نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده حسابداری و علوم مالی، دانشکدگان مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

2 استاد، گروه مدیریت تولید و عملیات، دانشکده مدیریت صنعتی و فناوری، دانشکدگان مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

3 کارشناس ارشد مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده مدیریت صنعتی و فناوری، دانشکدگان مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران

4 کارشناس ارشد مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده مدیریت صنعتی و فناوری، دانشکدگان مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

5 دکتری مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده مدیریت صنعتی و فناوری، دانشکدگان مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

در دنیای رقابتی امروز، سازمان‌ها برای حفظ جایگاه خود باید از رقبا متمایز شوند که این تمایز از طریق مزیت رقابتی، ناشی از قابلیت‌ها یا استراتژی‌های نوآورانه، به دست می‌آید. قابلیت‌های سازمانی نقش مهمی در موفقیت کسب‌وکار دارند. همچنین، استفاده از مدل‌های تعالی سازمانی مانند EFQM نیز به شناسایی فرصت‌ها و بهبود عملکرد کمک کرده و در سازمان‌ها به ارزیابی انسجام داخلی‌شان می‌پردازد. با توجه به اینکه وضعیت توانمندی‌های سازمانی در شرکت همراه اول (شرکت ارتباطات سیار ایران) بر اساس نسخه جدید مدل EFQM مورد بررسی قرار نگرفته است، این تحقیق به دنبال شناسایی قابلیت‌های سازمانی مدل جدید و طراحی یک مدل ریاضی بهینه‌سازی بر اساس آن است. روش تحقیق این پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر جمع‌آوری داده‌ها توصیفی پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری شامل متخصصان دانشگاهی، فعالان حوزه تعالی سازمانی و کارشناسان شرکت همراه اول (MCI) است. در این تحقیق ابتدا با بهره‌گیری از مرور ادبیات سیستماتیک، مهم‌ترین قابلیت‌های سازمانی از منابع معتبر استخراج و دسته‌بندی گردید. در گام دوم، بر مبنای دیدگاه خبرگان و با استفاده از سیستم استنتاج فازی، روابط علیِ میان قابلیت‌ها و مدل تعالی سازمانی مدل‌سازی شدند. سپس برای هر قابلیت، معادلات ریاضی به‌منظور تعریف تابع کمّی‌سازی استخراج شد و کلیت مدل ریاضی قابلیت‌ها، تدوین گردید. در نهایت، با به‌کارگیری الگوریتم ژنتیک، پارامترهای مدل ریاضی بهینه‌سازی شدند تا بهترین ترکیب قابلیت‌ها در راستای تعالی سازمانی تعیین شود. در پایان، پیشنهاداتی برای کاربرد عملی چارچوب در شرکت‌ها و مسیرهای توسعه آتی پژوهش ارائه شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Identification and Mathematical Modeling of Organizational Capabilities in the Organizational Excellence Model Using a Fuzzy Inference System and Genetic Algorithm Optimization- Case Study: Mobile Communications of Iran (MCI)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ali Ebrahimi Kordlar 1
  • Hossein Safari 2
  • Helyeh Sadat Aghamiri 3
  • Fatemeh Sharifi Tabar 4
  • Mohsen Moradi Moghaddam 5

1 Associate Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Accounting and Finance, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

2 Full Prof., Department of Production and Operations Management, Faculty of Industrial and Technology Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

3 MSC., Industrial Management, Faculty of Industrial and Technology Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

4 Master's student of Industrial Management, Faculty of Industrial and Technology Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

5 Phd., Industrial Management, Faculty of Industrial and Technology Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

In today’s competitive environment, organizations need innovative capabilities and strategies for competitive advantage, with organizational capabilities playing a key role in success. Excellence models like EFQM help identify improvement areas and enhance performance. Since the organizational capabilities of the Mobile Communications of Iran (MCI) have not been assessed using the latest EFQM model, this study aims to identify key capabilities and develop a mathematical optimization model. Using a descriptive survey with an applied purpose, the research targeted academic experts, excellence practitioners, and MCI specialists. First, a systematic literature review identified and categorized critical capabilities. Then, expert judgment and a fuzzy inference system modeled causal links between capabilities and the EFQM framework. Mathematical equations quantified each capability, forming an integrated model. A genetic algorithm was used to optimize parameters and determine the best capability combination. The study concludes with practical implementation recommendations and suggestions for future research.
Introduction
In today’s globalized and competitive environment, organizations face increasing competition and a dynamic external landscape. To survive and lead, organizations must differentiate themselves by creating a competitive advantage through innovation. This requires management excellence models that help organizations adapt to these changing conditions. The competitive environment, characterized by geographical dispersion and organizational innovation, demands unique capabilities known as dynamic capabilities, which help organizations create, expand, and maintain their core resources. The 2020 edition of the EFQM model, based on design thinking, has evolved from an assessment tool into a vital framework for addressing the changes and disruptions organizations face daily. Its strategic focus, combined with operational performance and a results-oriented approach, makes it an ideal framework for examining the alignment of an organization's ambitions. The aim of this article is to develop a mathematical model of organizational capabilities within the EFQM 2020 excellence model, helping organizations evaluate and improve their current performance.
Materials and Methods
This research is applied in nature with a comparative approach. It follows a quantitative methodology and is based on library research. The research strategy is survey-based, and from a goal perspective, it falls under the descriptive category. Data collection is conducted through interviews and questionnaires. Organizational capabilities are first extracted from scientific sources, then matched with the sub-criteria of the model by reviewing guidelines. Based on the findings, if-then rules and a fuzzy inference system are designed using MATLAB software.
Meta-heuristic methods are used to solve complex optimization problems where classical optimization and heuristic methods are ineffective. Among these, the genetic algorithm is commonly used as a function optimizer. In this model, due to the complex, non-linear, and fuzzy relationships in the fuzzy inference system within the objective function, it can be compared to a neural network. The genetic algorithm is then applied to solve the model.
Results
The desired capabilities for the fuzzy inference system are determined by specifying the capabilities of each criterion and sub-criterion of the EFQM model. A fuzzy inference system is defined for each of the 23 sub-criteria, and at the criterion level, the systems of the sub-criteria are combined. Sensing, learning, integration, coordination, and reconfiguration routines are used to measure the capabilities of the EFQM excellence model.
This research focuses on MCI. By comparing the current values with the target and the scores obtained from the genetic algorithm, it is found that, within the budget limits, the desired goal can be achieved for 38 capabilities. For capabilities such as sensing, abduction, business model development, reporting, environmental management, networking, modeling, and social responsibility, the values fall within the target range. However, for three capabilities—organizational governance development, transformation management, and improvement—the target values fall outside the selected range. These differences are minor and can likely be ignored. The transformation management capability score (25.6) is close to the minimum value of 26, indicating that improvement is not feasible within the current budget for this sub-criterion. Increasing the budget could raise the score. The organizational governance development score differs by almost 4 points, which may be due to the fuzziness in scoring and inaccuracies in the budget values assigned to each sub-criterion.
Conclusion
Organizational excellence models are generally frameworks that organizations use to develop a culture of excellence, and each model attempts to provide a set of management principles that are generally employed by organizations in their geographical areas of influence. Organizational resources and capabilities are the key success factors for the organization. In this research, using the fuzzy inference system, the combination of organizational capabilities in the sub-criteria of the EFQM 2020 excellence model was designed, and the mathematical model was developed using linear programming. Finally, a genetic meta-heuristic algorithm was used to solve the model. Each sub-criterion is a fuzzy inference system composed of the organizational capabilities related to it. A set of organizational capabilities makes up each of the sub-criteria of the excellence model, and we have a point limit for each capability. The budget limit defined in this model consists of the total budget dedicated to each organizational capability constituting the relevant sub-criterion. A case study was used to check the validity of the model and its practical application in an internal organization. In this research, the studied organization is MCI.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Organizational Capabilities
  • EFQM Excellence Model
  • Resource Optimization
  • Genetic Algorithm
  1. Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct on strategic management? International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(1), 29–49. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1017/‌CBO9781107415324.004.
  2. Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33–46. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌smj.4250140105.
  3. Bianchi, C., & Stoian, M. C. (2024). Exploring the role of managerial and organizational capabilities for the inbound internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management, 62(2), 724-762. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1080/‌00472778.2022.2082457.
  4. Brusset, X., & Teller, C. (2017). Supply chain capabilities, risks, and resilience. International Journal of Production Economics, 184, 59–68. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.ijpe.2016.09.008
  5. Buzzao, G, & Rizzi, F. (2023). The role of dynamic capabilities for resilience in pursuing business continuity: an empirical study. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1080/‌14783363.2023.2174427
  6. Carmeli, A., & Tishler, A. (2004). Resources, capabilities, and the performance of industrial firms: A multivariate analysis. Managerial and Decision Economics, 25(6–7), 299–315.https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌mde.1192
  7. Collis, D. J. (1994). Research note: how valuable are organizational capabilities?. Strategic management journal, 15(S1), 143-152.https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌smj.4250150910
  8. Constance E. Helfat. (1997). Know-How and Asset Complementarity and Dynamic Capability Accumulation: The Case of R&D. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌(SICI)1097-0266(199705)18:5<339::AID-SMJ883>3.0.CO;2-7
  9. Criado-García, F., Calvo-Mora, A., & Martelo-Landroguez, S. (2019). Knowledge management issues in the EFQM excellence model framework. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌IJQRM-11-2018-0317
  10. Dosi, G., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (2000). Introduction The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities. https:/‌/‌citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/‌document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=7ba1b5bc4304682ea3b1ab837c1bd518d800a0de#page=16
  11. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? 21(10–11), 1105–1121. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌9781405164054.ch21
  12. Ellstrom, D., Holtstrom, J., Berg, E., & Josefsson, C. (2022). Dynamic capabilities for digital transformation.Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(2), 272–286. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JSMA-04-2021-0089
  13. Escrig-Tena, A. B., Garcia-Juan, B., & Segarra-Ciprés, M. (2019). Drivers and internalisation of the EFQM excellence model. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 36(3), 398–419. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌IJQRM-08-2017-0161
  14. Gebauer, H. (2011). Exploring the contribution of management innovation to the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(8), 1238–1250. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.indmarman.2011.10.003
  15. Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special Issue), 109–122. http:/‌/‌proquest.umi.com/‌pqdweb?RQT=562&MRR=R&TS=1297501326&clientId=27625%5Cnhttp:/‌/‌proquest.umi.com/‌pqdweb?did=11194159&Fmt=7&clientId=27625&RQT=309&VName=PQD.
  16. Hall, R. (1993). A Framwork Linking Intangible Resources And Capablllltes To Sustainable Competitive Advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 14(July 1992), 607–618. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌smj.4250140804
  17. Harrington, H. (2007). The five pillars of organizational excellence. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 34(4), 73–73. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1109/‌emr.2006.261408
  18. Hemmati, M., Feiz, D., Jalilvand, M. R., & Kholghi, I. (2016). Development of fuzzy two-stage DEA model for competitive advantage based on RBV and strategic agility as a dynamic capability. Journal of Modelling in Management, 11(1), 288–308. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JM2-12-2013-0067
  19. Hemsworth, D. (2016). An Empirical Assessment Of The EFQM Excellence Model In Purchasing. International Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER), 15(4), 127–146.https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.19030/‌iber.v15i4.9715
  20. Inan, G. G., & Bititci, U. S. (2015). Understanding organizational capabilities and dynamic capabilities in the context of micro enterprises : a research agenda. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 210, 310–319. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.sbspro.2015.11.371
  21. Ismail, A. I., Rose, R. C., Uli, J., & Abdullah, H. (2012). The relationship between organisational resources, capabilities, systems and competitive advantage. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 17(1), 151–173. https:/‌/‌www.proquest.com/‌scholarly-journals/‌relationship-between-organisational-resources/‌docview/‌1506155286/‌se-2?accountid=45153
  22. Jiang, W. (2014). Business partnerships and organizational performance. https:/‌/‌link.springer.com/‌book/‌10.1007/‌978-3-642-53989-3
  23. Kafetzopoulos, D., & Gotzamani, K. (2019). Investigating the role of EFQM enablers in innovation performance. The TQM Journal, 31(2), 239–256. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌TQM-09-2018-0124
  24. Katkalo, V. S., Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. J. (2010). Introduction: On the nature and scope of dynamic capabilities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4), 1175–1186. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1093/‌icc/‌dtq026
  25. Li, L. (2022). Digital transformation and sustainable performance: The moderating role of market turbulence. Industrial Marketing Management, 104, 28–37. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.indmarman.2022.04.007
  26. Lin, F. J., & Lai, C. F. (2020). Key factors affecting technological capabilities in small and medium-sized enterprises in Taiwan. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1007/‌s11365-019-00632-2
  27. Loureiro, R., Ferreira, J. J. M., & Simões, J. (2021). Approaches to measuring dynamic capabilities: Theoretical insights and the research agenda. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 62, https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jengtecman.2021.101657
  28. Makadok, R. (2001). Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), 387–401. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌smj.158
  29. Mcadam, R., & O’Neill, E. (1999). Taking a critical perspective to the European Business Excellence Model using a balanced scorecard approach: A case study in the service sector. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 9(3), 191–197. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌09604529910267091
  30. Mikalef, P., Pateli, A., & Van De Wetering, R. (2016). IT flexibility and competitive performance: The mediating role of IT-enabled dynamic capabilities. 24th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2016. http:/‌/‌aisel.aisnet.org/‌ecis2016_rp/‌176
  31. Mithas, S., Ramasubbu, N., & Sambamurthy, V. (2011). How information management capability influences firm performance. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 35(1), 237–256. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.2307/‌23043496
  32. Nguyen, X. H., Nguyen, K. L., Nguyen, T. V. H., Nguyen, T. T. H., & Ta, V. L. (2023). The impact of green organizational capabilities on competitive advantage of construction enterprises in Vietnam: The mediating role of green innovation. Sustainability, 15(16), 12371. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.3390/‌su151612371
  33. O’Regan, N., & Ghobadian, A. (2004). The importance of capabilities for strategic direction and performance. Management Decision, 42(2), 292–313. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌00251740410518525
  34. Odeibat, A. S. A. (2023). Exploring the impact of managerial capabilities on the innovation potential of artificial intelligence and organizational capabilities: A literature review.
  35. Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2011). Understanding the elusive black box of dynamic capabilities. Decision Sciences, 42(1), 239–273. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1111/‌j.1540-5915.2010.00287.x
  36. Rahman, M., Hack-Polay, D., Shafique, S., & Igwe, P. (2024). Institutional and organizational capabilities as drivers of internationalisation: Evidence from emerging economy SMEs. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 25(3), 187-202. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1177/‌14657503221106181
  37. Rahmandad, H. (2012). Impact of growth opportunities and competition on firm-level capability development trade-offs. Organizational Science, 23(1), 138–154. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1287/‌ORSC.1100.0628
  38. Reeves, M., & Deimler, M. (2011). Adaptability: The new competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1080/‌1478336042000309857
  39. Samadi, M., Mirnezami, R., & Torabi Khargh, M. (2023). The impact of organizational capabilities on the international performance of knowledge-based firms. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.joitmc.2023.100163
  40. Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 35(2), 179–203. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌smj.2090
  41. Spanos, Y. E., & Prastacos, G. (2004). Understanding organizational capabilities: Towards a conceptual framework. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3), 31–43. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌13673270410541024
  42. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌smj.64
  43. Teece, D. J. (2009). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management: Organizing for innovation and growth. https:/‌/‌www.researchgate.net/‌publication/‌227468288_Dynamic_Capabilities_and_Strategic_Management_Organizing_for_Innovation_and_Growth
  44. Teece, D. J. (2014). The foundations of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of firms. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 328–352. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.5465/‌amp.2013.0116
  45. Teece, D. J. (2018). Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of Management and Organization, 24(3), 359–368. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1017/‌jmo.2017.75
  46. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(March), 509–533. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1142/‌9789812796929_0004
  47. Terouhid, S. A., & Ries, R. (2016). People capability: A strategic capability for enhancing organizational excellence of construction firms. Journal of Modelling in Management, 11(3), 811–841. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JM2-04-2014-0028
  48. Urbano, D., Alvarez, C., & Turró, A. (2013). Organizational resources and intrapreneurial activities: An international study. Management Decision, 51(4), 854–870. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌00251741311326617
  49. Verreynne, M., Hine, D., Coote, L., & Parker, R. (2016). Building a scale for dynamic learning capabilities: The role of resources, learning, competitive intent and routine patterning. Journal of Business Research, 69, 4287–4303. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jbusres.2016.04.003
  50. Wang, C. H., Chang, C. H., & Shen, G. C. (2015). The effect of inbound open innovation on firm performance: Evidence from high-tech industry. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.techfore.2015.07.006
  51. Xu, D., Huo, B., & Sun, L. (2014). Relationships between intra-organizational resources, supply chain integration and business performance: An extended resource-based view. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 114(8), 1186–1206. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌IMDS-05-2014-0156
  52. Zapata-Cantu, L., Delgado, J. H. C., & Gonzalez, F. R. (2016). Resource and dynamic capabilities in business excellence models to enhance competitiveness. TQM Journal, 28(6), 847–868. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌TQM-03-2014-0030
  53. Zhang, J., & Wu, W. P. (2017). Leveraging internal resources and external business networks for new product success: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 61, 170–181. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.indmarman.2016.06.001