Document Type : Original Article
Authors
Department of Health Services Management, School of Management and Medical Information, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
CONTEXT: Performance is a significant objective of any organization. To grow and develop and
to improve the performance of the education development centers (EDCs) of medical sciences
universities at Iran, the recognition of the performance criteria of these centers is important. This
study was conducted with the aim of discovering the performance criteria of EDCs of medical science
universities.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This study was conducted using qualitative research and a
semi‑structured interview. Participants were selected using an expert sampling method is a sub‑type
of purposive sampling. Twenty‑three faculty members and expert staff (11 males and 12 women)
participated in the interview. Data were collected using the participant’s perception. The data analysis
was performed based on the interpretative analysis steps of Gillham and Rubin.
RESULTS: From the analysis of data, seven categories including leadership, strategy, stakeholders,
workforce, knowledge management, processes management, and results were obtained.
CONCLUSIONS: The obtained criteria in this study assist managers to design and to develop
self‑assessment questionnaires and a performance measurement program for EDCs of medical
sciences universities. This will facilitate performance evaluation of EDCs.
Keywords
- Gavrea C, Ilies L, Stegerean R. Determinants of organizational
performance: The case of Romania. Manag Mark 2011;6:286‑300. - 2. Momtazmanesh N, Shoghi Shafagh Aria F. Educational
development centers (EDCs) in universities of medical
sciences: Treatment and medical education, roles, position and
achievements. Teb Va Tazkiyeh 2010;76:59‑64.
3. Krause P, Boyle DP, Bäse F. Comparison of different efficiency
criteria for hydrological model assessment. Adv Geosciences
2005;5:89‑97.
4. Haghdoost AA, Emami M, Dehnavieh R, Momtazmanesh N,
Shoghi Shafagh Aria F, Mehrolhassani MH. Evaluation of
education development centers for medical sciences: Challenges
and strategies. Strides Dev Med Educ 2015;11:407‑19.
5. Mirzazadeh A, Gandomkar R, Shahsavari H, Moharari SR,
Niknafs N, Shirazi M, et al. Applying accreditation standards
in a self‑evaluation process: The experience of educational
development center of tehran university of medical sciences.
J Med Educ Dev 2016;10:340‑51.
6. Haghdoost A, Momtazmanesh N, Shoghi F, Mohagheghi M,
Mehrolhassani M. Accreditation the education development
centers of medical‑sciences universities: Another step toward
quality improvement in education. Iran J Public Health
2013;42:134‑40.
7. Kalantari AR, Rafiee N, Hosseni S, Hekmat SN, Haghdoost AA,
Dehnavieh R. Evaluation of the task compliance of medical
education development centers from the viewpoint of the
managers of the centers. Strides Dev Med Educ 2018;15(1) e58885:.
8. 2019‑2020 Baldrige Excellence Builder – NIST. Available
from: https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/2019/02/06/2019‑2020‑baldrige‑excellence‑builder.
pdf. [Last accessed on 2019 Nov 14].
9. Foster TC, Johnson JK, Nelson EC, Batalden PB. Using a malcolm
baldrige framework to understand high‑performing clinical
microsystems. Qual Saf Health Care 2007;16:334‑41.
10. Julie A, Furst‑Bowe RA. Application of the Baldrige Model
for Innovation in Higher Education. New Dir Higher Educ
2007;137:5‑14.
11. Javier FV. Assessing an Asian University’s Organizational
Effectiveness Using the Malcolm Baldridge Model. Asian J Bus
Gov 2013;2:37‑55.
12. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content
analysis. Qual Health Res 2005;15:1277‑88.
13. Suen LJ, Huang HM, Lee HH. A comparison of convenience
sampling and purposive sampling. Hu Li Za Zhi 2014;61:105‑11.
14. Etikan I, Bala K. Sampling and sampling methods. Biostat Int J
2017;5:00149.
15. Eremina A. Comparison of Organizational Structures–Case
Zappos. Oulu Business School: UNIVERSITY OF OULU;
May 2017.
16. Rubin HJ, Rubin IS. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing
Data. California: Sage; 2011.
17. Gillham B. The Research Interview. Rautledge; 2000.
18. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. California: Sage
Publications; 2017.
19. Lazaros A, Sofia A, George I. Malcolm baldrige national quality
award (MBNQA) dimensions in greek tertiary education system.
KnE Soc Sci 2017;1:436‑55.
20. Shibru S, Bibiso M, Ousman K. Assessment of factor affecting
institutional performance: The case of Wolaita Sodo University.
J Educ Practice 2017;8:60‑6.
21. Said AD. Non‑industrial research organizations performance
evaluation model. Epistemol J 2014;11:382‑7.
22. PsomasE, PsomasE, AntonyJ, AntonyJ. Total quality management
elements and results in higher education institutions: The Greek
case. Qual Assur Educ 2017;25:206‑23.
)