Write your message
Volume 8, Issue 2 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2020)                   Iran J Ergon 2020, 8(2): 72-82 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Shakari M, Shabani Bahar G, Solimani M. The Effect of Organizational Architecture on Performance Management with the Mediating role of Organizational Agility of Physical Education Departments of Medical Sciences Universities in the Country. Iran J Ergon 2020; 8 (2) :72-82
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-733-en.html
1- PhD Student, Department of Sport Management, Hamadan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan, Iran , m_shekari82@yahoo.com
2- Department of Sport Management, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
3- Department of Sport Sciences, Malayer Branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran
Full-Text [PDF 436 kb]   (8015 Downloads)     |   Abstract (HTML)  (6271 Views)
In modern performance management, the aims of staffs and the purposes of the organization should be aligned and by creating coordination and providing the necessary guidance by supervisors, people feel more belonging to the organization and make the organization more agile by organizational changes.
Extended Abstract:   (1293 Views)
Introduction

In today's world, the complexity, instability and unpredictability of environmental changes in approaches affect the concepts of traditional organizational management. Managers are also looking for organizational tools and actions that are effective to move and guide organizational performance and to be sufficiently flexible to changing environmental conditions to improve their performance [1]. The most important tool that can help organizations to do this is undoubtedly the human resources that have the power of creativity, learning, development of abilities, skills, etc. Through these capabilities, an organization plays a unique and valuable role in gaining and increasing competitive advantage to improve its performance in achieving its goals. Therefore, organizational goals must be aligned with business strategy so that employee policy is in line with management goals.
According to management researchers, organizational architecture is a complete expression of the organization; a master plan for collaboration between aspects of business planning such as goals, visions, strategies and principles of management, aspects of business activities such as business functions and processes, organizational structures and data of the organization, aspects of automation such as information systems and databases, as well as business support technology infrastructure such as computers, operating systems and networks [9]. Attention to information technology as one of the vital infrastructures to achieve agility is very important because the relationship and interaction of organizations with various factors such as government, private sector, social, economic, political and cultural factors cause them to face different demands and expectations [10].
One of the areas affected by the new systems is the performance management of sports organizations and physical education departments; therefore, this factor should be used for agility and improving their organizational architecture by the managers of these organizations, more than before and take the necessary measures. Sports organizations and physical education departments of universities, need to manage and evaluate performance, because all aspects of the organization, from human factors to inhuman factors, are all changing with astonishing speed.
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of organizational architecture on performance management with the mediating role of organizational agility of physical education departments of country's medical science universities.


 

Materials and Methods

The present study is applied in terms of purpose and is descriptive and survey in terms of data collection and analysis. Also, in terms of time, this research is cross-sectional. The statistical population of this study includes 216 senior managers and employees of physical education departments in medical universities of the whole country, which was selected as a statistical sample by the whole population. After attending and communicating and reducing the subjects' sensitivity about the questionnaires and the reasons for their selection in the sample, the researcher provided the necessary explanations about how to complete the questionnaires and the subjects completed the questionnaires. We used three types of questionnaires to collect the data in this study.
In the present study, depending on the objectives and hypotheses of the research, we used different methods to analyze the data. In general, at the level of descriptive statistics, we used indicators such as frequency distribution tables, mean and standard deviations, and at the level of inferential statistics, we used tests such as Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to determine the distribution of data, structural equations and path coefficient. These tests were also performed with SPSS software version 20 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill., USA), and PLS. One of the reasons for using PLS software is proper predictive power, testing of intervening hypotheses and the ability to test theories in the form of equations between variables. Another reason for considering measurement error by this method is that it allows the researcher to report the analysis of his data by calculating the measurement error.


 

Results

Based on descriptive statistics, the statistical sample of the study is 216 people (176 males and 40 females). The highest number of statistical samples of the study with 43.51% was in the age group of 41 to 50 years and the lowest percentage of the statistical sample of the research with 4.6% was in the age group under 30 years and 94% of the statistical sample had a degree in physical education. After examining the fit of the measurement model, structural model and general model, it was time to review and test the research hypotheses.
 In order to test the main hypothesis of the research which has a mediating variable, Sobel test was used. Given the obtained Z-value, which is higher than 1.96, the hypothesis of organizational architecture on performance management with the mediating role of organizational agility of physical education departments in medical universities is confirmed. The results of the organizational architecture hypothesis test are as follows.

 

Given the obtained Z-value, which is higher than 1.96, the hypothesis of organizational architecture on performance management with the mediating role of organizational agility of physical education departments in medical universities is confirmed.
The magnitude of the effect of the mediating variable using VAF was 0.228 and according to the magnitude of the direct effect of the independent variable on the dependent which was equal to 0.799, it can be said that the magnitude of the direct effect is greater than the indirect effect.
  The amount of T-statistic obtained to affect the dimensions of organizational agility in all dimensions of the amount of T-statistic obtained is greater than 1.96. Therefore, it can be said that the dimensions of organizational agility have a significant effect on the performance management of physical education departments in medical universities.

 

 
Discussion

The results also showed that the dimensions of organizational agility have a positive and significant effect on the performance management of physical education departments in medical universities. Agility in any organization usually includes several capabilities, including responsiveness (the ability to detect change, react quickly and take advantage of it), competency (a set of capabilities that provide productivity of activities towards the goals and objectives of the organization), flexibility (ability to process products and different services and achieving different destinations with the same facilities), and speed (ability to perform activities and operations in the shortest possible time). Organizational agility is the ability to meet unwanted challenges to overcome new and unexpected threats to the business environment and to take advantage of change as opportunities. Physical education departments in universities are government organizations, and their structures, processes, and budgets are different from those of private organizations and sectors in the field of sports. The results also showed that organizational agility plays a mediating role in the relationship between organizational architecture and performance management. In explaining the results, it can be said that one of the main and basic tools to achieve agility is organizational structure.


 

Conclusion

 In modern performance management, the aims of staffs and the purposes of the organization should be aligned and by creating coordination and providing the necessary guidance by supervisors, people feel more belonging to the organization and make the organization more agile by organizational changes.

 

Acknowledgements

This article is taken from the doctoral dissertation of the corresponding author and all participants in this study are thanked and appreciated.

 

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declared no conflict of interest.

 

Type of Study: Research | Subject: Other Cases
Received: 2020/07/6 | Accepted: 2020/08/25 | ePublished: 2020/08/25

References
1. Zeng YR, Wang L, Xu XH. An integrated model to select an ERP system for Chinese small-and medium-sized enterprise under uncertainty. Tech Econ Dev Eco. 2017; 23(1):38-58. [DOI:10.3846/20294913.2015.1072748]
2. Seethamraju R, Sundar DK. Influence of ERP systems on business process agility. IIMB Manag Rev. 2013; 25(3):137-49. [DOI:10.1016/j.iimb.2013.05.001]
3. Kim PS, Hong KP. Major constraints and possible solutions for performance management in Korea. Public Manag Rev. 2013; 15(8):1137-53. [DOI:10.1080/14719037.2013.818844]
4. Jamali DR, El Dirani AM, Harwood IA. Exploring human resource management roles in corporate social responsibility: The CSR‐HRM co‐creation model. Business Eth: Euro Rev. 2015; 24(2):125-43. [DOI:10.1111/beer.12085]
5. Manistitya M, Fongsuwan W. Human Resource Management, Job Satisfaction and Employee Commitment Affecting Information Technology Staff Turnover Intention: A Structural Equation Model. Res J Business Manag. 2015; 9(1):157-72. [DOI:10.3923/rjbm.2015.157.172]
6. Yan M, Yu Y, Dong X. Contributive roles of multilevel organizational learning for the evolution of organizational ambidexterity. Inf Tech People; 2016. [DOI:10.1108/ITP-04-2015-0079]
7. Silverman LL. Organizational Architecture-A Framework for Successful Transformation. Anchorage: Partners for Progress; 1997.
8. Oveyssi S. The role of organizational architecture and evaluation of the framework of federal organizational architecture in e-government in order to improve strategic management. International Conference on Research in Engineering, Science and Technology. 28 July; Tehran, Iran; 2016. [Google Scholar]
9. Armstrong M, Taylor S. Armstrong's handbook of human resource management practice: London: Kogan Page Publishers; 2020. [Google Scholar]
10. Dries N, Vantilborgh T, Pepermans R. The role of learning agility and career variety in the identification and development of high potential employees. Personnel Rev; 2012. [DOI:10.1108/00483481211212977]
11. Sharifi H, Zhang Z. A methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organisations: An introduction. Int J Prod Eco. 1999; 62(1-2):7-22. [DOI:10.1016/S0925-5273(98)00217-5]
12. Chen WH, Chiang AH. Network agility as a trigger for enhancing firm performance: A case study of a high-tech firm implementing the mixed channel strategy. Indust Market Manag. 2011; 40(4):643-51. [DOI:10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.01.001]
13. Hiiemäe J. Developing a model of employee's performance management process for Tallinn hotel businesses. BA thesis. Helsinki: Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences. [Article] [Google Scholar]
14. Felipe CM, Roldán JL, Leal-Rodríguez AL. An explanatory and predictive model for organizational agility. J Bus Res. 2016; 69(10):4624-31. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.014]
15. Zachman JA. A Framework for Information Systems Architecture. IBM Sys J. 1987; 26(3):276. [DOI:10.1147/sj.263.0276]
16. Lepak DP, Snell SA. Virtual HR: Strategic Human Resource Management in the 21st Century. Human Resource Manag Rev. 2007; 8(3):215-34. [DOI:10.1016/S1053-4822(98)90003-1]
17. Mohammadi M, Hoshangi H, Hashemieh M. Ranking influence tactics in Performance Evaluation of Public sector. India J Sci Res. 2014; 37:23-38. [Google Scholar]
18. Nikpoor C, Bearkam SY. Enterprise agility: a view from the PRISM lab. Int J Agile Manag Sys. 2011; 1(1):51-9. [DOI:10.1108/14654659910266736]
19. Khosrowabadi A, Mohammadi H. Organizational architecture and its role in increasing productivity. Human Resource Manag. 2016; 3:112-43.
20. Walker M. A day in the life of an enterprise architect. Technical Report, Microsoft Corporation; 2007. [Google Scholar]
21. Miranzadeh S. Investigating the effect of organizational agility on organizational performance in Birjand Education Organization. Tehran: Payame Noor University; 2017.
22. Baldrige.M. performance measurement. Int Dent J. 1989.51(1): 17-22 [DOI:10.1177/002029408902200204]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Iranian Journal of Ergonomics

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb |