports, 11:179–196, 2024.

Swati Goyal, Shivi Agarwal, Narinderjit Singh Sawaran Singh, Trilok Mathur, and Nirbhay Mathur. Analysis of hybrid mcdm methods for the performance assessment and ranking public transport sector: a case study. Sustainability, 14(22):15110, 2022.

Alessio Ishizaka and Philippe Nemery. Selecting the best statistical distribution with promethee and gaia. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 61(4):958–969, 2011.

Daekook Kang, Krishnan Suvitha, Samayan Narayanamoorthy, Michael Sandra, and Dragan Pamucar. Evaluation of wave energy converters based on integrated electre approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 242:122793, 2024.

Marcin Kicinski and Katarzyna Solecka. Application of mcda/mcdm methods for an integrated urban public transportation system–case study, city of cracow. Archives of Transport, 46(2):71–84, 2018.

Ranjit Kumar. Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. Research methodology, pages 1–528, 2018.

Ming-Shin Kuo and Gin-Shuh Liang. A soft computing method of performance evaluation with mcdm based on interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Applied Soft Computing, 12(1):476–485, 2012.

Wen-Hsiang Lai, Pao-Long Chang, and Ying-Chyi Chou. Fuzzy mcdm approach to r&d project evaluation in taiwan’s public sectors. In PICMET’08-2008 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology, pages 1523–1532. IEEE, 2008.

Barbara Loken, Phyllis Pirie, Karen A Virnig, Ronald L Hinkle, and Charles T Salmon. The use of 0-10 scales in telephone surveys. Journal of the Market Research Society, 29(3):353–362, 1987.

Gabriella Marcarelli and Massimo Squillante. A group-ahp-based approach for selecting the best public tender. Soft Computing, 24(18):13717–13724, 2020.

Bertrand Mareschal, Yves De Smet, and Philippe Nemery. Rank reversal in the promethee ii method: some new results. In 2008 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, pages 959–963. IEEE, 2008.

Rocco Reina et al. Gestione del personale e cambiamento organizzativo nell’amministrazione pubblica. Rubbettino Editore, 2008.

Thomas L Saaty. Deriving the ahp 1-9 scale from first principles. Proceedings 6th ISAHP. Berna, Suiza, pages 397–402, 2001.

Thomas L Saaty. Decision-making with the ahp: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European journal of operational research, 145(1):85–91, 2003.

Thomas L Saaty. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International journal of services sciences, 1(1):83–98, 2008.

TL Saaty. The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resources allocation. mcgraw-hill, new york. 1980.

Fiorella Pia Salvatore, Simone Fanelli, Gianluca Lanza, and Michele Milone. Public food procurement for italian schools: results from analytical and content analyses. British Food Journal, 123(8):2936–2951, 2021.

Roman Vavrek, Rastislav Kotulic, Peter Adamisin, Elena Sira, and Ivana Kravcakova Vozarova. Effectiveness of use of mcdm methods in the terms of local self-government. In Advances in Applied Economic Research: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Applied Economics (ICOAE), pages 279–288. Springer, 2017.

Philippe Vincke. Preference modelling: a survey and an experiment. In Operational research’81: Proceedings of the ninth IFORS International Conference on Operational Research. North Holland, 1981.

Hung-Yi Wu, Jui-Kuei Chen, I-Shuo Chen, and Hsin-Hui Zhuo. Ranking universities based on performance evaluation by a hybrid mcdm model. Measurement, 45(5):856–880, 2012.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23755/rm.v53i0.1618

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Gerarda Fattoruso, Antonio Violi, Stefania Pizzimenti, Sonia Suraci, Marco Vesperi

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Ratio Mathematica - Journal of Mathematics, Statistics, and Applications. ISSN 1592-7415; e-ISSN 2282-8214.