Journal List > Korean J Community Nutr > v.18(2) > 1038408

TOOLS
Jeong, Chae, Yang, Kim, and Lee: Analysis of Relative Importance of Key Performance Indicators for Center for Child-Care Foodservice Management through Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
Original Article

Korean J Community Nutr 2013;18(2):154-164.

Published online: 30 April 2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2013.18.2.154

Analysis of Relative Importance of Key Performance Indicators for Center for Child-Care Foodservice Management through Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Yun-Hui Jeong, In-Sook Chae1), Il-Sun Yang, Hye-Young Kim2), Hae-Young Lee3), †

Deptartment of Food and Nutrition, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea

1)Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Jeju National University, Jeju, Korea

2)Institute of Symbiotic Life-TECH, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea

3)Department of Food and Nutrition, Sangji University, Wonju, Korea

†Corresponding author: Hae-Young Lee, Department of Food and Nutrition, Sangji University, 660 Woosan-dong, Wonju 220-702, Korea Tel: (033) 730-0492, Fax: (033) 738-7740 E-mail: hy1317@sangji.ac.kr

Received 11 March 2013       Revised 15 April 2013       Accepted 24 April 2013

Copyright © 2013 The Korean Society of Community Nutrition

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to assign reasonability to importance of weight selection issue in key performance indicator for performance evaluation of Centers for Child-care Foodservice Management (CCFSM) developed by using Balanced Scorecard (BSC), to draw key performance indicator (KPI) by perspective and to analyze differences in recognition on importance. From September 25 to October 9, 2012, we conducted a questionnaire-based study via e-mail, targeting chiefs and team leaders of nationwide 21 CCFSMs (43 persons), officials of local governments where CCFSM was established (21 persons), officials of Korea Food and Drug Administration (2 persons) and foodservice management experts (27 persons) in order to estimate the relative importance on 4 perspectives and 14 KPIs and analyzed its results by using 61 collected data. The results showed that relative importance of perspectives was estimated in order of importance as follows: business performance (0.3519), customer (0.3393), resource (0.1557), learning and growth (0.1531). Relative importance of KPIs was in order of importance as follows: Evaluation of sanitary management level in childcare foodservice facilities (0.1327), Level of customer recognition and behavior improvement (0.1153), performances of round visiting inspection on foodservice, sanitary, safety management, and foodservice consulting (0.0913). Our results showed that the recognition differences exist on the relative importance of perspectives and KPIs between officials of CCFSM, KFDA, local government and foodservice management experts. These observations will form the basis for developing evaluation systems, and it is considered that performance indicators developed on this basis will suggest direction of operation which CCFSM will have to perform.

Keywords: Centers for Child-care Foodservice Management (CCFSM), perspective·Key Performance Indicator (KPI), Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

REFERENCES

1. Chang ML, Kim YB. A study of the actual conditions of kindergarten meals program. Korean J Early Child Educ. 2003; 23(3):261–284.
2. Staskel DM, Briley ME, Field LH, Barth SS. Microbial evaluation of foodservice surfaces in texas child-care centers. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007; 107(5):854–859.
crossref
3. Harker PT, Vargas LG. The theory of ratio scale estimation: Saaty\'s analytic hierarchy process. Manage Sci. 1987; 33(11):1383–1403.
crossref
4. Hwang DY, Kang KH, Gim KM, Baek MH. Development of woman farmers center performance indicators by using the analytic hierarchy process. J Agric Extension Community Dev. 2008; 15(4):599–619.
5. Jang YL. Development of sustainable eco-tourism evaluation models and indicators: Focusing on the specialist of eco-tourism by AHP analysis. Korean J Tourism Res. 2012; 27(2):455–475.
6. Jin JG. Government productivity: Conceptual framework and measures. In: Korean Institute of Public Administration KIPA Research Report. 1998. pp. 0-117.
7. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The balanced scorecard-measures that drive performance. Harv Bus Rev. 1992; 70(1):71–79.
8. Kim DK, Park YW, Lee SM. Assessment of tourism resource development by the analytic hierarchy process: Focusing on the planning process. Korea J Tourism Hosp Res. 2007; 21(4):5–18.
9. Kim EH. A study on the development of performance evaluation model of the disabled welfare institutions using BSC and AHP. Korean Policy Sci Rev. 2010; 14(4):143–171.
10. Kim HK, Sung ES. In: BSC Practice Manual. Sigmainsight; 2004.
11. Kim HJ, Lim HG, Kim DG. The development on significancy and priority of KPI in contracted foodservice business in Korea using AHP. Korea J Tourism Hosp Res. 2011; 25(4):163–176.
12. Kim ST, Ahn SS, Lee HY. A study on the development of a CSR(Corporate Social Responsibility) evaluation model: with application of AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) technique. Acad Customer Satisf Manag. 2011; 13(1):169–187.
13. Kim SY, Yang IS, Yi BS, Baek SH, Shin SY, Lee HY. Childcare facility and kindergartens demands on foodservice support by center for child-care foodservice management (CCFSM) inSeoul and Gyeonggi-do. Korean J Community Nutr. 2011; 16(6):730–739.
14. Kim HK, Kim HJ. The development on significancy and priority of KPI in Korean coffee shop business using AHP. Korean J Hosp Adm. 2012; 21(5):195–205.
15. Kim JH, Kim WJ, Cho HK, Lee EY, Seo MW. A study on the development of evaluation model for selecting a standard for DITA using AHP. Ind Eng Interfaces. 2012; 25(1):96–105.
crossref
16. Ko YS, Yoon HS, Lee JH. In: Performance management in public service. Korea Development Institute; 2004.
17. Kwak TK, Lee HS, Yang IS. Assessment of food service management practices in day care centers. Korean J Soc Food Sci. 1991; 7(4):103–109.
18. Lee SG. Consolidated performance management for local governments with the introduction of performance-based budgeting system: With special reference to the case of Seoul metropolitan government. Korean J Local Finance. 2003; 8(1):135–162.
19. Lee BS. The survey on the foodservice management system of the child care centers in Ansan. Korean J Food Nutr. 2006; 19(4):435–447.
20. Lee MA, Yang IS, Yi BS, Kim HA, Park SH. Analytic hierarchy process approach to estimate weights of evaluation categories for school food service program in Korea. Korean J Nutr. 2006; 39(1):74–83.
21. Lee MS, Lee JY, Yoon SH. Assessment of foodservice management performance at child care centers. Korean J Community Nutr. 2006; 11(2):229–239.
22. Lee WS. Selection of indicator and establishment of system for a functional assessment of green space: Focused on forest green space. J Korea Soc Environ Restor Tech. 2012; 15(5):31–48.
23. Park JH. A study on civil administration service current and improvement method of central government. In: Korean Association for Public Administration Summer Consortium. 2000. pp. 553-568.
24. Park JH, Han HJ, L KJ, Park BS. Analysis and improvement in performance evaluation system and actual administration. In: KIPA Research Report. 2004. pp. 1-162.
25. Park S, Hong YW, Na JK. A method for selecting the evaluation index of defence R&D project by AHP. J Korean Data Inf Sci Soc. 2012; 23(5):961–970.
26. Park YM. A study on performance indicator of disabled welfare service. Jeonnam Assoc Public Adm. 2001; 8:413–431.
27. Saaty TL, Aczel J. Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgements. J Math Psychol. 1983; 27(1):93–102.
28. Saaty TL. In: Fundamental of decision making and prority theory with the analytic hierarchy process. Pittsburg: RWS Publications; 1994.
29. Saaty TL. In: Decision making for leader: the analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world. Pittsburg: RWS Publications; 1999.
30. Sohn CY, Yang IS. A analysis of relative importance of evaluation categories for hospital food service by analytic hierarchy process. Korean J Food Nutr. 2010; 23(4):470–477.
31. Staskel DM, Briley ME, Field LH, Barth SS. Microbial evaluation of foodservice surfaces in texas child-care centers. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007; 107(5):854–859.
crossref
32. Um DH, Kim DS, Kim TC, Kim ES. A study on the Development of green-tourism performance indicators by using BSC on rural village. J Korean Soc Rural Plan. 2006; 12(3):43–55.
33. Wholey JS, Hatry HP. The case for performance monitoring. Public Adm Rev. 1992; 52(6):604–610.
crossref
34. Yoon SJ, Kim KS, Kang ES. Application strategies on the BSC model of public performance evaluation system. In: KIPA Research Report. 2005. pp. 1-149.

Fig. 1.
The hierarchical diagram for the performance evaluation of operation in Centers for Child-care Foodservice Management (CCFSM).
kjcn-18-154f1.tif
Fig. 2.
The relative importance of perspectives.
kjcn-18-154f2.tif
Fig. 3.
The relative importance of key performance indicator in customer perspective.
kjcn-18-154f3.tif
Fig. 4.
The relative importance of key performance indicator in business performance perspective.
kjcn-18-154f4.tif
Fig. 5.
The relative importance of key performance indicator in learning & growth perspective.
kjcn-18-154f5.tif
Fig. 6.
The relative importance of key performance indicator in resource perspective.
kjcn-18-154f6.tif
Fig. 7.
Compound relative importance of key performance indicators.
kjcn-18-154f7.tif
Table 1.
Random Indicator (RI)
n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
RI 0 0 0 .58 0.90 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45 1.49
Table 2.
General characteristics of the subjects
Characteristics Frequency (%)
Gender Male 7 (11.5)
Female 54 (88.5)
Total 61 (100.0)
Age (years) 40.6 ± 9.71)
Occupation Chief of CCFSM 13 (21.3)
Team leader of CCFSM 27 (44.3)
Officials in executive department related to CCFSM2) 13 (21.3)
Foodservice management experts (Professor, Researcher) 8 (13.1)
Total 61 (100.0)
Career (years) 11.2 ± 7.9

1) Mean ± SD

2) Officials of Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) included

Table 3.
Difference in perception on the relative importance of perspectives
Perspective Relative importance
CCFSM (n = 40) KFDA (n = 1) Foodservice management expert (n = 8) Local government (n = 12)
Customer 0.3330 0.3255 0.3173 0.3685
Business performance 0.3537 0.2578 0.3734 0.3307
Learning & growth 0.1703 0.0769 0.1013 0.1453
Resource 0.1430 0.3399 0.2080 0.1555
Table 4.
Difference in perception on the relative importance of key performance indicators according to perspective
Perspective Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Relative importance
CCFSM (n = 40) KFDA (n = 1) Foodservice management expert (n = 8) Local government (n = 12)
Customer Evaluation of sanitary management level in child-care foodservice facilities 0.4023 0.4286 0.4098 0.3363
Evaluation of nutrition management level in child-care foodservice facilities 0.2639 0.4286 0.2584 0.2782
Level of customer recognition and behavior improvement 0.3338 0.1429 0.3318 0.3855
Business performance Enrollment rate 0.1543 0.0475 0.1251 0.0783
Performance of round visiting inspection on foodservice, sanitary, safety management and foodservice consulting 0.2713 0.2653 0.2345 0.2931
Performance of sanitation education 0.2156 0.2653 0.2465 0.2092
Performance of menu management 0.1734 0.1565 0.1959 0.2072
Performance of nutrition education 0.1854 0.2653 0.1980 0.2121
Learning & growth Performance of participation in education 0.4912 0.2500 0.0676 0.6057
Performance of self-checking and improvement in CCFSM 0.5088 0.7500 0.9324 0.3943
Resource Performance of budget management 0.2680 0.4941 0.2934 0.2032
Rate in secure of professional employee 0.3797 0.0729 0.4598 0.3857
Performance of management of facilities and equipments 0.1318 0.1572 0.1044 0.1139
Performance of supporting local government and connection with local community 0.2205 0.2759 0.1423 0.2971
TOOLS
Similar articles