Decision Support System for Academic Staff's Managerial Competencies

Assessment

An applied study for Faculty of Dentistry, Alex, University

Mohamed.Wahba
Arab Academy for Science and Technology and Maritime Transport
mwahba@aast.edu

Abstract:

This paper aims to evaluate the managerial competencies of the academic staff
member through using testing and DSS tool for the members to determine the training
needs of them ,by applying the study on the academic staff member of Faculty of
Dentistry, Alex, University, by testing them in the managerial competencies .The tests
were evaluated by using DSS tool and the needed training plan are determined for
each one .The paper surveyed the literature review of the competency concept
,competency management and Decision Support System (DSS)concept and brief
history. The conclusion and future research points are mentioned also.

Keywords: Competency, Competency based-assessment, Comptency Based

Management (CBM) Training needs, Managerial Competenies,Decsion Support
System(DSS),.

1. Introduction

Competency-based management has become a very crucial element in the effective

operation of any enterprise or any business organization, due to the increased need of
the latter to be agile enough to adapt to quick market changes and re-orientation of its
business plans. In this situation, competency based management (CBM) would be the
core human resource tool, which would enable the enterprise to manage and develop
the skills of their employees, recruit the most appropriate candidates, and make
effective succession planning and employee development plans. Apart from enterprise
competency management systems nowadays research is being conducted focusing on
the development of CBM system for academics, which may provide possibilities such
as the easy integration and mapping of different competencies required to perform
various tasks associated to academicians. The quality in higher education has become
a necessary condition for the knowledge transfer, knowledge creation and knowledge
services to the society. There are many experts who suggested development of certain
skill sets in a faculty that in turn helps in the development of technology and
globalization to meet the ever changing needs of society. (Pooja, at...el, 2010)
Various research works related to the changes in educational and organizational
perspective related to Competency Management (CM) are summarized in the
following section. (Centra and John, 1993) studied a reflective evaluation processes
for the organization. (Sanchez and Heene, 1979) invented competence management as
a strategic management. (Spencer and Spencer, 1992) analyzed Competency as a link
to the human performance model.(Chou and Tsai, 2004) explained the importance of
organizational knowledge for creating activities is more than the individual
knowledge. (Lidgren, 2002) developed range of competence systems and studied the

1
various barriers of accepting these competence systems in knowledge based
organizations. Stenmark (2002) studied the usage of intranet as a tool in knowledge
management for the competence systems. Walter (2003) described the necessity of
innovative unified strategies for the management of the organizational competence.
Barr et al (1995) emphasized the transition of teaching to learning process for
undergraduate education. Chambers and Tony (2002) analyzed the teaching paradigm
for the development of faculty to help students in finding place and purpose. Austin
and Ann (2002) identified the need for creating the bridge to the future by preparing
new faculty to face changing expectation in shifting. Menges and Robert (1999)
described the role of faculty for their new jobs and encourages on using the
scholarship to improve the teaching practice. Ryan and Katherine (2002) explored a
new direction for teaching and learning and also present a vision to evaluate the
teaching in higher education.
Braskamp and Larry (2000) projected a holistic approach to assess faculty. Shulman
and Lee (2002) discussed a table of learning to make difference in the development of
teaching practice. Ernest (2001) evaluated the gap to achieve excellence in the
education system. Taft (2007) studied the ethical factors that affect the academic
education for global perspective. Canen and Canen (2002) calculated the ways for
fostering innovation in management education with a case study. John (2003) focused
on Quality in Higher Education from monitoring to management through the balance
scorecard introduction. Srikanathan (2003) developed an alternative perspective for
quality in higher education through the quality management techniques. Mohd. and
Owlia (1993) presented a framework for the various dimensions of quality in higher
education. Schmeidiner (2002) presented CbBD that can help organizations in the
effective identification measurement integration of organizational competence which
are in the form of human competencies. Alberto (2003) projected the importance of
employers’ competencies in dynamic work domain. Dragenidis (2006) implemented
an ontology based application that can be used for the competence management.
Keenam (2005) projected a DSS to match the skills of the prospective employees with
the needs of the employer. Huang (2004) explored a DSS in Human Resource
selection which utilizes the fuzzy neural network in evaluating the managerial talent.
Berio (2004) presented a case study for modeling and managing the competence of an
enterprise. Vartarien (2003) studied the competencies in virtual organization that can
be used at work and also for the lifelong learning. Stenmark (2003) analyzed the need
of rethinking of competence management systems for the knowledge of based
organizations. Colucci (2003) described an approach to ontology based semantic
match of skills descriptions. Ranjan and Tripathi (2007) developed a theoretical
framework for measuring competencies in academic institutions. Ranjan and Tripathi
( 2008) presented an Empirical Study for the competence Management. The review of
the literature reveals that though there is lot of research and reforms taking place in
educational environment focusing on the changing role of faculty and the realization
of the CBM approaches in the various business organizations. But there is not a single
model presented which can incorporate the CBM in the educational environment to
meet the changing requirements of the educational institutions. The review of the
literature also reveals that though there is lot of research and reforms taking place
regarding the changing role of faculty in academics and the implementation of CBM
approaches in various business organizations, but not a single model is available,
which can be easily incorporated and implemented in educational institutions. Also,
Information Technology (IT) has become the important component for the success of
any business organization. In today’s fast changing business environment the role of

2
IT is changing a lot. Its use has not been restricted to record keeping, processing
transactions or viewing the reports and analysis of data but the role has been extended
to take decisions and to build strategies for enhancing the business usage from
Management Information System (MIS) to the Decision Support System (DSS). The
DSS helped the managers to extract the critical information from their huge data in
the way they want (Turbain, 1995). With today’s dynamic and highly competitive
environment, the organizations tend to lose their competitiveness /business, if their
employees don't keep pace with the emerging technologies. The transformation from
production economy to knowledge economy has provided both the opportunities and
challenges. This scenario is true in under developed and developing countries. The
organizations require manpower with different set of values and competencies which
should be productive, creative, responsive and adaptable to fast changing business
environment (Stenmark, 2005). So, it becomes impetus to understand the knowledge
in the Human Resource (HR) data. So in our paper we will depend on the Decision
Support System (DSS) tool to evaluate the competencies.

Decision support systems are gaining an increased popularity in various domains,

including business, engineering, the military, and medicine. They are especially
valuable in situations in which the amount of available information is prohibitive for
the intuition of an unaided human decision maker and in which precision and
optimality are of importance. Decision support systems can aid human cognitive
deficiencies by integrating various sources of information, providing intelligent access
to relevant knowledge, and aiding the process of structuring decisions. They can also
support choice among well-defined alternatives and build on formal approaches, such
as the methods of engineering, economics, operations research, statistics, and decision
theory. They can also employ artificial intelligence methods to address heuristically
problems that are intractable by formal techniques. Proper application of decision-
making tools increases productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness and gives many
businesses a comparative advantage over their competitors, allowing them to make
optimal choices for technological processes and their parameters, planning business
operations, logistics, or investments (Druzdzel et al, 2002).
Role of decision making in CBM:
In any innovative business organization, the Competency Based Management (CBM)
has become a very crucial element for effective operation. The CBM helps
organization by adapting to quick market changes and rebuilding their strategies and
business plans. The CBM has become one of the vital HR tool for managing and
developing the skills of employees, recruiting the most appropriate candidate, making
effective succession planning and developing the Employee Relationship
Management (ERM). CBM involves lots of decision making. By developing Decision
Support System (DSS) for CBM, we couple the intellectual resources of human
expert along the powers of emerging technologies to improve the decisions making.
Decision makers basically utilize knowledge for taking the decisions. Any
Knowledge based DSS not only provides solutions of the unstructured problems
quickly but also provides an improved way of communication for the employee
satisfaction (Turbain, 1995). CBM is one of the areas which require the domain
expert to develop various theories through their acquired knowledge from training,

3
reading and years of experience. These days Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools are
applied to the knowledge based DSS. Hence, an Expert System (ES) can be applied to
the CBM. It has shown quite promising results to many problem areas such as
information systems, information science, business strategies and organization
science (Jackson, 2000). Its unique characteristics to simulate human reasoning over
the representation of human knowledge and coming to solutions /advice through
heuristics methods has attracted the lot of attention for the research work. As the
business environment is uncertain and the unpredictable the organizations are turning
to AI and ES to develop a knowledge management systems that can provide the basis
for future sustainability and competence. Young (1999) discusses about the use of
neural network in the Financial Management System (FMS). Tingly (1999) proposes
AI to insurance organizations to offer multiple channels for the rapid response for the
customers. There are many such knowledge management implementations using AI
and ES that rely upon the mean making and sense making capabilities of AI and ES
technologies and humans using them. We feel that institutes like any other
organization have their own challenge developing an effective way for managing
competence can enable an institute to build stronger links between stake holders
while providing timely input into the decision making process. Academic institutes all
over the world follow the common pattern to measure the competencies of their
employees. The basic human resource component in educational institute is faculties,
supporting staffs, team heads, and training and development staffs. They also have a
well defined competence metrics in terms of their jobs and their requirements. They
too have the competency assessments tools which are applied periodically to assess
their competencies. For their existence in the competitive environment there should
be customer orientation and the plan for continuous improvements and up gradations
(Ranjan et al,2008).

Theoretical Framework:
A competency may be described as a combination of skill, attitudes and behavior that
an individual or an organization is competent at, that is, the ability to deliver; perform
(a set of tasks with relative ease and with a high level of predictability in terms of
quality and timeliness), (Spencer, 1993). Competencies are important, as they help to
communicate what an individual stands for or what the expectation is (Ernest, 1989).
The proper and careful use of competencies is important as it will help increase clarity
in the system, bring transparency and build trust by avoiding multiple interpretations
of the competence concept, both by the employees and the organizations. McClelland
(1973) defined competence measurement as a tool for distinguishing superior
performer from average performer. Ernest (1989) presented the competence as a
statement which describes the integrated demonstration of a cluster of related skills
and attitudes that are observable and measurable necessary to perform a job
independently at prescribed proficiency level. King and Kenneth (1997) described the
competency as an overt and measurable performance in terms of quality, quantity,
time, cost or a combination of any of these, for which action or performance oriented
verbs are to be used in writing competency statements. Dranganidis and Mentazas
(2007) Identified competency as a combination of the tacit and explicit knowledge,
behavior, and skills that give somebody the potential for effectiveness in task

4
performance. After reviewing most of the definitions presented by different authors,
we found that these definitions mainly suits to the requirements of business
organizations. However in attempts done by (Pooja at el, 2010) present a definition
which is more suited to academic environment. Taking this view competency has
been defined as the combination of attributes such as personality, ability, knowledge
and skills (PAKS) that help the institution in the process of knowledge transfer,
knowledge creation and the knowledge services to the society. The available literature
on CBM for academia shows that still lots of work need to be done on CBM based
approach for academic institutions which is highly essential in this era of knowledge.

Concept of "DSS":

According to Keen Dan Scoot Morton: “Decision Support System is a merger of the
source - the source of intelligence with the ability of individual components to
improve the quality of decisions. Decision Support System is also a computer-based
information systems for management decision-making that deal with the problem - the
problem of semi structure “(Mutiara, 2010).
The definitions provided during the last 30 years for DSS show, according to (Keen,
1987), “both what DSS is and what it is not”, with consequences on both the scientific
basis, and the credibility of the decision support applications. Essentially, a DSS is a
computerized system which improves the activity of decision-makers situated on
different levels in the chain of command (from supervision of different processes to
leading positions in politics). At the same time, DSS stimulates the decision-maker to
improve the decisional process and make the right decisions in order to obtain high
and quickly visible performances (decision effectiveness) (Filip and Bărbat, 1999).As
early as 1980, (Sprague, 1980) observed that the initial definition of the Decision
Support Systems – computerized interactive systems which support decision-makers
in using data and models to solve unstructured problems was too restrictive, and thus,
the definition was expanded to include any system involved in the decision-making
process. This expansion of the definition made the concept of Decision Support
Systems an umbrella term for different types of systems, many of which having no
connection with the initial idea of Decision Support Systems (Alter, 2002). If,
initially, Decision Support Systems were instruments for large companies, today, they
also address small companies too. These instruments have changed and will change
considerably the way in which decisions are made. They enable the individual or
organizational decision-maker to manage more effectively the volume and complexity
of information and better co-ordinate activities.
Decision support systems are interactive, computer-based systems that aid users in
judgment and choice activities. They provide data storage and retrieval but enhance
the traditional information access and retrieval functions with support for model
building and model-based reasoning. They support framing, modeling, and problem
solving. Typical application areas of DSSs are management and planning in business,
health care, the military, and any area in which management will encounter complex
decision situations. Decision support systems are typically used for strategic and
tactical decisions faced by upper-level management decisions with a reasonably low
frequency and high potential consequences in which the time taken for thinking
through and modeling the problem pays o_ generously in the long run.
There are three fundamental components of DSSs.
Database management system (DBMS) serves as a data bank for the DSS. It stores
large quantities of data that are relevant to the class of problems for which the DSS

5
has been designed and provides logical data structures (as opposed to the physical
data structures) with which the users interact. A DBMS separates the users from the
physical aspects of the database structure and processing. It should also be capable of
informing the user of the types of data that are available and how to gain access to
them.
Model-base management system (MBMS) is analogous to that of a DBMS. Its
primary function is providing independence between specific models that are used in
a DSS from the applications that use them. The purpose of an MBMS is to transform
data from the DBMS into information that is useful in decision making. Since many
problems that the user of a DSS will cope with may be unstructured, the MBMS
should also be capable of assisting the user in model building.
Dialog generation and management system (DGMS). The main product of an
interaction with a DSS is insight. As their users are often managers who are not
computer-trained, DSSs need to be equipped with intuitive and easy-to-use interfaces.
These interfaces aid in model (Druzdzel et al, 2002)

DSS characteristics and functions

The characteristics specific to a DSS depend on the type of decision the systems have
been designed for (Bellorini and Lombardi, 1998). However, numerous authors have
suggested a series of “standard” characteristics any DSS should possess. Considering
the results obtained by (Parker and Al-Utabi, 1986) after studying 350 sources on the
same subject (Bellorini and Lombardi, 1998) and the essential characteristics
emphasized by (Filip, 2004) we may synthesize a list of DSS characteristics:
• To provide support and improve, not replace, human reasoning; the user maintains
control over the DSS at all times.
• To assist managers in the decision-making process connected with unstructured and
Semi-structured problems, which cannot be solved through simple reasoning and
judgment, or through any other classes of information systems;
• To be flexible and adaptable in relation to the changes in the context of the decision
and support as many (or even all) decision process stages as possible;
• To be focused on characteristics in order to make it more user-friendly to less
proficient users (managers on all levels, a single decision-maker or a group) and not
be limited to the computerization of some methods of working used before the
implementation of the system, but to facilitate and stimulate new approaches (to
ensure support for a variety of decision processes and for different styles);
• To combine the use of analytical models and techniques with data access functions;
the data and information in the system should be obtained from various sources;
• To improve the efficiency of the decision process, rather than its effectiveness,
focusing on the increase in productivity and the quality, suitability and applicability of
decisions, rather than on the time and cost of decision.
In conclusion, the main characteristics of a DSS are:
• It alleviates efforts, amplifies decision-makers’ capacity and its purpose is not to
replace them or transform them into mere agents who adopt mechanically solutions
provided by the computer;
• Its purpose is to approach semi-structured problems, in which sections of the
analysis effort could be computerized, but the decision-makers use their own
reasoning to control the decision process.

6
DSS classification

The systems that used to provide support in the decision process have been named by
specialists Decision Support Systems or Decision Management Systems. Recently,
terms such as artificial intelligence, data mining, on-line analytical processing, and
knowledge management have been used for systems whose objective was to inform
and assist managers in the decision process (Muntean, 2003).

Because of the existence of a huge number of terms, which have caused many
problems to DSS research, several criteria, have been proposed for a classification of
Decision Support Systems (Suduc, 2007).Undoubtedly, numerous DSS classifications
have been developed in time, but we shall restrict below to those classifications which
are enough relevant and encompassing to the subject in discussion. Donovan and
Madnick (1977), quoted by Turban (1998), divided DSS, according to the nature of
the decisional problem, into two categories:
• Institutional DSSs facilitate solving structured problems within an organization;
• Ad-hoc DSSs facilitate solving semi-structured problems, which are not usually
anticipated.
Hackathorn and Keen (1981), quoted by Turban (1998), identified three categories of
DSS:
• Single-user DSSs;
• Group DSSs;
• Organizational DSSs.
Steven Alter, quoted by Muntean (2003) proposed in 1980 a classification of the
Decision Support Systems according to “the degree to which the system's output can
directly determine the decision”, independently from problem type, functional area or
decisional perspective. Thus, seven categories of Decision Support Systems were
proposed, divided into two super-classes:
• Data-oriented DSSs
• File Drawer Systems, whose purpose is to automate certain manual processes and
provide access to data items. They address people who have operational
responsibilities (operators, clerks, workshop supervisors). Currently, this category
includes simple query and reporting instruments which access transactional systems;
• Data Analysis Systems, which facilitate the analysis of current and historical data, in
order to produce reports for managers. Data analysis is required for budget analysis,
business opportunities analysis, investment effectiveness analysis, etc.
Today, this category includes a large number of data warehouse applications;
• Analysis Information Systems, which provide access to a multitude of support
databases for the decisional process, as well as a series of simple models in order to
supply information necessary for solving particular decisional situations.
• Model-oriented DSSs
• Systems oriented on Accounting and Financial Models. The models employed are
“what-if” and “goal-seeking” and they are frequently used in producing profitability
estimates for new products, estimative balances, etc.
• Systems oriented on Representational Models, which use simulation models to
estimate consequences; they are used extensively in risk analysis, in production
simulation etc.;

7
• Systems oriented on Optimization Models which help producing optimal solutions
for different activities;
• Systems oriented on Suggestion Models, which carry out the logical process that
leads to a suggested decision for activities with a certain degree of structuring (such as
determining the rate of updating insurance, models for the optimization of bond
supply, etc.).

Advantages and limitations

Filip (2007) identifies four advantages and six limitations, as shown below:

Advantages

 Direct (or intermediated) work with the decision support system may contribute to
improving the individual’s decisional capacity;
• Increase in work productivity by extending capacity of decision-makers to directly
process information;
• Expanding decision-makers’ individual capacities leads to improved decisions, as a
result of a better analysis;
• being an artificial object, the decision support system is objective and impartial;

limitations

• The system lacks human traits: creativity, intuition, imagination, irresponsibleness

or the instinct of self-preservation;
• Because of hardware and software limitations, there could be consequences which
lead to insufficient qualities (regarding correctness and completeness) of knowledge
accumulated within the system and in the limited possibilities of communication
between decision-maker and the DSS;
• In order to be effective and efficient, the system must be designed with a specific
purpose in mind, for a specific field of use and a specific type of relative decision
problems;
• The DSS is designed as a component part of the global computer system of the
organization, from which it derives the necessary data. Thus, there may be
compatibility problems between computer systems;
• Terminological issues and problems related to the significance of certain aspects
approached by DSS may arise because of the cultural differences between developers
and users;

Managerial Competency:

To achieve an effective performance, a corporation requires a certain managerial

competence. According to some researchers, managerial competence can be measured
by various aspects, which, by Cockerill et al. (1995) is identified as high performance
managerial competencies (HPMC). HPMC will be one of the primary capitals to
achieve organizational competitive advantage. To obtain an effective performance,
company needs people who have a suitable competency. The fact is that paradigm

8
shift from old to new paradigm, now management is focused on more humanistic
aspect. Managers should give more attention and motivation to their employees.
Accordingly, managers are required to have a good interpersonal skill. Refers to Daft
(2003), there are two main things of a managerial competency i.e. leadership and team
building skill. Leadership aspect is characterized by delegation of authority, while
team building skill should be possessed by front liners who directly relate to the
customer. According to many researchers, the measures of managerial competency
can be determined by many aspects. Cockerill et al (1995) presents eleven aspects of
managerial competency that mention as high performance managerial competencies /
HPMC. Those eleven aspects are information search, concept formation, conceptual
flexibility, interpersonal search, managing interaction, developmental orientation,
impact, self-confidence, presentation, proactive orientation, and achievement
orientation. Beside Cockerill with high performance managerial competencies,
Abraham et al. (2001) presents ten aspects of managerial competency as a result of
their research which is at the first formulation there are more than twenty aspects of
managerial competency. The ten aspects are stated as good oral / written
communication skill, problem solver, results oriented, interpersonal skill, leadership
skill, customer focus, flexible / adaptable, team worker, dependable, and quality
focus. Those are having a high descriptor (80%) in the research. According to
Abraham et al., the ten aspects of managerial competencies should be possessed by
managers at each level of management in the organization. Therefore, this research
uses those ten aspects as a measure of managerial competency.

Competency –based assessment Method:

Competency –based assessments are constructs that provide a means to define and
measure job skill ability and performance. Competency based training assessment was
introduced to Australia in the early 1990s through the push to restructure Australian
industry and the national training Reform Agenda (Robin, 2000).

A variety of other concepts are also associated with competency based assessment of
individuals: motives, traits, self concepts, attitudes, cognitive behavior skills, work
habits, etc. (shipman et al, 2000).There is also debate among HR practitioners and
academicians regarding whether the term competency refers to behavioral output or
an individual's characteristics and qualities (Mcvagan,1997). In reference to
developing expertise in a given discipline. The concept of competence can be dated
back to Persian (in the code of Hamurabbi), Greek (in Lydia of Plato) and Roman
times (in general language), has been used in Europe from the sixteenth century and
entered professional literature in law (competence of courts and witnesses), public
administration (competence of institutions), organizational structure (competence of
departments or functions), management (core competence, competence management),
and education and training(competence-based education) from the seventies of the last
century (Mulder, 2007).

9
(1959) wrote a piece in which he defined competence as a basic motive for the
acquisition of knowledge, mastery of skills, need for exploration, or competence as
exploratory learning for “effictance”. McClelland (1973) stated more than a decade
later that traditional testing needed to be changed, as the prognostic validity of IQ
testing and of traditional assessments in education, training and selection of
professionals was limited. Gilbert (1978) made a link between competence and
effective performance improvement. Boyatzis (1982) did large-scale studies on
competence of managers, asking top performing managers to define their new
competence concept, task-oriented; and. meaningful in a specific context and at a
sufficient level of specification. Apart from relevance, there are more notions behind
the new concept of competence. Based on various theories of education and empirical
research, eight principles of comprehensive competence-based (vocational) education
were developed for the empowerment of local education teams to facilitate interactive
processes of curriculum deliberation (Wesselink et al, 2007a, b). These principles
were included in a matrix that was meant to be an instrument for program teams.
Applying these principles will result in a comprehensive approach of competence-
based education. And the more recent competence-based developments (Biemans et
al, 2004; Mulder et al, 2006; Weigel et al, 2007). The most fundamental criticism
regarding competence-based education comes for higher education, especially from
the liberal education tradition. Hyland (2006) for instance, sees competence-based
education as a form of reductionist behaviorism. It is not clear whether he refers to the
older conceptualizations of the concept or to the newer more holistic ones, which
stress the broad development of the full potential of students. Anyway, it is good to
review the perceptions of higher education faculty, in particular full university
professors, also in the natural sciences, to see whether the criticism against
competence-based higher education indeed is as strong as some critics suggest.
Together with that, it is good to have a picture of the opinions of other stakeholders in
higher education, especially university.

2. Research methodology and design:

The study was done by applying competency tests. It was carried out with the
participation of the academic staff of the Dentistry-Alex-University. There are ten
departments within the faculty, the department of Removable Prosthodontics, the
department of Conservative Dentistry, the department of Oral Pathology, the
department of Oral Maxillo Facial Surgery, the department of Oral Biology, the
department of Oral Medicine, Periodontology, Diagnosis and Radiology, the
department of Orthodontics, the department of Pediatric Dentistry Public Health, the
department of Dental Bio Materials, the department of Maxillo Facial and Plastic
Surgery. 115 academic staff works in these departments. However most of the
academic staff did not want to be included in the study because of the work load. In
this way, the study was only carried out with the participation of 80 academic staff
members.

11
Research Model:

Figure (1) shows the research model

Step(1):Determinig the academic

staff administrative competencies

Step(2):Competency Testing

Step(3):Test evaluation

Step(4):Determining the training

needs decision

Figure (1) Competencies assessment model

Step (1): Determining the academic staff management and administrative

Competencies: according to pervious study done by (Harria et al,2007) about the
academic competencies for medical faculty, they determined that the administrative
competencies will focus on: managerial, communication, decision making and
problem solving….etc. So in our paper the focus will be on such competencies
because of the importance of that role for academics.
Step (2): Competency testing, through giving them tests in verbal critical thinking,
time management, managerial skills, communication and presentation skills,
negotiation skills and personality test.
Step (3): Test evaluation, through using excel spreadsheets as DSS tool and data entry
for the academic staff test scores.

11
Step(4):Determining the training needs decision for every member, after entering the
scores and calculate the result the Decision Support System (DSS)will give us the
final decision about the needed training for every member.

Figure (2): Individual test report

12
Figure(3):Assessment report for the population

13
 3. Research Results:

80
71 71
70 67 66
60 58 58 57
50
40
30
Need 23
22 22
No need 20
13 14
10 9 9

Figure(4):the training needs for each competency

Figure (4) shows the academic staff member need training in the following
competencies as follows:

• Abstract reasoning with 58 trainees

• Verbal critical reasoning with 67 trainees
• Time management and work pressure with 57 trainees
• Communication and presentation with 71 trainees
• Negotiation skills with 71 trainees
• Personal skills with 66 trainees

Findings and conclusions:

Competency course code Hours Number

Reasoning thinking Decision making and L3 24 58

problem solving

Interpersonal Effective presentation I1 24 71

skills
Effective communication I2 24 71
skills
Negotiation skills I3 12 71
People management I4 24 66
group dynamics I5 24 66
Personal and thinking methods P1 24 66
managerial skills P2 12 57

14
 time management and P3 12 58
work pressure

Table (II) Training plan

In our paper, we have discussed the managerial competencies needed for the
academic staff member and we assessed them by using DSS tool to set training plan
to develop their competencies, and the Dss tool was more effective way than the
traditional way. So the training plan set according to the test score of each staff
member.

For future research we suggest after the implementation of the training plan that the
evaluation must be done through use an effective decision support system(DSS) and
not use the traditional way, that tool can applied on the other types of academic
competencies such as :teaching and research competencies

Reference

Austin, Ann E. (2002). “Creating a bridge to the future: Preparing new faculty to face
changing expectations in shifting context.” The Review of Higher Education, 26 (2),
119-144.
Barr, Robert.and, John Tagg (1995). “From teaching to learning – A new paradigm
for undergraduate education Change”, 13-25.
Becerra. (2000), “The role of artificial intelligence technologies in the implementation
of people-finder knowledge management systems. In Bringing knowledge to business
processes”. Workshop in the AAAI Spring Symposium Series. Stanford.
Berio G. (2005) ‘Knowledge Management for Competence Management’.
Proceedings of I- KNOW 05.
Bernhard Schmeidinger. (2005) ‘Competency Based Business Development:
Organizational Competencies as basis for the successful companies’. Journal of
Universal Knowledge Management, pp 13-20.
Braskamp, Larry A. (2000). “Toward a more holistic approach to assessing faculty as
teachers. In Katherine E .Ryan (Ed.), Evaluating teaching in higher education: A
vision for the future”. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Number 83. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Canen, G., Alberto , Canen Ana. (2002) ‚ Innovation management education for
multicultural organizations: challenges and a role for logistics’, European Journal of
Innovation Management, Volume 5, Issue 2 , pp. 73 – 85
Centra, John A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Chambers, Tony (2002). Helping students find their place and purpose: Tony
Chambers talks with Sharon Parks.About Campus,20-24.
Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990) “Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on
learning and innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, pp.128–152.
Diamond, Robert (Ed.) (2002). Field guide to academic leadership. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Draganidis, F., Chamopoulou, P., Mentzas, G.(2006)‘An ontology based tool for
competency management and learning paths.’ 6th International Conference on
Knowledge Management (I-KNOW 06).

15
Ernest Joshua, (1989) Competency Based Curriculum Design for Technical
Education –An Indian Experiment. Manila, Philippines: Colombo Plan Staff College
for Technician Education, Proceedings of the International Conference on Technical
Education.
Efraim Turban, Jay E.Aronson.(1995) Decision Support System Pearson Education
Asia,pp 12- 16.
Froh, Robert C.; Gray, Peter J.; and Lambert, Leo M. (1993), "Representing Faculty
Work: The Professional Portfolio." In Recognizing Faculty Work: Reward Systems
for the Year 2000, ed. Robert M. Diamond and Bronwyn E. Adam. New Directions for
Higher Education 81:97 - 110.
Heene, A. and Sanchez, R. (Eds.) (1997) Competence-Based Strategic Management,
Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Huang Liang Chi. (2004) ‘Applying Fuzzy Neural Network in Human Resource
selection’. International Conference of the North American Fuzzy Information
Processing.
J. B. Vasconcelos, C. Kimble, A. Rocha A.( 2003), “Ontologies and the Dynamics of
Organisational Environments. An example of a Group Memory System for the
Management of Group Competencies”, The 3rd International Conference on
Knowledge Management, Graz, Austria.
Kenji Hirata. (2003) ‘Total Resolution for Human Resource Development Based on
Competency Ontology’. Conference Paper WM2003.
King, Kenneth .Technical and Vocational Education and Training in an International
Context, Oxford shire, London: The Vocational Aspect of Education.
Lidgren, (2000) ‘Competence Visualizer: Generating Competence Patterns of Project
Groups’. Proceedings of ECIS. Lloyd Sherwood Arthur. (2004) ‘Problem-based
learning in management education: A framework for designing context management
education’, Journal of Management Education, vol. 28, no 5, pp. 536 557.
M. Harlzallah, G. Berio., (2004),”Competency Modeling and management: A case
study”. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Enterprise Information
Systems (ICEIS’04), University of Portucalense, pp. 350-358, Porto, April 13-16,
2004.
Mallach Efrem G. (2002) Decision Support and Data Warehouse System , Tata
McGrawHill, pp 424-456.
Mark Wilhelm, Alice E. Smith. (1995) ‘Process Planning using an Integrated Expert
System and Neural Network Approach’. Proceedings of the conference of the Expert
Applications.
McClelland, M. (2003). Metadata standards for educational resources. IEEE
Computer , 36
Menges, Robert J., & Associates (1999). Faculty in new jobs. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
McClelland, M. (2003). Metadata standards for educational resources. IEEE
Computer,36(11), 107-109.
Peter Keenan. (2004). ‘Human Resource Management DSS’. International
Conference DSS2004.
R. Lindgren, D. Stenmark, J.Ljungberg. (2003), “Rethinking competence systems for
knowledge-based organisations”. European Journal of Information Systems, vol.12,
n. 1, pp. 18-29, 2003.
Raye Walter (2003) ‘Competence Management Strategies: Future Concept in the
Competence Management for Knowledge Based Organization’. Retrieved March
2007, from http://www.handels.gu.se/epc/archive/00002860/.

16
Reich, Brockhausen, Lau, & Reimer.(2002).Ontology-based skills management:
Goals, opportunities and challenges. Journal of Universal Computer Science, (55),
06-5515.
Ryan, Katherine E. (Ed.). (2003) “Evaluating teaching in higher education: A vision
for the future. New Directions for Teaching and Learning”, Number 83. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[34] 34. Retrieved from http://ns.hr-xml.org/2_0/HR-XML- 2_0/cpo/competncies.pdf
on December 2007.
Spencer L.M.,Spencer.(1993). ‘Competence at work: models for superior
performance’,New York: John Wiley and Sons.
S. Colucci, T. Di Noia, E. Di Sciascio, F. M. Donini, M. Mongiello, M.
Mottola.(2003), “A formal approach to ontology-based semantic match of skills
descriptions”. Journal of Universal Computer Science, Special issue on Skills
Management.
Sanchez, R. and Heene, A. (1997) “Reinventing strategic management: new theory
and practice for competence-based competition”, European Management Journal,
Vol. 15, No. 3, pp.303–317.
Sandberg, J. (1994) “Human Competence at Work: An Interpretative Approach”,
Göteberg
Schmidt A.,&Winterhalter,C.(2003).User context aware delivery of e-learning
material: Approach and architecture [Special issue]. Journal of Universal Computer
Science,10 (11), 8-36.
Scriven, Michael (1978). Value versus merit. Evaluation News, 8, 1-3.
Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig.(1995) Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach,
Prentice-Hall, Inc. pp 31- 35.
Seldin, Peter (1999). Changing practices in evaluating teaching. Anchor Publishing.
Shulman, Lee S. (2002). Making differences: A table of learning. Change, 34 (6), 36-
45.
Spencer, L.M. and Spencer, S.M. (1993) Competence at Work: Models for Superior
Performance, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Srikanthan, G. and Dalrymple, J. (2005), ‘Implementation of a holistic model for
quality in higher education’, Quality in Higher Education, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 69-81.
Stenmark, D. (2003) ‘Knowledge creation and the web: Factors
indicating why some intranets succeed where others fail’. Knowledge and Process
Management, pp. 207-216.
Stenmark, D. and Lindgren R. (2006) ‘System Support for Knowledge Work: Bridging
the Knowing-Doing Gap’. International Journal of Knowledge Management, pp.46-
68.
Taft H.,Susan.(2007), ‘Ethics education : using Inductive reasoning to develop
individual, group, organizational, and global perspectives’, Journal of Management
Education, Vol31, No.5, pp 614-646.

Ranjan J, Tripathi P. (2007). “Decision Supporting System for the Competence

Management”. Procoeedings of the First International Conference on Information
System Technology and Management,2007.
Ranjan J, Tripathi P. (2008). “Measuring Competencies using Expert System:
Educational Perspective” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information
Technology, 2008. Bernhard Schmeidinger. (2005)‘Competency Based Business
Development: Organizational Competencies as basis for the successful companies’.
Journal of Universal Knowledge Management,pp 13-20.

17
Berio G .(2005)‘Knowledge Management for Competence Management’. Proceedings
of I-KNOW .
Efraim Turban, Jay E.Aronson.(1995) Decision Support System Pearson
Education Asia,pp 12- 16.
Draganidis, F., Chamopoulou, P., Mentzas, G.(2006)‘An ontology based tool for
competency management and learning paths.’ 6th International Conference on
Knowledge Management (I-KNOW 06).

18