Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Novel Hybrid Fuzzy DEA-Fuzzy ARAS Method for Prioritizing High-Performance Innovation-Oriented Human Resource Practices in High Tech SME’s

  • Published:
International Journal of Fuzzy Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although in line with the resource-based view (RBV), the impact of different HPWS practices on the innovation success of SMEs has been approved by researchers, investigating the previous studies indicates that the relation between these two areas has been more widely considered and less attention has been paid to the impact mechanism. Lack of real data and focus of analysis on respondents’ opinions, lack of process perspective and focus on innovation output criteria, lack of attention to uncertainty in the impact chain, and most importantly lack of a method to prioritize HPWS practices are among the most important constraints identified. So, this study proposes a framework for prioritizing innovation-oriented high-performance human resource practices by combining fuzzy DEA and fuzzy ARAS methods. This paper also presents an objective approach to investigate the impact of High-Performance Work system (HPWS) practices on innovation performance of small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) by considering organizational innovation as a process. After preparing the list of HPWS practices and innovation performance criteria through reviewing the literature and obtaining expert opinions, the fuzzy DEA method was used to model the innovation process performance and calculate the weight of each innovation input criteria. Then, considering the impact of HPWS practices on these input criteria, HPWS practices were ranked using the fuzzy ARAS method. The results of applying this framework to SMEs in the field of nanotechnology in Iran show that top management support is the most important input criteria and the financial results of innovation are the most important output of organizational innovation criteria. In addition, based on the results of this study, the most important effective HPWS practices for SME innovation can be considered as: employee training and development, information sharing and employee participation. The consistency of final ranking of practices and criteria importance with the findings of previous research, the results of sensitivity analysis and comparison of the results of proposed framework and four other multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) methods show the robustness and reliability of the findings of this research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shahzad, K., Arenius, P., Muller, A., Rasheed, M.A., Bajwa, S.U.: Unpacking the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance in SMEs. Pers Rev (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-10-2016-0271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Edwards, T., Delbridge, R. and Munday, M.: Linking innovative potential to SME performance: an assessment of enterprises in Industrial South Wales. Paper for 41st European Regional Science Association Meeting, Zagreb, Croatia, August 2001.

  3. Curado, C., Muñoz-Pascual, L., Galende, J.: Antecedents to innovation performance in SMEs: a mixed methods approach. J. Bus. Res. 89, 206–215 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Shipton, H., Sparrow, P., Budhwar, P., Brown, A.: HRM and innovation: looking across levels. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 27(2), 246–263 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rujirawanich, P., Addison, R., Smallman, C.: The effects of cultural factors on innovation in a Thai SME. Manag. Res. Rev. 34(12), 1264–1279 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Huang, Z., Ning, Z.: Examining the key factors of SME successful innovation. In ISPIM Innovation Symposium, p. 1. The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM), December, 2012.

  7. Kim, M.K., Park, J.H., Paik, J.H.: Factors influencing innovation capability of small and medium-sized enterprises in Korean manufacturing sector: facilitators, barriers and moderators. Int. J. Technol. Manage. 76(3–4), 214–235 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Saa-Perez, P., Díaz-Díaz, N.L.: Human resource management and innovation in the Canary Islands: an ultra-peripheral region of the European Union. Int J Human Res Manag 21(10), 1649–1666 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jimenez-Jimenez, D., Sanz-Valle, R.: Could HRM support organizational innovation? Int J Human Res Manag 19(7), 1208–1221 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Osterman, P.: The wage effects of high performance work organization in manufacturing. ILR Rev. 59(2), 187–204 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Partanen, J., Möller, K., Westerlund, M., Rajala, R., Rajala, A.: Social capital in the growth of science-and-technology-based SMEs. Ind. Mark. Manage. 37(5), 513–522 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Della Torre, E., Solari, L.: High performance work systems, technological innovations and firm performance in SME: evidences from Italy. Int. J. Entrep. Ventur. 3(4), 375–391 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Do, H.: Interplay between HPWS and innovation: evidence from Vietnamese small businesses. In: Academy of management proceedings, vol. 2019(1), p. 10273. Academy of Management, Briarcliff Manor, NY (2019, July).

  14. Rasheed, M.A., Shahzad, K., Conroy, C., Nadeem, S., Siddique, M.U.: Exploring the role of employee voice between high-performance work system and organizational innovation in small and medium enterprises. J Small Business Enterp Dev (2017). https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-11-2016-0185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Crossan, M.M., Apaydin, M.: A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: a systematic review of the literature. J. Manage. Stud. 47(6), 1154–1191 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Edquist, C., Hommen, L., McKelvey, M.D.: Innovation and employment: process versus product innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mention, A.L.: Intellectual capital, innovation and performance: a systematic review of the literature. Business Econom Res (2012). https://doi.org/10.5296/ber.v2i1.1937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dahooie, J.H., Zavadskas, E.K., Firoozfar, H.R., Vanaki, A.S., Mohammadi, N., Brauers, W.K.M.: An improved fuzzy MULTIMOORA approach for multi-criteria decision making based on objective weighting method (CCSD) and its application to technological forecasting method selection. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 79, 114–128 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Estiri, M., Dahooie, J. H., Vanaki, A. S., Banaitis, A., Binkytė-Vėlienė, A.: A multi-attribute framework for the selection of high-performance work systems: the hybrid DEMATEL-MABAC model. Econom Res-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 1–28 (2020).

  20. Marlow, S.: Human resource management in smaller firms: a contradiction in terms? Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 16(4), 467–477 (2006)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Vahdani, B., Mousavi, S.M., Ebrahimnejad, S.: Soft computing-based preference selection index method for human resource management. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(1), 393–403 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Alfaro García, V.G., Gil-Lafuente, A.M., Alfaro Calderon, G.: A fuzzy logic approach towards innovation measurement. Global J Business Res 9(3), 53–71 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Poskela, J., Martinsuo, M.: Management control and strategic renewal in the front end of innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 26(6), 671–684 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Barak, S., Dahooie, J.H.: A novel hybrid fuzzy DEA-Fuzzy MADM method for airlines safety evaluation. J. Air Transp. Manag. 73, 134–149 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ma, J., Fan, Z.P., Huang, L.H.: A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 112(2), 397–404 (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Mousavi-Nasab, S.H., Sotoudeh-Anvari, A.: A comprehensive MCDM-based approach using TOPSIS, COPRAS and DEA as an auxiliary tool for material selection problems. Mater. Des. 121, 237–253 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shabani, A., Saen, R.F., Torabipour, S.M.R.: A new benchmarking approach in Cold Chain. Appl. Math. Model. 36(1), 212–224 (2012)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee, H., Kim, C.: Benchmarking of service quality with data envelopment analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(8), 3761–3768 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Heidary Dahooie, J., Hajiagha, S.H.R., Farazmehr, S., Zavadskas, E.K., Antucheviciene, J.: A novel dynamic credit risk evaluation method using data envelopment analysis with common weights and combination of multi-attribute decision-making methods. Comp Oper Res 129, 105223 (2021)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Kumar, A., Mukherjee, K., Adlakha, A.: Dynamic performance assessment of a supply chain process. Business Proc Manag J (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-09-2014-0086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Haar, J., O’Kane, C., Daellenbach, U.: High performance work systems and innovation in New Zealand SMEs: testing firm size and competitive environment effects. Int J Human Res Manag (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1894213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Boon, C., Den Hartog, D.N., Lepak, D.P.: A systematic review of human resource management systems and their measurement. J. Manag. 45(6), 2498–2537 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., Kalleberg, A.L., Bailey, T.A.: Manufacturing advantage: why high-performance work systems pay off. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Jiang, K., Lepak, D.P., Hu, J., Baer, J.C.: How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? a meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Acad. Manag. J. 55(6), 1264–1294 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Cooke, F.L., Cooper, B., Bartram, T., Wang, J., Mei, H.: Mapping the relationships between high-performance work systems, employee resilience and engagement: a study of the banking industry in China. Int J Human Res Manag 30(8), 1239–1260 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Cafferkey, K., Dundon, T.: Explaining the black box: HPWS and organisational climate. Pers. Rev. 44(5), 666–688 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Xian, H., Atkinson, C., Meng-Lewis, Y.: Guanxi and high performance work systems in China: evidence from a state-owned enterprise. Int J Human Res Manag 30(19), 2685–2704 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Chang, S., Jia, L., Takeuchi, R., Cai, Y.: Do high-commitment work systems affect creativity? a multilevel combinational approach to employee creativity. J. Appl. Psychol. 99(4), 665 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Deshpande, S.P., Golhar, D.Y.: HRM practices in large and small manufacturing firms: a comparative study. J. Small Bus. Manage. 32(2), 49–56 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Godard, J.: A critical assessment of the high-performance paradigm. Br. J. Ind. Relat. 42(2), 349–378 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lai, Y., Saridakis, G., Johnstone, S.: Human resource practices, employee attitudes and small firm performance. Int. Small Bus. J. 35(4), 470–494 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Drummond, I., Stone, I.: Exploring the potential of high performance work systems in SMEs. Empl. Relat. 29(2), 192–207 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Aït Razouk, A.: High-performance work systems and performance of French small-and medium-sized enterprises: examining causal order. Int J Human Res Manag 22(02), 311–330 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Xi, M., Chen, Y., Zhao, S.: The Role of employees’ perceptions of HPWS in the HPWS-performance relationship: a multilevel perspective. Asia Pac J Manag (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-019-09694-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Wu, N., Bacon, N., Hoque, K.: The adoption of high performance work practices in small businesses: the influence of markets, business characteristics and HR expertise. Int J Human Res Manag 25(8), 1149–1169 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wu, N., Hoque, K., Bacon, N., Bou Llusar, J.C.: High-performance work systems and workplace performance in small, medium-sized and large firms. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 25(4), 408–423 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Gilman, M., Raby, S.: National context as a predictor of high-performance work system effectiveness in small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): a UK–French comparative analysis. Int J Human Res Manag 24(2), 372–390 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Qiao, K., Wang, X., Wei, L.Q.: Determinants of high-performance work systems in small and medium-sized private enterprises in China. Asia Pac J Human Res 53(2), 185–203 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ivars, J.V.P., Martínez, J.M.C.: The effect of high performance work systems on small and medium size enterprises. J. Bus. Res. 68(7), 1463–1465 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  50. L’Écuyer, F., Raymond, L., Fabi, B., Uwizeyemungu, S.: Strategic alignment of IT and human resources management in manufacturing SMEs. Employee Relations Int J (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-09-2018-0258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Pittino, D., Visintin, F., Lenger, T., Sternad, D.: Are high performance work practices really necessary in family SMEs? an analysis of the impact on employee retention. J. Fam. Bus. Strat. 7(2), 75–89 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Andersen, J., Andersen, A.: Are high-performance work systems (HPWS) appreciated by everyone? the role of management position and gender on the relationship between HPWS and affective commitment. Employee Relations Int J 41(5), 1046–1064 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Do, H., Shipton, H.: High-performance work systems and innovation in Vietnamese small firms. Int. Small Bus. J. 37(7), 732–753 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Arthur, J.B., Herdman, A.O., Yang, J.: Which way to high performance? comparing performance effects of high-performance work system components in small-to medium-sized establishments. ILR Rev, 0019793919893668 (2019).

  55. Sun, Y., Mamman, A.: Adoption of high-performance work systems in small and medium-sized enterprises. Asia Pac J Human Res (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Messersmith, J.G., Patel, P.C., Lepak, D.P., Gould-Williams, J.S.: Unlocking the black box: exploring the link between high-performance work systems and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 96(6), 1105 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Liu, D., Gong, Y., Zhou, J., Huang, J.C.: Human resource systems, employee creativity, and firm innovation: the moderating role of firm ownership. Acad. Manag. J. 60(3), 1164–1188 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Reinholt, M.I.A., Pedersen, T., Foss, N.J.: Why a central network position isn’t enough: the role of motivation and ability for knowledge sharing in employee networks. Acad. Manag. J. 54(6), 1277–1297 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wright, P.M., Kehoe, R.R.: Human resource practices and organizational commitment: a deeper examination. Asia Pac J Human Res 46(1), 6–20 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Baggen, Y., Lans, T., Biemans, H.J., Kampen, J., Mulder, M.: Fostering Entrepreneurial Learning On-the-Job: evidence from innovative small and medium-sized companies in Europe. Eur. J. Educ. 51(2), 193–209 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Teece, D.J.: Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 28(13), 1319–1350 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Wu, L., Chiu, M.L.: Organizational applications of IT innovation and firm’s competitive performance: A resource-based view and the innovation diffusion approach. J. Eng. Tech. Manage. 35, 25–44 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Chege, S.M., Wang, D.: The influence of technology innovation on SME performance through environmental sustainability practices in Kenya. Technol Soc 60, 101210 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Expósito, A., Sanchis-Llopis, J.A.: The relationship between types of innovation and SMEs’ performance: a multi-dimensional empirical assessment. Eurasian Bus. Rev. 9(2), 115–135 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Saraceni, A.V., De Resende, L.M., Serpe, L.F., De Andrade, P.P.: A comparative analysis between clustered and non-clustered companies using innovation indicators. IFAC-PapersOnLine 28(3), 155–160 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Staniewski, M.W., Nowacki, R., Awruk, K.: Entrepreneurship and innovativeness of small and medium-sized construction enterprises. Int Entrep Manag J 12(3), 861–877 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Schumpeter, J.A.: The theory of economic development (R. Opie, Trans). New Brunswick (1983).

  68. Dewangan, V., Godse, M.: Towards a holistic enterprise innovation performance measurement system. Technovation 34(9), 536–545 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Morris, L.: Innovation metrics: the innovation process and how to measure it. An InnovationLabs White Paper. InnovationLab. LLC (2008).

  70. Cordero, R.: The measurement of innovation performance in the firm: an overview. Res. Policy 19(2), 185–192 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Cruz-Cázares, C., Bayona-Sáez, C., García-Marco, T.: You can’t manage right what you can’t measure well: technological innovation efficiency. Res. Policy 42(6–7), 1239–1250 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  72. Chen, K., Guan, J.: Measuring the efficiency of China’s regional innovation systems: application of network data envelopment analysis (DEA). Reg. Stud. 46(3), 355–377 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Hittmar, S., Varmus, M., Lendel, V.: Proposal of evaluation system for successful application of innovation strategy through a set of indicators. Procedia Econom Finance 26, 17–22 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Roberts, E.B.: Managing invention and innovation. Res Technol Manag 50(1), 35–54 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  75. Shapiro, A.R.: Measuring innovation: beyond revenue from new products. Res. Technol. Manag. 49(6), 42–51 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  76. Sadeghani, M., Mollaverdi, N., Shirouyehzad, H., Jafarpour, E.: Analysis of the efficiency R & D projects base on BSC–DEA approach with restrictions on weight of inputs and outputs. Int J Econom Manag Soc Sci 2(10), 775–779 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  77. Alegre, J., Lapiedra, R., Chiva, R.: A measurement scale for product innovation performance. Eur J Innov Manag 9, 333–346 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Hagedoorn, J., Cloodt, M.: Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Res. Policy 32(8), 1365–1379 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  79. Godener, A., Söderquist, K.E.: Use and impact of performance measurement results in R&D and NPD: an exploratory study. R&D Manag 34(2), 191–219 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Diaz-Balteiro, L., Herruzo, A.C., Martinez, M., González-Pachón, J.: An analysis of productive efficiency and innovation activity using DEA: an application to Spain’s wood-based industry. Forest Policy Econ. 8(7), 762–773 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  81. Edison, H., Bin Ali, N., Torkar, R.: Towards innovation measurement in the software industry. J. Syst. Softw. 86(5), 1390–1407 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  82. Gao, W., Chou, J.: Innovation efficiency, global diversification, and firm value. J. Corp. Finan. 30, 278–298 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  83. Kim, S.K.: Explicit design of innovation performance metrics by using analytic hierarchy process expansion. Int J Math Math Sci (2014). https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/125950

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  84. Ivanov, C.I., Avasilcăi, S.: Measuring the performance of innovation processes: a balanced scorecard perspective. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 109(8), 1190–1193 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  85. Saunila, M.: Is innovation performance measurement beneficial for performance in services? Int J Business Global 18(1), 27–41 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  86. Park, J.H.: Open innovation of small and medium-sized enterprises and innovation efficiency. Asian J. Technol. Innov. 26(2), 115–145 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  87. Lee, J., Kim, C., Choi, G.: Exploring data envelopment analysis for measuring collaborated innovation efficiency of small and medium-sized enterprises in Korea. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 278(2), 533–545 (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  88. Schuler, R.S., Jackson, S.E.: Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 1(3), 207–219 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  89. Chadwick, C., Dabu, A.: Human resources, human resource management, and the competitive advantage of firms: toward a more comprehensive model of causal linkages. Organ. Sci. 20(1), 253–272 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  90. De Leede, J., Looise, J.K.: Innovation and HRM: towards an integrated framework. Creativity Innov Manag 14(2), 108–117 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  91. Scarbrough, H.: Knowledge management, HRM and the innovation process. Int. J. Manpow. 24(5), 501–516 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  92. Chen, C.J., Huang, J.W.: Strategic human resource practices and innovation performance—the mediating role of knowledge management capacity. J. Bus. Res. 62(1), 104–114 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  93. Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inform Control 8(3), 338–353 (1965)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  94. Adler, N., Friedman, L., Sinuany-Stern, Z.: Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 140(2), 249–265 (2002)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  95. Sarkis, J.: A methodological framework for evaluating environmentally conscious manufacturing programs. Comput. Ind. Eng. 36(4), 793–810 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  96. Tavana, M., Khalili-Damghani, K., Rahmatian, R.: A hybrid fuzzy MCDM method for measuring the performance of publicly held pharmaceutical companies. Ann. Oper. Res. 226(1), 589–621 (2015)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  97. Sinuany-Stern, Z., Mehrez, A., Hadad, Y.: An AHP/DEA methodology for ranking decision making units. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 7(2), 109–124 (2000)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  98. Alem, S.M., Jolai, F., Nazari-Shirkouhi, S.: An integrated fuzzy DEA-fuzzy AHP approach: a new model for ranking decision-making units. Int J Operat Res 17(1), 38–58 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  99. Wang, T.C., Lee, H.D.: Developing a fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on subjective weights and objective weights. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(5), 8980–8985 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  100. Chang, B., Chang, C.W., Wu, C.H.: Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(3), 1850–1858 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  101. Chang, S., Gong, Y., Shum, C.: Promoting innovation in hospitality companies through human resource management practices. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 30(4), 812–818 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  102. Chang, P.L., Chen, Y.C.: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method for technology transfer strategy selection in biotechnology. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 63(2), 131–139 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  103. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E.: Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2(6), 429–444 (1978)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  104. Emrouznejad, A., Parker, B.R., Tavares, G.: Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: a survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA. Socioeconom. Plann. Sci. 42(3), 151–157 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  105. Hatami-Marbini, A., Emrouznejad, A., Tavana, M.: A taxonomy and review of the fuzzy data envelopment analysis literature: two decades in the making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 214(3), 457–472 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  106. Kao, C., Liu, S.T.: Fuzzy efficiency measures in data envelopment analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 113(3), 427–437 (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  107. Moon, H.S.: The relative efficiency analysis of innovation activities with uncertainty: the case of Korean electronic equipment industry. Innovation 15(3), 305–314 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  108. Li, Q.: Regional technological innovation and green economic efficiency based on DEA model and fuzzy evaluation. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 37(5), 6415–6425 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  109. Lertworasirikul, S., Fang, S.C., Joines, J.A., Nuttle, H.L.: Fuzzy data envelopment analysis (DEA): a possibility approach. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 139(2), 379–394 (2003)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  110. Kumar, A., Kaur, J., Singh, P.: A new method for solving fully fuzzy linear programming problems. Appl. Math. Model. 35(2), 817–823 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  111. Yager, R.R.: A procedure for ordering fuzzy subsets of the unit interval. Inf. Sci. 24(2), 143–161 (1981)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  112. Turskis, Z., Zavadskas, E.K.: A new fuzzy additive ratio assessment method (ARAS-F). Case study: the analysis of fuzzy multiple criteria in order to select the logistic centers location. Transport 25(4), 423–432 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  113. Seeck, H., Diehl, M.R.: A literature review on HRM and innovation–taking stock and future directions. Int J Human Res Manag 28(6), 913–944 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  114. Taggar, S.: Individual creativity and group ability to utilize individual creative resources: A multilevel model. Acad. Manag. J. 45(2), 315–330 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  115. Shalley, C.E., Zhou, J., Oldham, G.R.: The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: where should we go from here? J. Manag. 30(6), 933–958 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  116. Fu, N., Flood, P., Bosak, J., Morris, T., O’Regan, P.: How do high performance work systems influence organizational innovation in professional service firms? Empl. Relat. 37(2), 209–231 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  117. Collins, C.J., Smith, K.G.: Knowledge exchange and combination: the role of human resource practices in the performance of high-technology firms. Acad. Manag. J. 49(3), 544–560 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  118. Armstrong, C., Flood, P.C., Guthrie, J.P., Liu, W., MacCurtain, S., Mkamwa, T.: The impact of diversity and equality management on firm performance: beyond high performance work systems. Hum Resour Manage 49(6), 977–998 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  119. Heffernan, M., Dundon, T., Cafferkey, K., Harney, B.: Exploring the relationship between HRM, creativity climate and organisational performance: evidence from Ireland (2009).

  120. De Winne, S., Sels, L.: Interrelationships between human capital, HRM and innovation in Belgian start-ups aiming at an innovation strategy. Int J Human Res Manag 21(11), 1863–1883 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  121. Jiménez-Jiménez, D., Sanz-Valle, R.: Innovation and human resource management fit: an empirical study. Int J Manpower (2005). https://doi.org/10.1108/01437720510609555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Lau, C.M., Ngo, H.Y.: The HR system, organizational culture, and product innovation. Int. Bus. Rev. 13(6), 685–703 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  123. Shipton, H., West, M.A., Dawson, J., Birdi, K., Patterson, M.: HRM as a predictor of innovation. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 16(1), 3–27 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  124. Walsworth, S., Verma, A.: Globalization, human resource practices and innovation: recent evidence from the Canadian workplace and employee survey. Indust Relations J Econom Soc 46(2), 222–240 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  125. Weisberg, R.W.: Expertise and reason in creative thinking. Creativity and reason in cognitive development, 7–42 (2006).

  126. Ottenbacher, M.C., Harrington, R.J.: The product innovation process of quick-service restaurant chains. Int J Contemp Hospitality Manag (2009). https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110910967782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Mak, S.K., Akhtar, S.: Human resource management practices, strategic orientations, and company performance: a correlation study of publicly listed companies. J. Am. Acad. Bus. Camb. 2(2), 510–510 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  128. Chou, S.Y., Chang, Y.H., Shen, C.Y.: A fuzzy simple additive weighting system under group decision-making for facility location selection with objective/subjective attributes. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 189(1), 132–145 (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  129. Liang, W., Zhao, G., Wu, H., Dai, B.: Risk assessment of rockburst via an extended MABAC method under fuzzy environment. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 83, 533–544 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  130. Tzeng, G.H., Huang, J.J.: Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL (2011)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  131. Sarraf, R., McGuire, M.P.: Integration and comparison of multi-criteria decision making methods in safe route planner. Expert Syst Appl 154, 113399 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  132. Webber, W., Moffat, A., Zobel, J.: A similarity measure for indefinite rankings. ACM Transact Inform Syst (TOIS) 28(4), 1–38 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  133. Järvelin, K., Kekäläinen, J.: IR evaluation methods for retrieving highly relevant documents. In: ACM SIGIR forum, vol. 51(2), pp. 243–250). ACM, New York, NY, USA (2000).

  134. Järvelin, K., Kekäläinen, J.: Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Trans Inform Syst (TOIS) 20(4), 422–446 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  135. Barak, S., Javanmard, S.: Outsourcing modelling using a novel interval-valued fuzzy quantitative strategic planning matrix (QSPM) and multiple criteria decision-making (MCDMs). Int J Prod Econom 222, 107494 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  136. Triantaphyllou, E.: Multi-criteria decision making methods. In: Multi-criteria decision making methods: a comparative stud, pp. 5–21. Springer, Boston, MA (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  137. Mulliner, E., Malys, N., Maliene, V.: Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability. Omega 59, 146–156 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  138. Andersson, M., Moen, O., Brett, P.O.: The organizational climate for psychological safety: associations with SMEs’ innovation capabilities and innovation performance. J Eng Technol Manag 55, 101554 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  139. Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., Ketchen, D.: How much do high-performance work practices matter? a meta-analysis of their effects on organizational performance. Pers. Psychol. 59, 501–528 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Jalil Heidary Dahooie & Mehrdad Estiri

  2. Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Jalil Heidary Dahooie & Mehrdad Estiri

  3. Institute of Sustainable Construction, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas

  4. Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, China

    Zeshui Xu

Authors
  1. Jalil Heidary Dahooie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehrdad Estiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zeshui Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mehrdad Estiri or Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heidary Dahooie, J., Estiri, M., Zavadskas, E.K. et al. A Novel Hybrid Fuzzy DEA-Fuzzy ARAS Method for Prioritizing High-Performance Innovation-Oriented Human Resource Practices in High Tech SME’s. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 24, 883–908 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-021-01162-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-021-01162-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation