A Conceptual Framework for Measuring the Performance of the Information Security Service Supply Chain Based on Meta-synthesize and Fuzzy Delphi Method

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Production and Operations Management, Tehran University, Kish International Campus, Kish, Iran.

2 Prof., Department of Algorithms and Computations, Faculty of Engineering Sciences, College of Engineering Campus, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

3 Prof., Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

4 Assistant Prof., Department of Network and Systems Security Assessment, Reserch Institute for Information and Communication Technology, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of the present study is to identify priority indicators -based on the qualitative analysis of the results of the research carried out- and also to provide a framework for measuring the performance of the information security service supply chain.
Methods: The methodology of this research is essentially descriptive and qualitative and has been carried out in two stages. In the first phase, 133 papers were reviewed, after evaluation, 28 articles were approved. Then, by using the CASP method, finally, 15 articles on the measurement of the performance of the service chain received the minimum score for conducting a qualitative analysis of the content. By reviewing these articles, a conceptual framework for measuring the performance of the service chain was presented in the form of a "logic model". This model is a tool that illustrates the logic of doing things in the four components of inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes. After verifying the reliability of the results, in the second stage, in order to map the proposed framework into the field of information security services, by referring to ten experts in this field and receiving their views in the three rounds of the Fuzzy Delphi, validation and final modeling of the research was designed.
Results: The evaluation of the performance of the information security service supply chain for 19 indicators and 35 effective sub-indicators, under the logic model, were agreed with the coefficient of coordination of Kendal of 0.742 between experts and specialists.
Conclusion: The review of experts' opinions showed that the sub-indicators of knowledge and skills, the provision of new and up-to-dated security technologies and the confidentiality and security of information make the most important and rate of personnel turnover sub-indicator, assessing the least important in the performance evaluation of the information security services supply chain.

Keywords

References

Anderson, L.M., Petticrew, M., Rehfuess, E., Armstrong, R., Ueffing, E., Baker, P., Francis, D., Tugwell, P. (2011). Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews. Research synthesis methods, 2 (1), 33-42.
Ayçin, E., Güçlü, P., & Özveri, O. (2014). Evaluation of Service Supply Chain Performance Criteria with DANP Method. West East Institute Academic Conference in Budapest, Hungary.
Baltacioglu, T., Ada, E., Kaplan, M.D., Yurt, O., & Kaplan, Y.C. (2007). A New Framework for Service Supply Chains. The Service Industries Journal, 27(2), 105–124.
Boon-itt, S., & Pongpanarat, C. (2011). Measuring Service Supply Chain Management Processes the Application of the Q-Sort Technique. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 2(3), 217-221.
Boon-itt, S., Wong, C. Y. & Wong, C.W.Y. (2017). Service supply chain management process capabilities: Measurement development. International Journal of Production Economics, 193(C), 1-11.
Cheng, C. H., & Lin, Y. (2002). Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy modification of Delphi. Human Systems Management, 5(1), 76-80.
Chithambaranathan, P., Subramanian, N., Gunasekaran, A., Palaniappan, P.L.K. (2015). Service supply chain environmental performance evaluation using grey based hybrid MCDM approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 166, 163–176.
Cho, D. W., Lee, Y. H., Ahn, S. H., & Hwang, M. K. (2012). A framework for measuring the performance of service supply chain management. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 62(3), 801-818.
Elgazzar, S.,& Elzarka, S. (2017). Supply chain management in the service sector: an applied framework. The Business and Management Review, 8 (5).
Jensen, L.A., & Allen, M.N. (1996). Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Findings. Qualitative Health Research, 6, 553-560.
Jafarnejad, A., Mohseni, M., Abdollahi, A. (2014). Proposing a Hybrid Fuzzy PROMETHEE - AHP Approach to Performance Evaluation of Service Supply Chain (Case Study: Hotel industry). Journal of Industrial Management Perspective, 4(2). 69-92. (in Persian)
Kuo, Y. F., & Chen, P. C. (2008). Constructing performance appraisal indicators for mobility of the service industries using fuzzy Delphi method. Expert Systems with Applications, 35, 1930-1939.
McLaughlin, J.A., Jordan, G. (2015). Using Logic Models. Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Mehrparvar, H., Shahin, A., Karbasian, M. (2014). Performance Indicators in a Service Supply Chain. International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 3(10), 582-588.
Murry, T. J., Pipino, L. L., & Gigch, J. P. (1985). A pilot study of fuzzy set modification of Delphi. Human Systems Management, 5(1), 76-80.
Mohaqar, A., Jafarnejad, A., Modares Yazdi, M., Sadeghi Moghadam, M. (2013). Presenting a Comprehensive Model of Information Coordination of Automotive Supply Network Using Hypertext Method. Journal of Information Technology Management, 5(4), 161-194. (in Persian)
Mostaghimi, M., Ramezanian, M., Esmailzadeh, M. (2013). Classification of service supply chain performance measurement indicators using Score model and Serqual model criteria. Second National Conference on Industrial and Systems Engineering. Isfahan, 22-25 Feb2013. (in Persian)
Mostaghimi, M., Ramezanian, M., Esmailzadeh, M. (2015). Identifying and prioritizing measures for evaluating the performance of services supply chain. Industrial Management       Journal, 7(1), 151-174. (in Persian)
Mashayekhi, A., Farhangi, A., Moemeni, M., Alidousti, S. (2006). An empirical study of the relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership style (transformational-transactional). Human Sciences MODARES, 9(3), 191-200. (in Persian)
Renger, R. (2002). A Three-Step Approach to Teaching Logic Models. The American Journal of Evaluation, 23 (4), 493–503.
Rezaei Pandari, A., Azar, A., Taghavi, A., Moghbel Baarz, A. (2015). A Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping Model forService Supply Chains Management Performance Measurement (Case Study: Insurance Industry). Journal of Industrial Management Perspective, 4(4), 75-93. (in Persian)
Song, D., Huang, W., & Xu, Y. (2008). Performance evaluation of professional service supply chain based upon DEA & AHP models. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics, pp. 2210–2215, Beijing, China.
Shahin, A., Dez Taheriyan, M. (2015). Proposing a Solution for Selecting and Differentiating Performance Indicators of Service Supply Chain Using Net IndicatorsScore NIS The Case of a Double-Bilateral Supply Chain. Iranian journal of management sciences, 10(39), 87-115. (in Persian)
Sandelowski, M. & Barroso, J. (2006). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer Publishing Company.
Tseng, M.L., Lim, M.K., Wong, W.P., Chen, Y.C., & Zhan, Y. (2018). A framework for evaluating the performance of sustainable service supply chain management under uncertainty. International Journal of Production Economics, 195, 359-372.
Weed, M. E. (2006). Sports tourism research 2000–2004: A systematic review of knowledge and a meta-evaluation of methods. Journal of Sport and Tourism, 11 (1), 5–30.
Zhan, B., & Zeng, Y. (2011). Port Service Supply Chain Performance Evaluation based on GRA. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computing. Control and Industrial Engineering, Wuhan, China.
Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(3), 311–318.
Industrial Management Journal
Volume 12, Issue 1
2020
Pages 24-46

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics