Empirical study on performance evaluation of scientific research team in medical university —taking Capital Medical University as an example

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2096-045X.2023.05.024

Abstract

Abstract: Objective To establish a preliminary performance evaluation index system for research teams in medical university to comprehensively and objectively evaluate the performance level of research teams. Methods The balanced scorecard theory was introduced in this study, Delphi method and analytic hierarchy method were applied to establish a performance evaluation index system for medical university scientific research teams. The index system consists of 4 first-level indicators, 14 second-level indicators and 29 third-level indicators, and then we selected 6 scientific research teams for empirical verification. Results There were significant gaps in the performance levels of the six teams. Teams have problems such as insufficient talent training, low degree of cooperation, weak academic influence and low social benefits. In order to solve these problems, it is suggested that medical universities should increase talent training, establish a well-structured scientific research team, strengthen the degree of cooperation inside and outside the team, and highlight local regional characteristics. Conclusion The Balanced Scorecard method is applicable to the performance evaluation of research teams in medical university.

Key words: medical university, scientific research team, performance evaluation, Delphi method, analytic hierarchy process, empirical study

CLC Number:

R159
G644

Ma Ziyin, Hou Jie, Shao Xuemei, Wu Ping. Empirical study on performance evaluation of scientific research team in medical university —taking Capital Medical University as an example[J]. Medical Education Management, 2023, 9(5): 679-686.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

URL: https://journal06.magtechjournal.com/Jwk3_yyyzlt/EN/10.3969/j.issn.2096-045X.2023.05.024

https://journal06.magtechjournal.com/Jwk3_yyyzlt/EN/Y2023/V9/I5/679

References

［1］马源. 中国高等教育 “双一流” 建设的演化、探索与展望［J］. 四川理工学院学报（社会科学版）， 2019， 34（4）： 70-87.
［2］ Early P F. A phenomenological study of stakeholder perceptions of the communication exchanges and leadership during mergers and acquisitions［D］. Minneapolis： Capella University， 2016.
［3］仲洁，吴越，陈静漪. 基于AHP与PCA法的高校科研绩效评价研究——对教育部直属五所高校科研投入与产出效率的分析［J］. 黑龙江教育（高教研究与评估）， 2016（1）： 16-17.
［4］秦勤，孙涛. 基于AHP法构建的高校科研团队绩效评价体系［J］. 南昌航空大学学报（社会科学版）， 2017， 19（1）： 47-53， 60.
［5］陶秋香，涂继亮，舒长江. 论创新创业教育背景下江西省地方高校的科技创新服务功能［J］. 科技管理研究， 2019， 39（1）： 104-110.
［6］ Geng Y X， Zhao L Y， Wang Y， et al. Competency model for dentists in China： results of a Delphi study［J］. PLoS One， 2018， 13（3）： e0194411.
［7］ Shi J Y， Sun X Y， Meng K. Identifying organisational capability of hospitals amid the new healthcare reform in China： a Delphi study［J］. BMJ Open， 2021， 11（1）： e042447.
［8］ Wang Y J， Wang T Y， Wang A H， et al. Identifying the competencies of China’s paediatric residents： a modified Delphi method study［J］. BMJ Open， 2021， 11（2）： e041741.
［9］陈冉.科技创新团队绩效评价研究［J］.企业导报，2014（3）：88，90.
［10］麦宇红. 高校学科带头人产生方式及其制度完善路径研究［J］. 中国农业教育， 2019， 20（4）： 31-37.
［11］井润田. 高校科研团队管理与战略科学家能力建设［J］. 上海交通大学学报（哲学社会科学版）， 2022， 30（4）： 43-56.
［12］季小天，赵文华. 研究型大学一流科研创新团队的影响因素分析——以国家自然科学基金委创新研究群体为样本［J］. 科学管理研究， 2021， 39（6）： 43-53.
［13］孙劲楠，杨榕，丁佐奇. “双一流” 背景下高校学科科研产出评价体系研究——基于药理学与毒理学学科的实证研究［J］. 中国药科大学学报， 2022， 53（2）： 245-252.
［14］常杲，宁宝英，马建霞. 科研人员非产出性科研贡献认可度调查与分析［J］. 科学学研究， 2023， 41（6）： 1048-1056， 1065.
［15］王志刚，谷申杰，张俊杰，等. 高校创新型科研团队建设的关键因素研究［J］. 农业科技管理， 2018， 37（3）： 82-85.

[1]	Wu Yan, Zhu Miao, Guo Rui, Ma Ling, Wu Ping, Zhu Qingshuang, Wu Hao, Lu Xiaoqin, Chen Rui, Liu Jun’e, Wang Jiabo, Yang Hong, Zhao Guoguang, Lu Jie, Wu Yingfeng, Lei Liping, Wang Yutong, Liao Xinsheng , Wang Songling. Exploration and practice of strengthening top-level design to cultivate different types of medical personnel [J]. Medical Education Management, 2023, 9(1): 1-7.
[2]	Gao Liya, Wu Hao. Survey and analysis of medical adult education undergraduates current learning status during online learning [J]. Medical Education Management, 2022, 8(5): 602-607.
[3]	Shang Weina, Yang Jinghan. Innovative path of public art education in medical universities under the background of fine traditional Chinese culture [J]. Medical Education Management, 2021, 7(3): 293-297.
[4]	Ma Ziyin, Shao Xuemei, Hou Jie, Wu Ping. Exploration on the reform of the evaluation standard of “the four sole criteria” in local medical universities [J]. Medical Education Management, 2021, 7(3): 298-302.
[5]	Ma Long, Yan Mei, Yin Ronggang, Chen Yanzhou. Management of narcotic and psychotropic drugs in the local medical university [J]. Medical Education Management, 2021, 7(1): 97-102.
[6]	Li Xiaxi, Li Haiyan, Shao Xuemei. Countermeasures to improve the patent quality of colleges and universities based on the motivation of patent application——Take Capital Medical University as an example [J]. Medical Education Management, 2020, 6(6): 615-619, 600.
[7]	Wu Yan, Zhu Miao, Wang Qian, Wu Ping, Lei Liping, Zhao Lili, Lu Xiaoqin, Wang Songling. From medical scientists to healthcare workers: serving social needs for multiple talents and building a world-class university——a review of the achievements in education and talent training for the 60th anniversary of Capital Medical University [J]. Medical Education Management, 2020, 6(5): 415-420.