Relevance of Key Performance Indicators and Islamic Higher Educations Reputation

Rahman El Junusi*  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang
Tolkah Tolkah  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang, Indonesia
Heny Yuningrum  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang, Indonesia
Ferry Khusnul Mubarok  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang, Indonesia

(*) Corresponding Author
DOI: 10.21580/at.v14i1.11546
The university ranking is an achievement indicator based on reputation, especially global reputation. The objectives of this study are (1) To determine the relevance of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) and PTKINs’ reputation based on SMS and Webometrics ranking; (2) To find out the correlation between KPI and PTKINs’ Reputation. This study uses mixed methods or integration of quantitative and qualitative research. The research objects were 17 PTKINs. For the analysis technique, it uses person correlation and explorative analysis. The results showed that of 51 KPI criteria, only one was relevant to the reputation of PTKINs based on the SMS ranking. In contrast, there are 13 KPI criteria that fit PTKINs' reputation based on Webometrics ranking. KPI does not correlate with PTKINs’ reputation based on SMS ranking, while KPI correlates with PTKINs’ reputation based on Webometrics ranking. For this reason, a policy is needed to synchronize KPI with WCU standards that have been recognized globally. While the implementation of ranking based on SMS needs to be reviewed because it does not reflect PTKINs' reputation.

Keywords: The objectives of this study are (1) To determine the relevance of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) and PTKINs’ reputation based on SMS and Webometrics ranking; (2) To find out the correlation between KPI and PTKINs’ Reputation. This study uses mixed meth

  1. Altbach, P. G., Yudkevich, M. and Rumbley, L. E. (2015) ‘Academic inbreeding: local challenge, global problem’, Asia Pacific Education Review. Springer Netherlands, 16(3), pp. 317–330. doi: 10.1007/s12564-015-9391-8.
  2. Ameer, R. and Othman, R. (2012) ‘Sustainability practices and corporate financial performance: A study based on the top global corporations’, Journal of Business Ethics, 108(1), pp. 61–79. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-1063-y.
  3. Campbell, A. C. (2019) ‘Exploring the Relationship of Home Country Government Reforms and the Choices of International Higher Education Scholarship Program Participants’, European Education. Taylor & Francis, 51(2), pp. 147–163. doi: 10.1080/10564934.2019.1569470.
  4. Carpenter, D. P. and Krause, G. A. (2012) ‘Reputation and Public Administration’, Public Administration Review, 72(1), pp. 26–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02506.x.
  5. Choong, K. K. (2013) ‘Understanding the features of performance measurement system: A literature review’, Measuring Business Excellence, 17(4), pp. 102–121. doi: 10.1108/MBE-05-2012-0031.
  6. Daraio, C., Bonaccorsi, A. and Simar, L. (2015) ‘Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach’, European Journal of Operational Research, 244(3), pp. 918–930. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.02.005.
  7. Darmalaksana (2016) ‘Implementasi Strategic Management System ( SMS ) For Islamic Higher Education’. Jakarta: Kementerian Agama.
  8. Diana Heckl and and Moormann, U. (2010) ‘Process Performance Management’, in Handbook on Business Process Management 2. Germany: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 115–135. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-01982-1.
  9. Ding, L. and Zeng, Y. (2015) ‘Evaluation of Chinese higher education by TOPSIS and IEW - The case of 68 universities belonging to the Ministry of Education in China’, China Economic Review. Elsevier B.V., 36, pp. 341–358. doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2015.05.007.
  10. Doğan, G., & Al, U. (2018) ‘(2018). Is it possible to rank universities using fewer indicators A study on five international university rankings. Aslib Journal of Information Management..pdf’, Aslib Journal of Information Managemen, pp. 2–21.
  11. Estera, A. and Shahjahan, R. A. (2019) ‘Globalizing whiteness? Visually re/presenting students in global university rankings websites’, Discourse. Taylor & Francis, 40(6), pp. 930–945. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2018.1453781.
  12. Fitriyani, D. (2017) ‘Balanced Scorecard: Alternatif Pengukuran Kinerja Organisasi Sektor Publik’, Jurnal Cakrawala Akuntansi. Jakarta: PT Grafindo Persada. doi: 10.1108/14635770410532624.
  13. Fombrun, C. J. and Gardberg, N. (2000) ‘Who’s Tops in Corporate Reputation?’, Corporate Reputation Review, 3(1), pp. 13–17. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540095.
  14. Gao, L. (2017) ‘The Dilemma and Outlet of China ’s High Education Management in the Era of Globalization’, in Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, pp. 388–390. doi: 10.2991/ichssr-17.2017.79.
  15. Gosselin, M. (2005) ‘An empirical study of performance measurement in manufacturing firms’, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54(5–6), pp. 419–437. doi: 10.1108/17410400510604566.
  16. Den Hartog, D. N. et al. (2013) ‘HRM, Communication, Satisfaction, and Perceived Performance: A Cross-Level Test’, Journal of Management, 39(6), pp. 1637–1665. doi: 10.1177/0149206312440118.
  17. Hazelkorn, E. (2011) ‘Measuring world-class excellence and the global obsession with rankings’, Handbook on Globalization and Higher Education, (January 2011), pp. 497–515. doi: 10.4337/9780857936233.00040.
  18. Huang, C. L. et al. (2010) ‘AdaPTKINsve intervehicle communication control for cooperative safety systems’, IEEE Network, 24(1), pp. 6–13. doi: 10.1109/MNET.2010.5395777.
  19. Ismail Sukardi (2017) Peta Jalan (Road Map) Pengembangan PTKINS Di Indonesia, UIN Raden Fatah. Available at: http://103.84.119.11/artikel/34/peta-jalan-roadmap-pengembangan-PTKINS-di-indonesia.
  20. Jabnoun, N. (2015) ‘The influence of wealth, transparency, and democracy on the number of top ranked universities’, Quality Assurance in Education, 23(2), pp. 149–165. doi: 10.1108/QAE-07-2013-0033.
  21. Junusi, R. El, Musahadi, M. and Yuningrum, H. (2019) ‘Balanced Scorecard: Strategy Towards World Class University’, Economica: Jurnal Ekonomi Islam, 10(1), pp. 87-98. doi: 10.21580/economica.2019.10.1.3429.
  22. Kantola, M. and Kettunen, J. (2012) ‘Integration of education with research and development and the export of higher education’, On the Horizon, 20(1), pp. 7–16. doi: 10.1108/10748121211202026.
  23. Lee, D. and Van Ryzin, G. G. (2019) ‘Measuring bureaucratic reputation: Scale development and validation’, Governance, 32(1), pp. 177–192. doi: 10.1111/gove.12371.
  24. Marginson, S. (2010) ‘Higher education in the global knowledge economy’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(5), pp. 6962–6980. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.05.049.
  25. Marginson, S. (2014) ‘University rankings and social science’, European Journal of Education, 49(1), pp. 45–59. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12061.
  26. McMillan Sally & Schumacher (2014) Research in Education Evidence-Based Inquiry. Perason Ne. Edited by Seventh Edition. London: Pearson.
  27. Mense, E. G. et al. (2018) ‘The Development of Global Higher Education in a World of Transformation’, Journal of Education and Development, 2(3), p. 47. doi: 10.20849/jed.v2i3.529.
  28. Millot, B. (2015) ‘International rankings: Universities vs. higher education systems’, International Journal of Educational Development. Elsevier Ltd, 40, pp. 156–165. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2014.10.004.
  29. Nursito, S., Julianto, H. A. and Nugroho, S. (2013) ‘Model Empiris Student-Based University Reputation Terintegrasi Sebagai Strategi Mencapai Keunggulan Kompetitif Perguruan Tinggi Swasta’, in. Surakarta (Proceeding Seminar Nasional Dan Call For Papers Sancall), pp. 67–75.
  30. Pan, J. N. and Pan, T. C. (2010) ‘Developing a new key performance index for measuring service quality’, Industrial Management and Data Systems, 110(6), pp. 823–840. doi: 10.1108/02635571011055072.
  31. Permana, D. J. (2018) ‘Perancangan Sistem Pengukuran Kinerja Perguruan Tinggi Melalui Metode Academic Scorecard’, Jurnal Informatika: Jurnal Pengembangan IT Poltek Tegal, 03(01), pp. 109–114.
  32. Pratiwi, D. A., Purwanggono, B. and Bakhtiar, A. (2017) ‘Kriteria World Class University Qs World Rankings’, Industrial Engineering Online Journal, 6(1).
  33. Quintal, V. A., Mazzarol, T. and Soutar, G. N. (2012) ‘Revisiting the global market for higher education’, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 24(5), pp. 717–737. doi: 10.1108/13555851211278079.
  34. R. Burke Johnson, Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, L. A. T. (2007) ‘Mixed methods research’, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), pp. 112–133. doi: 10.1017/9781316418376.015.
  35. Reddy, K. S., Xie, E. and Tang, Q. (2016) ‘Higher education, high-impact research, and world university rankings: A case of India and comparison with China’, Pacific Science Review B: Humanities and Social Sciences. Elsevier Ltd, 2(1), pp. 1–21. doi: 10.1016/j.psrb.2016.09.004.
  36. Renny, S. (2016) ‘Analisis Dampak Implementasi Indikator Kinerja Utama Terhadap Serapan Anggaran BPPK’, Journal Info Artha, 1, pp. 61–71. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
  37. Santos-Vijande, M. L., López-Sánchez, J. Á. and Trespalacios, J. A. (2012) ‘How organizational learning affects a firm’s flexibility, competitive strategy, and performance’, Journal of Business Research, 65(8), pp. 1079–1089. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.002.
  38. Setijono, D. and Dahlgaard, J. J. (2007) ‘Customer value as a key performance indicator (KPI) and a key improvement indicator (KII)’, Measuring Business Excellence, 11(2), pp. 44–61. doi: 10.1108/13683040710752733.
  39. Sidorenko, T. and Gorbatova, T. (2015) ‘Efficiency of Russian Education Through the Scale of World University Rankings’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier B.V., 166, pp. 464–467. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.555.
  40. Tashakkori, A. and Creswell, J. W. (2007) ‘Editorial: The New Era of Mixed Methods’, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), pp. 3–7. doi: 10.1177/2345678906293042.
  41. Toor, S. ur R. and Ogunlana, S. O. (2010) ‘Beyond the “iron triangle”: Stakeholder percePTKINson of key performance indicators (KPIs) for large-scale public sector development projects’, International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier Ltd and IPMA, 28(3), pp. 228–236. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.05.005.
  42. van Vught, F. (2008) ‘Mission diversity and reputation in higher education’, Higher Education Policy, 21(2), pp. 151–174. doi: 10.1057/hep.2008.5.
  43. Yaisawarng, S. and Ng, Y. C. (2014) ‘The impact of higher education reform on research performance of Chinese universities’, China Economic Review. Elsevier Inc., 31, pp. 94–105. doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2014.08.006.

Open Access Copyright (c) 2022 At-Taqaddum
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
At-Taqaddum
Published by Lembaga Penjaminan Mutu
Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Walisongo Semarang
Jl. Walisongo No.3-5 Semarang 50185, Indonesia
Phone: +62 857-1999-1679
Website: https://lpm.walisongo.ac.id/
Email: attaqaddum@walisongo.ac.id 
 
ISSN: 1979-4703 (p)
ISSN: 2527-9726 (e)
DOI : 10.21580/at

Lisensi Creative Commons
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 
apps