Browsing by Author "Chu, Mei-Tai"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Comparison among three analytical methods for knowledge communities group-decision analysis
(2007-11-01)
Chu, Mei-Tai
;
Shyu, Joseph
;
Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung
;
Khosla, Rajiv
;
科技管理研究所
Knowledge management can greatly facilitate an organization's learning via strategic insight. Assessing the achievements of knowledge communities (KC) includes both a theoretical basis and practical aspect; however, a cautionary word is in order, because using improper measurements will increase complexity and reduce applicability. Group decision-making, the essence of knowledge communities, lets one considers multi-dimensional problems for the decision-maker, sets priorities for each decision factor, and assesses rankings for all alternatives. The purpose of this study is to establish the objective and measurable patterns to obtain anticipated achievements of KC through conducting a group-decision comparison. The three multiple-criteria decision-making methods we used, simple average weight (SAW), "Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution" (TOPSIS) and "VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje" (VIKOR), are based on an aggregating function representing "closeness to the ideal point". The TOPSIS and VIKOR methods were used to highlight our innovative idea, academic analysis, and practical appliance value. Simple average weight (SAW) is known to be a common method to get the preliminary outcome. Our study provides a comparison analysis of the above-three methods. An empirical case is illustrated to demonstrate the overall KC achievements, showing their similarities and differences to achieve group decisions. Our results showed that TOPSIS and simple average weight (SAW) had identical rankings overall, but TOPSIS had better distinguishing capability. TOPSIS and VIKOR had almost the same success setting priorities by weight. However, VIKOR produced different rankings than those from TOPSIS and SAW, and VIKOR also made it easy to choose appropriate strategies. Both the TOPSIS and VIKOR methods are suitable for assessing similar problems, provide excellent results close to reality, and grant superior analysis. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Measuring the relative performance for leading fabless firms by using data envelopment analysis
(2008-06-01)
Chu, Mei-Tai
;
Shyu, Joesph Z.
;
Khosla, R.
;
科技管理研究所
;
Institute of Management of Technology
IC Design (fabless) is critical for the global semi-conductor industry. The total revenue of all global fabless firms in 2003 was about US$20 billion, with the top 30 firms earning accounting for 96% of the market share. To examine the leaders in the field, this research analyzes the relative performances of those top 30 fabless firms. Fabless firms are often evaluated based on subjective judgments, and an overall scheme to measure the performance involving objective, multi-input and multi-output criteria is yet to be established. There is also a need for identifying and determining suggestions of how specific firms could improve their performance. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) method has been employed in this paper to satisfy the above needs. Using the input and output data of 2003, this study used the DEA method to build a model to evaluate the performance of those global top 30 fabless firms. The current research used four efficiency models: CCR, A&P, BCC, and Cross-Efficiency. To offer a comparison of efficiencies and associated discussions, an analysis of the Scale-Return is provided. Finally, the performance of various fabless firms in 2003 is analyzed. According to the CCR and A&P models, the results showed that the top ten Decision Management Units (DMUs) achieved better operation performance among the 30 leading global fabless firms.
Using nonadditive fuzzy integral to assess performances of organizational transformation via communities of practice
(2007-05-01)
Chu, Mei-Tai
;
Shyu, Joseph Z.
;
Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung
;
Khosla, Rajiv
;
科技管理研究所
Organizational transformations have been widely adopted by firms who wish to improve their competitive advantage to be better prepared to face external challenges. This research has chosen Communities of Practice (CoPs) as the subject of discussion for an assessment model to reform organizations that undertake CoPs for collective knowledge to enhance their core competencies. Given the interrelationships between criteria, this research uses the nonadditive fuzzy integral to develop a framework for the CoPs performance assessment. The purposes of this paper are to identify the key dimensions/criteria in the CoPs, to use fuzzy logic method to analyze the relative importance of each criterion, and to rank the criteria so that proper resources can be allocated while managing the CoPs. Through interviews with experts, four strategy alternatives and 16 criteria along four dimensions are generated. A survey of the CoPs practitioners is then conducted to compare the results of each criterion. The results will not only help organizations that intend to initiate changes via the CoPs activities to decide the ranking of their appraisal criteria, but it can also assist them in guiding the behavior of their staff while effectively monitoring and improving the performances of the CoPs.