Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance Measurement of Insurance Company Software Groups by Using Fuzzy-AHP and ELECTRE Method

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Science, Engineering Management and Information Technology (SEMIT 2022)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1808))

  • 131 Accesses

Abstract

Measuring employee performance is critical to improving production and service processes in enterprises. However, as with all other abstract concepts, performance measurement has a complex process. Different approaches are used in the literature for performance measurement. One of these methods is Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). The MCDM aims to select the best alternatives by simultaneously evaluating the criteria. In addition, one or more decision-makers in the MCDM may be involved in the decision-making process at the same time. For these reasons, a Fuzzy-MCDM method is proposed for the performance evaluation of project groups operating in the software sector. The application part of the study aimed to determine the best-performing team among four software project groups working in an insurance company, combining the Fuzzy-Analytic Hierarchy Process (F-AHP) and Elimination and Choice Translating Reality (ELECTRE) methods. Each group comprises five software engineers who are experts in their field. In the first stage, the main criteria and sub-criteria that impact performance most were determined. Then, the weights of the criteria were determined by the F-AHP method. Finally, with the ELECTRE method, the performance ranking of the software groups was made.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Eraslan, E., Algün, O.: İdeal performans değerlendirme formu tasarımında analitik hiyerarşi yöntemi yaklaşımı (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Saaty, T.L., Sodenkamp, M.: The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Measurement Processes: The Measurement of Intangibles, vol. 1, pp. 91–166 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92828-7_4

  3. Özder, E.H., Özcan, E., Eren, T.: Staff task-based shift scheduling solution with an ANP and goal programming method in a natural gas combined cycle power plant. Mathematics 7 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/math7020192

  4. Farrell, M.J.: The measurement of productive efficiency. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A. (1957). https://doi.org/10.2307/2343100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lynch, R., Cross, K.: Measure Up - the essential guide to measuring business performance. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.: The balanced score card measures that drive performance. Harv. Bus. Rev. 70, 71–79 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy. Calif. Manage. Rev. (1996). https://doi.org/10.2307/41165876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hronec, S.M.: Vital signs: using quality, time, and cost performance measurements to chart your company’s future. Amacom American Management Association (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Neely, A., Adams, C., Crowe, P.: The performance prism in practice. Meas. Bus. Excell. (2001). https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040110385142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Neely, A., Adams, C., Kennerley, M.: The performance prism: the scorecard for measuring and managing business success. Cranf. Sch. Manag. (2002). https://doi.org/10.1108/eb016623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu, H.Y., Tzeng, G.H., Chen, Y.H.: A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on Balanced Scorecard. Expert Syst. Appl. (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wu, H.Y., Lin, Y.K., Chang, C.H.: Performance evaluation of extension education centers in universities based on the balanced scorecard. Eval. Program Plann. (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gürbüz, T., Albayrak, Y.E.: An engineering approach to human resources performance evaluation: hybrid MCDM application with interactions. Appl. Soft Comput. J. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.03.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ozdemir, Y.S., Oktay, T.: Evaluating service quality of an airline maintenance company by applying fuzzy-AHP. In: Calisir, F., Cevikcan, E., Camgoz Akdag, H. (eds.) Industrial Engineering in the Big Data Era. LNMIE, pp. 189–200. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03317-0_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Haseli, G., Sheikh, R., Sana, S.S.: Base-criterion on multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Int. J. Manag. Sci. Eng. Manag. 15, 79–88 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/17509653.2019.1633964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rahmati, S., Mahdavi, M.H., Ghoushchi, S.J., Tomaskova, H., Haseli, G.: Assessment and prioritize risk factors of financial measurement of management control system for production companies using a hybrid Z-SWARA and Z-WASPAS with FMEA method: a meta-analysis. Mathematics. 10 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/math10020253

  17. Goli, A., Mohammadi, H.: Developing a sustainable operational management system using hybrid Shapley value and Multimoora method: case study petrochemical supply chain. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 1–30 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01844-9

  18. Saaty, T.L.: The analytic hierarchy process. Education 1–11 (1980). https://doi.org/10.3414/ME10-01-0028

  19. Piya, S., Shamsuzzoha, A., Azizuddin, M., Al-Hinai, N., Erdebilli, B.: Integrated fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS method to analyze green management practice in hospitality industry in the sultanate of Oman. Sustain. 14 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031118

  20. Ayyildiz, E., Taskin Gumus, A.: Pythagorean fuzzy AHP based risk assessment methodology for hazardous material transportation: an application in Istanbul. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28(27), 35798–35810 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13223-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Soner, S., Önüt, S.: Multi-criteria supplier selection: an Electre-Ahp application. J. Eng. Nat. Sci. Sigma. (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chan, F.T.S.: Performance measurement in a supply chain. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700300063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shaik, M., Abdul-Kader, W.: Performance measurement of reverse logistics enterprise: a comprehensive and integrated approach. Meas. Bus. Excell. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1108/13683041211230294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fernandes, J.M., Rodrigues, S.P., Costa, L.A.: Comparing AHP and ELECTRE i for prioritizing software requirements. In: 2015 IEEE/ACIS 16th International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing, SNPD 2015 - Proceedings (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Benayoun, R.B., Sussman, N.: Manual de Reference du Programme Electre. Note Synth. Format. (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Daneshvar Rouyendegh, B., Erol, S.: Selecting the best project using the fuzzy ELECTRE method. Math. Probl. Eng. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/790142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., Ulukan, Z.: Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logist. Inf. Manag. (2003). https://doi.org/10.1108/09576050310503367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Göleç, A., Taşkin, H.: Novel methodologies and a comparative study for manufacturing systems performance evaluations. Inf. Sci. (Ny). (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2007.06.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee, A.H.I., Chen, W.C., Chang, C.J.: A fuzzy AHP and BSC approach for evaluating performance of IT department in the manufacturing industry in Taiwan. Expert Syst. Appl. 34, 96–107 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.08.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sun, Q., Zhang, W.M., Li, P.Z.: A comprehensive evaluation approach for machining operation based on fuzzy AHP. In: Applied Mechanics and Materials (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control. 8, 338–353 (1965). https://doi.org/10.1109/2.53

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Buckley, J.J.: Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 17, 233–247 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Saaty, T.L.: Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. (2008). https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Beccali, M., Cellura, M., Mistretta, M.: Decision-making in energy planning. Application of the Electre method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy technology. Renew. Energy. (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(03)00102-2

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Istanbul Arel University, Istanbul, Türkiye

    Ezgi Ansen

  2. Ankara Science University, Ankara, Türkiye

    Yavuz Selim Özdemir

Authors
  1. Ezgi Ansen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yavuz Selim Özdemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yavuz Selim Özdemir .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

    Abolfazl Mirzazadeh

  2. Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Ankara, Türkiye

    Babek Erdebilli

  3. Istinye University, Istanbul, Türkiye

    Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee

  4. Poznań University of Technology, Poznań, Poland

    Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber

  5. Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Arpan Kumar Kar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Ansen, E., Özdemir, Y.S. (2023). Performance Measurement of Insurance Company Software Groups by Using Fuzzy-AHP and ELECTRE Method. In: Mirzazadeh, A., Erdebilli, B., Babaee Tirkolaee, E., Weber, GW., Kar, A.K. (eds) Science, Engineering Management and Information Technology. SEMIT 2022. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1808. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40395-8_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40395-8_25

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-40394-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-40395-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation