Determination of Effective Balanced Indicators in the Airline Company Using a Modified Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process Approach
Abstract
The determination of the balanced scorecard (BSC) model based on the example of an airline company are considered in this article. The main objective is the finding of the effective indicators for the airline company activities which are major importance for the company's strategy. The authors used the following research methods: the Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) (T. Saati's method). On the result of research priority (importance) and weight of all perspectives and corresponding indicators are determined. According to the research, the first priority is the ‘Customers’ perspective, the second priority is the ‘Finance’ perspective, the third priority is the ‘Internal business-processes’ perspective, and the fourth priority is the ‘Learning and Growth’ perspective. During the study, 20 indicators from 37 indicators were selected.
The results of the research show that such indicators as passenger satisfaction, code-sharing agreements with airline companies, the number of passengers are the most effective for the ‘Customers’ perspective. Profitability, revenues, operating costs, ROIC, EBITDAR are the most significant indicators for the financial perspective. Indicators such as the average age of the park, technical dispatch reliability, On-time Performance of flights, the number of accidents, the level of safety, the number of aircrafts are the most significant for the ‘Internal business-processes’ perspective. The indicators like the employee satisfaction, employee efficiency, percent of trained employees from total number of employees, the amount of funds for training, the number of passengers buying tickets through websites, IT costs are most significant for the ‘Learning and Growth’ perspective. With the help of selected indicators, the company can monitor the effectiveness of its activity.
References
[2] Akkoç, S., and Vatansever, K. 2013. Fuzzy performance evaluation with AHP and Tops is methods: evidence from Turkish banking sector after the global financial crisis. Eurasian J. Bus. Econ. 6 (11): 53-74.
[3] Aljardali, H., Mazen Kaderi, Levy-Tadjine, T. 2012. The implementation of the balanced scorecard in lebanese public higher education institutions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 62: 98 – 108.
[4] Balkovskaya, D. and Liubov Filneva. 2016. The use of the balanced scorecard in bank strategic management. Int. J. Business Excellence, 9(1).
[5] Chen, I.S. 2016. A combined MCDM model based on DEMATEL and ANP for the selection of airline service quality improvement criteria: a study based on the Taiwanese airline industry. J. Air Transp. Manag.57: 7-18.
[6] Chlistalla, M. and Schaper, T. 2009. Modifying the Balanced Scorecard for a Network Industry. The Case of the Clearing Industry. IFIP AICT 305: 255–271.
[7] Chung-Ming C. 2012. Verification of the Effects of Balance Scorecard Implementation on a Company’s Financial Performance: Using Intellectual Capital Accumulation as the Mediator. The Journal of Global Business Management, 8(2).
[8] Del Sordoa, C. et al. 2012. Assessing global performance in universities: an application of balanced scorecard. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46: 4793 – 4797.
[9] Dincer, H., and Hacioglu, U. 2013. Performance evaluation with fuzzy VIKOR and AHP method based on customer satisfaction in Turkish banking sector / Kybernetes, 42(7): 1072-1085.
[10] Flores, M., Al-Ashaab, A. and Magyar, A. 2009. A Balanced Scorecard for Open Innovation: Measuring the Impact of Industry–University Collaboration. PRO-VE, IFIP AICT 307: 23–32.
[11] Ghasemi, A., and Ahmadi, S.H. 2013. Evaluation of higher education institutions with the help of a balanced scorecard and multi-criteria decision methods. Journal of Medical Education, 6(10): 38-49.
[12] Gorsky M., and Gershun A. 2008. Golden Pages: The best examples of the introduction of a balanced scorecardTranslated from English by Pavlova M. Closed Joint-Stock Company ‘Olympus Business’, 416.
[13] Gündüzalp, S. and Bakır Arabac, I. 2017. Applicability of Balanced Scorecard system in primary schools according to opinions of education inspectors, managers and teachers. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(4): 161-180.
[14] Ivanov, C.I. and Avasilcăi, S. 2014. Measuring the performance of innovation processes: A Balanced Scorecard perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 109: 1190-1193.
[15] Kaplan, R. and Norton, D. 1996. Translating Strategy Into action. The balanced scorecard. Harvard Business School Press, 336.
[16] Lupi, S. et al. 2011. Multidimensional evaluation of performance with experimental application of balanced scorecard: a two year experience. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 9:7.
[17] Mahendran, P. Moorthy, M. B. K. and Saravanan, S. 2014. Fuzzy AHP Approach for Selection of Measuring Instrument for Engineering College Selection. Applied Mathematical Sciences, 8: 2149 – 2161.
[18] Nikookar, G., Rahrovy, E., Razi, S., and Ghassemi, R.A. 2015. Investigating influential factors on word of mouth in service industries: the case of Iran airline company. Procedia-Social Behav. Sci. 177: 217-222.
[19] Otero, D.F., Akhavan-Tabatabaei, R. and Eur. J. 2015. A stochastic dynamic pricing model for the multiclass problems in the airline industry. Eur. J. Operational Res. 242 (1): 188-200.
[20] Romano, L. 2013. How to evolve a project portfolio using balanced scorecards: a case study. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2013 - North America, New Orleans, LA. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
[21] Saaty, T.L. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process, New York: McGraw- Hill, , 296.
[22] Satybaldiyeva, D.O, and Mukhanova, G.S. 2017. Foreign experience of introducing balanced scorecard in companies / Bulletin of Turan University, 4 (76): 185-189.
[23] Schwieger D. 2015. Using a Balance Scorecard Approach to Evaluate the Value of Service Learning Projects in Online Courses. Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 13(5).
[24] She-I Chang, et al. 2011. An ERP system performance assessment model development based on the balanced scorecard approach. Springer Science+Business Media, InfSyst Front, 429–450.
[25] Shivakumar, U., Ravi, V., and Venkateswaran, T. R. 2013. Quantification of Balanced Scorecard Using Crisp and Fuzzy Multi Attribute Decision Making: Application to Banking. In Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology (ICETET), 6th International Conference on, 164-170.
[26] The introduction of a balanced scorecard. Horvath & Partners; Translation from German – Moscow: Alpina Business Books.3-ed, 2008, 478.
[27] Wang Qiaoxiu, Wang Hong, and Qi Zuoqiu. 2016. An application of nonlinear fuzzy analytic hierarchy process in safety evaluation of coal mine. Safety Science Elsevier Ltd. 86: 78–87.
[28] Yang, C.C., and Chen, B. 2004. Key quality performance evaluation using fuzzy AHP. Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers, 21(6): 543-550.
[29] Zhang, Q., Yang, H., Wang, Q., and Zhang, A. 2014. Market power and its determinants in the Chinese airline industry. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 64: 1-13.
[30] Zou, B., Elke, M., Hansen, M., and Kafle, N. 2014. Evaluating air carrier fuel efficiency in the US airline industry. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract., 59: 306-330.
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.