基于AHP法的合作性评估模型探索性简化
Exploratory Simplification of Collaborative Evaluation Model Based on AHP
DOI: 10.12677/ORF.2023.135533, PDF,  被引量   
作者: 李嘉俊:贵州大学公共管理学院,贵州 贵阳
关键词: AHP法合作性评估模型简化AHP Collaborative Evaluation Model Simplification
摘要: 作为评估科学的分支内容,国外学者对合作性评估的研究已经取得了一定成果,开发了合作性评估模型和评估技术。国内绩效领域学者对合作性评估的关注较早,但实际开展关于合作性评估理论引进和模型研究的中文文献却鲜见其迹。合作性评估强调评估人员和项目利益相关者在评估活动中的积极合作,以提升评估结果的科学性和被采纳的可能性。文章在国外学者研究基础上进行研究方法的创新,尝试运用层次分析法(AHP法)对合作性评估模型进行符合中国场域的改进简化,以期望合作性评估在我国的评估实践中能够得到借鉴发挥。构建目标层、准则层和方案层之间的层次结构,再分别将各个部分的内容构建起一级指标和二级指标的判断矩阵,经过判断矩阵的权重单排序计算最后得到层次结构的综合权重结果,经过一致性检验,表明计算结果在一致性上得到通过。改进后的合作性评估模型包含六个组成部分共23项内容,并且按照重要性对各个部分的具体内容进行了重新排序。
Abstract: As a branch of evaluation science, foreign scholars have made some achievements in the study of cooperative evaluation, and developed collaborative evaluation model and evaluation technology. Domestic scholars in the field of performance have paid attention to collaborative evaluation earlier, but there are few literatures with Chinese on collaborative evaluation models. Collaborative evaluation emphasizes the active cooperation of evaluators and project stakeholders in evaluation activities to improve the scientific nature of evaluation results and the likelihood of adoption. Based on the research of foreign scholars, this paper tries to use analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to improve and simplify the collaborative evaluation model in line with the Chinese field, so as to hope that cooperative evaluation can be used for reference in China’s evaluation practice. The hierarchical structure among the target layer, criterion layer and scheme layer is constructed, and then the judgment matrix of the first and second indexes is constructed by the contents of each part, and the comprehensive weight result of the hierarchy is finally obtained through the single ranking calculation of the weight of the judgment matrix. The consistency test shows that the calculation result is passed in the consistency. The improved cooperative evaluation model contains 23 items in six components, and the specific contents of each part are reordered in order of importance.
文章引用:李嘉俊. 基于AHP法的合作性评估模型探索性简化[J]. 运筹与模糊学, 2023, 13(5): 5316-5325. https://doi.org/10.12677/ORF.2023.135533

参考文献

[1] Rodríguez-Campos, L. (2012) Advances in Collaborative Evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35, 523-528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] Brandon, P.R. and Fukunaga, L.L. (2013) The State of the Empirical Research Literature on Stakeholder Involvement in Program Evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 35, 26-44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] O’Sullivan, R.G. and O’Sullivan, J.M. (1998) Evaluation Voices: Promoting Evaluation from within Programs through Collaboration. Evaluation and Program Planning, 21, 21-29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] Brandon, P.R. (1999) Involving Program Stakeholders in Reviews of Evaluators’ Recommendations for Program Revisions. Evaluation and Program Planning, 22, 363-372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] Pollitt, C. (1999) Stunted by Stakeholders? Limits to Collaborative Evaluation. Public Policy and Administration, 14, 77-90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[6] Askew, K., Beverly, M.G. and Jay, M.L. (2012) Aligning Collaborative and Culturally Responsive Evaluation Approaches. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35, 552-557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] O’Sullivan, R.G. and D’Agostino, A. (2002) Pro-moting Evaluation through Collaboration. Evaluation, 8, 372-387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Rodríguez-Campos, L., Mitchell, M.E. and Rincon-es-Gómez, R. (2020) Model for Collaborative Evaluations as a Framework to Foster a Community of Collaborators. New Directions for Evaluation, 2020, 17-27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Rodríguez-Campos, L., Martz, W. and Rincones-Gómez, R. (2010) Applying the Model for Collaborative Evaluations to a Multicultural Seminar in a Nonprofit Setting. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 6, 109-117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] O’Sullivan, J.M. and O’Sullivan, R. (2012) Collaborative Evaluation and Market Research Converge: An Innovative Model Agricultural Development Program Evaluation in Southern Sudan. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35, 547-551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Fitzpatrick, J.L. (2012) Commentary—Collaborative Evaluation within the Larger Evaluation Context. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35, 558-563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Cousins, J.B. (2001) Do Evaluator and Program Practitioner Perspectives Converge in Collaborative Evaluation? Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 16, 113-133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] Bowen, S. and Martens, P.J. (2006) A Model for Collabo-rative Evaluation of University-Community Partnerships. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 60, 902-907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Brandon, P.R., Newton, B.J. and Harman, J.W. (1993) Enhancing Validity through Beneficiaries’ Equitable Involvement in Identifying and Prioritizing Homeless Chil-dren’s Educational Problems. Evaluation and Program Planning, 16, 287-293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[15] O’Sullivan, R.G. (2012) Collaborative Evaluation within a Framework of Stakeholder-Oriented Evaluation Approaches. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35, 518-522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Hicks, T., Rodríguez-Campos, L. and Choi, J.H. (2017) Bayesian Posterior Odds Ratios. American Journal of Evaluation, 39, 278-289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[17] 彭国甫, 李树丞, 盛明科. 应用层次分析法确定政府绩效评估指标权重研究[J]. 中国软科学, 2004(6): 136-139.
[18] 孙涛, 郑秋鹛, 王炜, 等. BSC+KPI视阈下高校教师绩效考核体系构建——基于德尔菲法和层次分析法的应用[J]. 中国高校科技, 2020(6): 21-26.
[19] 王慧杰, 毕粉粉, 董战峰. 基于AHP-模糊综合评价法的新安江流域生态补偿政策绩效评估[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(20): 7493-7506.
[20] 于宗绪, 马东春, 范秀娟, 等. 基于AHP法和模糊综合评价法的城市水环境治理PPP项目绩效评价研究[J]. 生态经济, 2020, 36(10): 190-194.