Influence of e-Standard Operating Procedure to Auditors' e-Satisfaction through IT Capabailities and e-Audit

Sutapa, I Nyoman; Tarigan, Zeplin Jiwa Husada; Mochtar, Jenny

doi:10.1145/3133811.3133826

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…KPIs for lecturers, programs, faculty, and university level distributed in 4 BSC perspectives derived from FGDs using reference [4], [7]- [10]. The weight of the entire KPI is based on the college policy.…”

Section: Design Of Hei's Measurement Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Higher Education Performance Measurement Based on Mutual Contribution

Sutapa¹,

Tarigan²,

Djundjung³

et al. 2018

IJIET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article discusses a measurement model to overcome a problem of performance among higher education institutions and its lecturers which is less support each other. The model aims to increase lecturer's motivation which can improve the performance of the higher education organizations and vice versa. The research method to develop the performance measurement is a focus group discussion, was done by inviting higher education top management and senior lecturers to discuss the mutual contribution each other. The finding of this research is a performance measurement model which are a tiered, balanced, and shared a mutual contribution. Tiered measurements are done in stages, starting from measuring the performance of individual lecturers upward to the measurement of institution performance. A balanced was done by measurement based on the Balanced Scorecard concept. Mutual contribution among lecturers and their institution, as measured by share the performance of institution to its lecturers and the other hand, all lecturers' performance are accumulated to institution performance.

show abstract

Section: Design Of Hei's Measurement Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maybe the reason was individual performance are generalized as average score in one work unit, high and low achievers get the same rewards. Also, their contribution to the organization is directly or indirectly to the progress of the organization is not adequately rewarded [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%