Cheng, E W L and Li, H (2006) Job performance evaluation for construction companies: An analytic network process approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(8), pp. 827-835. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper aims at presenting a job performance evaluation process for construction companies. Human resource is a core economic asset. Organizations are responsible for helping their employees work at their optimal level. Job performance evaluations become an essential organizational activity, which can sustain employee performance. Existing literature has suggested that the construction industry does not pay attention to the importance of job performance evaluation. This paper presents the use of the analytic network process (ANP) to assign weights to a set of job performance criteria. It also describes a process for job performance evaluation. An example is demonstrated to illustrate how to construct the supermatrix for ANP.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction companies; employment; evaluation; personnel management |
| Index terms: | construction industry, analytic network process, employment, human resource, performance evaluation, personnel, performance criteria, construction company |
| Subjects: | organization, industry analysis, decision-making and optimization, performance measurement, management |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Human Resources, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here