paper 174

Third International Conference on Production Research Third International Conference on Production Research Third International Conference on Production Research Third International Conference on Production Research ––––

Americas’ Americas’ Americas’ Americas’ Region 2006 Region 2006 Region 2006 Region 2006 (ICPR(ICPR(ICPR(ICPR----AM06) AM06) AM06) AM06)

IFPR IFPR IFPR IFPR –––– ABEPRO ABEPRO ABEPRO ABEPRO ---- PUCPR PUCPR PUCPR PUCPR ---- PPGEPS PPGEPS PPGEPS PPGEPS

PRODUCTIVITY MANAGEMENT BASED ON PRODUCTIVITY

SCIENCE FOR SELF-RECREATING ORGANIZATION

IN A BRAZILIAN MULTINATIONAL COMPANY

Katsumi Abe Meisei University, Tokyo – [email protected]

José Jean Paul Zanlucchi de Souza Tavares University of São Paulo, São Paulo – [email protected]

Abstract:Abstract:Abstract:Abstract:

Employees’ morale and motivation are key elements for self-recreating organization,

which management has to take into consideration for productivity improvement with

limited capital investment at production line. This is the essential way of the

management for enhancement of work member productivity based on the human

semantics. It is not, however, unusual that there is a mismatch between workers' real

needs and the available managements given by the organization, which could be

crucial problem to both workers and the management. In order to elucidate the situation

of the mismatch structurally, this study applies the questionnaire system [1] designed in

the S-F scheme. It is based on the KIS Productivity scheme for Self-Recreating

Organization (SRO) in productivity science. The original idea of Self-Recreating

Organization (SRO) for the research has been proposed by Kurosawa [2]. The

research for Japanese companies on this theme has been carried on; the reports were

made at the 17th ICPR [3] and the 18th ICPR [4]. This study develops it further on the

case study for a Brazilian multinational company.

Keywords:Keywords:Keywords:Keywords:

Knowledge Intensive Staff (KIS) Member Productivity scheme, Self-Recreating

Organization (SRO), productivity science, S-F scheme, organizational productivity,

morale and motivation, fuzzy similarity and connectivity matrix.

1111 IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

The organizational climate has been studied many, but there are few works on KIS

productivity (KIS: Knowledge Intensive Staff members) connected to the organizational




climate. This study applies the Kurosawa’s questionnaire system [5] [6]based on the S-

F scheme in productivity science. It constructs a questionnaire system for the

organization, where the structure of worker’s needs for higher performance can be

made clear in the four dimensions as is illustrated in Fig.1; they are (S) Drives to Work,

(s) Communication, (f) Organizational Effectiveness, and (F) Performance or

Satisfaction [7].

First it is explained the diagnostic survey, where the questionnaire system is designed

uniquely based on the S-F scheme. Second, the collected data are processed by fuzzy

operations so as to quantify the relationships between the dimensions, where the

analytical tools used are fuzzy contingency table analysis, fuzzy similarity matrix, fuzzy

connectivity matrix, and principal component analysis. Third, the situations of each

dimension, especially the consciousness gaps between superiors and subordinates are

quantified as to the consciousness responses about the organizational climate from the

members; superiors and the subordinates. It will suggest the appropriate managerial

policy for the SOR that should be taken by the top of decision makers in the

organizations concerned.

Fig.1 Structure of Organizational Productiveness/Productivity by SFig.1 Structure of Organizational Productiveness/Productivity by SFig.1 Structure of Organizational Productiveness/Productivity by SFig.1 Structure of Organizational Productiveness/Productivity by S----F SchemeF SchemeF SchemeF Scheme

Performance

SatisfactionOrganizational

Effectiveness

Drives to Work Communication

ｆｆｆｆ

ｓｓｓｓ

ＦＦＦＦ

ＳＳＳＳ

Organizational

Productiveness/

Productivity

through Morale

Motivation

ＦＦＦＦ-Dimension （（（（Function））））Function．Functionally it

represents roles and role

playing.

ｆｆｆｆ-Dimension （（（（form））））Form of the thing，

Functionally it represents

a goal gratification

function．

s-Dimension（（（（system/structure））））Structure，elements plus law．

Functionally it represents a

functional system of

systematization，strategy setting.

S-Dimension （（（（Substance））））Substance，foundation of

the system．Functionally it

represents potential or

hypothesis．

Performance


Effectiveness


ｆｆｆｆ

ｓｓｓｓ

ＦＦＦＦ

ＳＳＳＳ

Organizational

Productiveness/

Productivity

through Morale

Motivation

Performance


Effectiveness


ｆｆｆｆ

ｓｓｓｓ

ＦＦＦＦ

ＳＳＳＳ

Organizational

Productiveness/

Productivity

through Morale

Motivation

Performance


Effectiveness


ｆｆｆｆ

ｓｓｓｓ

ＦＦＦＦ

ＳＳＳＳ

Performance


Effectiveness


ｆｆｆｆ

ｓｓｓｓ

ＦＦＦＦ

ＳＳＳＳ

Organizational

Productiveness/

Productivity

through Morale

Motivation

Organizational

Productiveness/

Productivity

through Morale

Motivation

ＦＦＦＦ-Dimension （（（（Function））））Function．Functionally it

represents roles and role

playing.

ｆｆｆｆ-Dimension （（（（form））））Form of the thing，

Functionally it represents

a goal gratification

function．

s-Dimension（（（（system/structure））））Structure，elements plus law．

Functionally it represents a

functional system of

systematization，strategy setting.

S-Dimension （（（（Substance））））Substance，foundation of

the system．Functionally it

represents potential or

hypothesis．




2222 FFFFrameworkrameworkrameworkramework ofofofof D D D Diagnosisiagnosisiagnosisiagnosis of organization situation of organization situation of organization situation of organization situation

What is the fundamental of organizational productivity? The S-F scheme proposed

originally by Kurosawa is very useful to explain this, which has the four basic

dimensional categories described in the introduction descried above. Fig.1 shows a

concrete expression of the four dimensions of organizational climate [8]. The four

dimensional categories influence each other, which is called a phase-movement with a

counter clockwise or a clockwise or sometimes opposite angle (s-F or S-f). The S-F

scheme has a multi-stage structure. At the first stage, it represents the total structure of

organizational productivity, which consists of four dimensions, S, s, f, and F;

A={S,s,f,F}, as is shown in Figure 1, and the each dimension consists of four sub-

dimensions, and the each sub-dimension consists of four sub-sub dimensions of S, s, f,

and F.

While the S-dimension is a repeller the potential source of energy for the organization,

the F-dimension is an attractor as the total result from the organizational activity. The

dimensions of s and f are the intermediate saddles between the S and the F, which acts

to receive the energy/results and to develop them into the following dimension. The

potentials of each dimension in the phase-movement of S-F scheme flow from the

Fig.2 SFig.2 SFig.2 SFig.2 S----F Scheme applied to the questionnaire F Scheme applied to the questionnaire F Scheme applied to the questionnaire F Scheme applied to the questionnaire

systemsystemsystemsystem




dimension with a higher potential to the one with a lower potential; that is, S⊃s⊃f⊃F

as the set theory and S→s→f→F as the flow of potential energy in the depth phase-

movement with a counter clockwise. In the surface phase-movement with a clockwise,

they act in reverse order. That is the principal mechanism of phase-movement in the S-

F scheme [9]. The S-F scheme in Fig.1 shows the dynamism of developing the

organizational productiveness/productivity in that way.

Fig.2 shows the S-F scheme applied to the questionnaire system, which has a three-

stage structure; 64 questions are allocated with corresponding to each dimension.

What is asked at each dimension is shown in Fig.3. This study treats the psychological

Fig.3 The detailed structure of the four dimensions of organizational climateFig.3 The detailed structure of the four dimensions of organizational climateFig.3 The detailed structure of the four dimensions of organizational climateFig.3 The detailed structure of the four dimensions of organizational climate




relation between group managers and their subordinates, and in particular detects the

gaps in the consciousness. The Kurosawa’s questionnaire system [10] has carefully

constructed so as to collect their consciousness proper to each dimension. The SRO

Questionnaire for the Subordinates in the appendix is an example of actual 16

questions to subordinates at the dimension of S1-Drives.

3333 A CA CA CA Caseaseasease S S S Studytudytudytudy forforforfor thethethethe C C C Companyompanyompanyompany “A “A “A “A””””

This study has tentatively surveyed small organizations in Brazil. One of them, who

engage in working on a new nano pump development to require a new specific

application patent, is taken here to explain the diagnosis for organization. Some of the

questions, which are designed for Japanese workers, would not go down well with

Brazilian workers. Since the survey treats the psychological relation between managers

and their subordinates, as is explained above, some questions refer to workers’ values

and traditions; they might not be easy to answer because of different cultures between

two nations. However, this time does not take account of these problems at this stage.

3333.1.1.1.1 Total Total Total Total SSSSituation of ituation of ituation of ituation of OOOOrganizational rganizational rganizational rganizational CCCClimatelimatelimatelimate

The survey has collected the degree of consciousness of 5 ranks from 3 superiors and

3 subordinates of the company; all persons engaged have been questioned. It is rather

small organization; however, referring to the size of organization, it has no problem at

all for this diagnostic method, because the survey does not deal the statistics but

examine the organization as if the doctor diagnosed his/her patients.

The degree of consciousness of 5 ranks are transferred to the scores by weighting to

represent the positive/negative aspects of each category, thus Negative aspect 1: 0.0,

Negative aspect 2: 2.5, Neutral aspect 3: 5.0, Positive aspect 4: 7.5, and Positive

aspect 5: 10.0.

The bar chart in Fig.4 shows average values of each dimension S1, s1, f1, and F1 at

the first stage of S-F scheme in Fig.2, which is appraised for the 64 questionnaires by

all respondents. The total situation for the climate of this company is not bad. The

potential of this company at S-dimension, which is the source of energy for the self-

recreating organization, is fairly high; however, it does not seems to have been

activated; they are conscious of negative aspect in accordance with the counter

clockwise of S→F. They feel that the outcome of business (F-dimension) is less than

the expected. It is said that the company such as showing a negative aspect in




accordance with the counter clockwise of S-F scheme would be in the situation of

declining tendency. Of course; it might not be the case for this company.

Fig.5 shows the consciousness gap between superiors and subordinates for the climate

of this company, which corresponds to each dimension appraised by all staffs of the

organization shown in fig.4. AS is pointed earlier that the staffs are conscious of

negative aspect in accordance with the counter clockwise of S→F, it shows a similar

Fig.4 Total situation for the organizational Fig.4 Total situation for the organizational Fig.4 Total situation for the organizational Fig.4 Total situation for the organizational

climateclimateclimateclimate

Fig.5 Consciousness gap between superiors and Fig.5 Consciousness gap between superiors and Fig.5 Consciousness gap between superiors and Fig.5 Consciousness gap between superiors and

subordinates for the totalsubordinates for the totalsubordinates for the totalsubordinates for the total orgaorgaorgaorganizational climatenizational climatenizational climatenizational climate




tendency for both superiors and subordinates. The positive consciousness of superiors

is higher than that of the subordinates, the pattern of which is commonly seen; in

general, the superiors would tend psychologically to overestimate their management.

3.23.23.23.2 Consciousness Gap between Superiors and Consciousness Gap between Superiors and Consciousness Gap between Superiors and Consciousness Gap between Superiors and SubordinatesSubordinatesSubordinatesSubordinates

According to Fig.5 which shows the consciousness gaps between superiors and the

subordinates, they have very similar consciousness; there are not significant

differences. In general, there should be gaps in the consciousness between them; see

the case of a Japanese company in Appendix, where there are large gaps except for

the ones for Colleague Relations (S2) and Communication Pattern (s2) at the

dimension of Communication (S1). In Japan, it is quite normal to make efforts to keep a

good relationship with the colleagues. They enjoy quite often the so-called “after-five

communication” in drinking/chatting together with colleagues including the superiors at

pub or somewhere else. The fact might have been appeared as a very small

consciousness gap at (S2) Colleague Relations and (s2) Communication Pattern.

However, they feel different consciousness at (f2) Vertical Relations and (F2) Team

Work Atmosphere in the case of the organization shown in Appendix. One of the main

works in this diagnosis is to make clear the consciousness gaps and the effects on the

other dimensions. It is very important to know that in the S-F scheme the S-dimension

is the potential source of energy for the organization; the F-dimension is the total result

Fig.6 Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2Fig.6 Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2Fig.6 Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2Fig.6 Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2ndndndnd

stage stage stage stage




from the organizational activity; the dimensions of s and f intermediate between the S-

dimension and the F-dimension so as to revitalize the organization. It is therefore

important to elucidate the structures and the functions of intermediate dimensions of s

an f.

Fig.7 to Fig.10 shows the detail of gap patterns for each dimension at the 3rd stage.

Here, it is referred to the most characteristics at intermediate dimensions

3.2.1 s3.2.1 s3.2.1 s3.2.1 s----dimensidimensidimensidimension: Communication (see Fig.8)on: Communication (see Fig.8)on: Communication (see Fig.8)on: Communication (see Fig.8)

It has been observed very low valuations at the following dimensions, for which the real

questions made to the subordinates are shown as well.

(1) “s4: Admiring High Performance” of (S) Colleague Relations.

“Do you think such an organizational climate is valuable to keep and sustain the work

section as that all the members are frankly delighted in making appraisal of colleague’s

success?”

No gap has been seen between superiors and the subordinates in the consciousness

for this question. Brazilian people might not think so or the question itself might not fit

for the values of Brazilian people?

(2) “s5: Informal Communication” of (s) Communication Pattern.

Fig.7 SFig.7 SFig.7 SFig.7 S----Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3rdrdrdrd stage: Drives stage: Drives stage: Drives stage: Drives




“Do you think that the members in this work section do not pay more attention to having

associations with colleagues or superiors or subordinates outside the job?”

Apart from the job, Brazilian people might not take an interest in associating the

colleagues or superiors or subordinates? This custom might be unique only to

Japanese.

(3) “s15: Mutual Rivalry” of (F) Team Work Atmosphere.

“In this work section, is there full of mutual rivalry training toward solving the difficulties

in the job?”

The term of “mutual rivalry” means not “hostile rivalry” but “friendly rivalry. The

subordinates put highly positive scores than those given by the superiors.

3.2.2 f3.2.2 f3.2.2 f3.2.2 f----dimension: Organizational Effectiveness (see Fig.9)dimension: Organizational Effectiveness (see Fig.9)dimension: Organizational Effectiveness (see Fig.9)dimension: Organizational Effectiveness (see Fig.9)

This dimension represents functionally a goal gratification function or administering

function; therefore, what the situation at this dimension should be is very important; it

should be the key to the successful organization. In particular, middle managers and

KIS (Knowledge-Intensive Staffs) must play an important role in this dimension.

Referring to Fig.9, the total situation of this dimension is not bad, because the potential

energy of S flows to develop them into the F-dimension with being mediated by

functions of s and f (see (F) Leadership Style (see Fig.9). However, the situation could

be tightened up with improving (s) Pattern of Decision Making of f-Dimension; very low

Fig.8 sFig.8 sFig.8 sFig.8 s----Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3rdrdrdrd stage: Communication stage: Communication stage: Communication stage: Communication




valuations are given at (f7) Clarity of the Goal in the (s) Pattern of Decision Making (see

Fig.9), for which the real questions made to the subordinates is “In your work section,

are goals and policies clearly shown?”

The subordinates are very negative attitude to this question; why it is so should be

asked.

Fig.10 FFig.10 FFig.10 FFig.10 F----Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3rdrdrdrd stage: Performance/Satisfaction stage: Performance/Satisfaction stage: Performance/Satisfaction stage: Performance/Satisfaction

Fig.9 fFig.9 fFig.9 fFig.9 f----Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3Dimension at 3rdrdrdrd stage: Organizational Effectiveness stage: Organizational Effectiveness stage: Organizational Effectiveness stage: Organizational Effectiveness




3.33.33.33.3 Relationship Relationship Relationship Relationship AAAAnalysis between nalysis between nalysis between nalysis between DDDDiiiimensions by mensions by mensions by mensions by FFFFuzzy uzzy uzzy uzzy GraphGraphGraphGraph

The capability of organization is structured by using the S-F scheme shown in Fig.1. It

is thought that total capability of the organization should be highly maintained with

positive consciousness of the members in every dimension of the S-F scheme. That is

that the structure has (a) high potential capacity of each dimension; S, s, f, F and (b)

good relations between the dimensions. This section shows the quantitative diagnosis

of organizational capability; (a) to determine the potential capability of each dimension,

which is obtained through aggregating the capability evaluations of dimension by work

members, and (b) to evaluate the relations between the potentials of each dimension.

Each member’s evaluation about each dimension’s capability is set on the evaluation

matrix for coefficients of the fuzzy similarity matrix and fuzzy connectivity matrix.

It is desirable to express the consciousnesses surveyed as the degree of fuzzy

membership by a possible membership function, however; at this stage, it is

determined to treat the scores obtained as direct fuzzy membership degrees of the

group members’ consciousness, which are revalued between 0 and 1, supposing that

the membership function is a 45 diagonal liner line. The first operation is to calculate

the matrixes for fuzzy similarity and fuzzy connectivity by fuzzy contingency table

analysis [11][12]. Fuzzy similarity matrix defines some weakness and strength of the

organization. Fuzzy connectivity matrix provides some suggestions where the

organization needs to have the actions required for the organization manager to

improve the employees’ morale and motivation.

(1) Case of (S) Colleague Relations of Communication (s-Dimension)

Fig.11 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (S) Colleague Relations of

Communication (s-Dimension). Since the potential gaps between S (0.83) and F (0.25)

and between f (0.83) and F (0.25) are great, the weakest relationship appears between

them (0.42). The weak relationship follows between s and F (0.58). Fuzzy similarity

relation does not have a direction.




The connectivity relation shows the direction of the relationship (see Fig.13); therefore,

it makes clear that it is caused rather by the weakness of connectivity coefficient of

F→S (0.26) and F→f (0.26), and F→s follows by (0.42). On the basis of the information

given by the fuzzy relationship analysis, it tries to find out the actions required for the

organization managers to improve the organizational climate to raise the employees’

morale and motivation.

By using α-cut (see Fig.12), the relationships between the dimensions become clear.

When it is taken R0.75 and over, the relations between F-f and F-S are separated;

Dimension F is completely isolated and f-s is also separated when the α-cut is taken

R0.83. They suggest that there is a managerial problem of (s) Good Friendship in this

organization.

There can be seen a dispersion of relationships between the dimensions. The

dispersion can be reduced so as to optimize the state of the relational structure. The

fuzzy transitive closure shows the possibly maximum state of the relational structure

Fig.11 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)Fig.11 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)Fig.11 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)Fig.11 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)

(S) Colleague Relations of (s(S) Colleague Relations of (s(S) Colleague Relations of (s(S) Colleague Relations of (s----Dimension) Communication Dimension) Communication Dimension) Communication Dimension) Communication




(Fig.11, right). In this case, it shows that there are relational improvements in the S-f

(i.e. 0.46→0.63) and F-f (i.e. 0.54→0.63).

(2) Case of (s) Pattern of Decision Making of (f-Dimension) Organizational

Effectiveness

It is interpreted, as is explained above in the case of Colleague Relations. They

suggest in this organization that there are managerial problems of (f) Clarity of the

Goal, and (s) Devotion of the members to the Decision. The potential at those

dimensions must be heightened to improve their weak linkages.

Fig.13 Graphs of fuzzy connectiviFig.13 Graphs of fuzzy connectiviFig.13 Graphs of fuzzy connectiviFig.13 Graphs of fuzzy connectivity and transitive closurety and transitive closurety and transitive closurety and transitive closure

Fig.12 Fuzzy similarity relations and Fig.12 Fuzzy similarity relations and Fig.12 Fuzzy similarity relations and Fig.12 Fuzzy similarity relations and αααα----cutcutcutcut




Fig.15 Fuzzy similarity relations and Fig.15 Fuzzy similarity relations and Fig.15 Fuzzy similarity relations and Fig.15 Fuzzy similarity relations and αααα----cutcutcutcut

Fig.14 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)Fig.14 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)Fig.14 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)Fig.14 Graphs of fuzzy similarity and fuzzy transitive closure (right)

(s) Pattern of Decision Making of (f(s) Pattern of Decision Making of (f(s) Pattern of Decision Making of (f(s) Pattern of Decision Making of (f----Dimension) Organizational EffectivenessDimension) Organizational EffectivenessDimension) Organizational EffectivenessDimension) Organizational Effectiveness




4444 ConclusionConclusionConclusionConclusion

The diagnosis of organizational productiveness proposed in this paper is in a figurative

sense just like that a medical doctor diagnoses a patient；an organization is treated as

an organism. The F-dimension checks the present state of health for the organization;

the f-dimension judges the effectiveness of management: the s-dimension sees the

policy/strategy; the S-dimension values the psychological will/attitude toward work.

These diagnoses are carried out by the structural questionnaire system designed

based on the S-F scheme.

The information obtained from the organization diagnosis should be shared with both

superiors and subordinates through a periodical group meeting to improve the

organizational climate.

One of the key factors for the organizational climate is making a good communication

between superiors and subordinates, for which the final stage is to have an individual

counseling; counseling meeting with an individual subordinate, in particular who has

extreme and influential opinions for the organization, could be the key to improve the

organizational climate based on morale and motivation.

Participation of work members in the job management must be a target of the scheme

for work member productivity management, because subjectivity of workers or

psychological situation of workers must be the most important factor; the performance

Fig.16 Graphs of fuzzy connectivityFig.16 Graphs of fuzzy connectivityFig.16 Graphs of fuzzy connectivityFig.16 Graphs of fuzzy connectivity and transitive closure and transitive closure and transitive closure and transitive closure




of worker is decisively influenced and even determined by the work member

productivity management based on morale-motivation nexus.

Acknowledgments; Acknowledgments; Acknowledgments; Acknowledgments;

Professor Kurosawa, Professor Emeritus of Tokyo Institute of Technology has given us

a lot of useful advises, ideas, and referential materials; the original idea for this

research has been proposed by him, for which we greatly appreciate.

AppendixesAppendixesAppendixesAppendixes

SRO Questionnaire for the Subordinates

This enquête is carried for the purpose of SRO survey. SRO: Self-Recreating

Organization originated by Professor K. Kurosawa.

1 Is your job full of motivation and interest?

2 Are you suited to your present work?

3 Are you happy enough to be able to discipline for your job capability?

4 Is your job what you want to do?

5 Do you believe that working is a thing which gains respectful?

6 Are you working with nice colleagues?

7 Are you working under a nice supervisor?

8 Are you developing your ability and capacity through job achievement?

9 Is your job meaningful for your life?

10 Is your job societally meaningful?

11 Do you place a high value of the social mission on the management in your work

section?

12 Do you expect that the company can achieve a high business performance?

13 Do you think it will gain you respects to achieve a high performance?

14 Do you feel happy because you are working with nice colleagues whom you can

respect?

15 Do you carry your job efficiently because the goal has been set clearly in your work

section?

16 Do you have a strong consciousness of competition with colleagues?

・

・




63 Do you think that there is agreement between you and your corporation in respect of

the ideal purposes?

64 Do you consider your present job meaningful for your life?

The same text of questionnaires above can be used for the superiors by asking “Do

your subordinates” instead of “Do you”

Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2Consciousness gaps between superior and subordinate at the 2ndndndnd

stage stage stage stage

Manufacturing sector of a company in JapanManufacturing sector of a company in JapanManufacturing sector of a company in JapanManufacturing sector of a company in Japan

A verageA verageA verageA verage

P ositiveP ositiveP ositiveP ositive

N egativeN egativeN egativeN egative

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

S s f F S s f F S s f F S s f F

Superior Subordinates

(f)(f)(f)(f)O rganizationalO rganizationalO rganizationalO rganizational

E ffectivenessE ffectivenessE ffectivenessE ffectiveness

(F)(F)(F)(F)P erform anceP erform anceP erform anceP erform ance

(S )(S )(S )(S )D rivesD rivesD rivesD rives

(s)(s)(s)(s)C om m unicatioC om m unicatioC om m unicatioC om m unicationnnn




REFERENCES

[1] Kurosawa K. (2001), Work Member Productivity Improvement through

Organizational Revolution: General Scheme of Practice and Example, 2002, Revised

and Extended Edition, for XII World Productivity Congress, Hong Kong – Beijing, 2001,

29 pages.

[2] Kurosawa K., 2004, Theory for the Organization Productiveness – SRO –, Japan

Academy of Productivity Science, Meisei University Abe Laboratory, pp.1-48.

[3] Nayuki M. and Abe K. (2003), Empirical Study on Organizational Productivity

Management from Productivity Science Point of View, 17th

ICPR, Proceedings.

[4] Nayuki M. and Abe K. (2005), Productivity Management based on Productivity

Science for Self-Recreative Organization (SRO), 18th

ICPR, Proceedings.

[5] Kurosawa K., 2004 (1), Theory for the Organizational Productiveness – SRO –,

Japan Academy of Productivity Science, Meisei University Abe Laboratory, 1-48.

Procedure for making fuzzy similarity matrix and fuzzy connectivity matrixProcedure for making fuzzy similarity matrix and fuzzy connectivity matrixProcedure for making fuzzy similarity matrix and fuzzy connectivity matrixProcedure for making fuzzy similarity matrix and fuzzy connectivity matrix

0.83 0.68 0.73 0.63 No.10

0.68 0.60 0.55 0.58 No.9

0.75 0.78 0.68 0.88 No.8

0.75 0.70 0.68 0.65 No.7

0.60 0.40 0.63 0.65 No.6

0.78 0.78 0.60 0.53 No.5

0.75 0.80 0.75 0.63 No.4

0.73 0.68 0.70 0.75 No.3

0.45 0.63 0.55 0.43 No.2

0.48 0.90 0.48 0.45 No.1

FfsSM em ber

0.83 0.68 0.73 0.63 No.10

0.68 0.60 0.55 0.58 No.9

0.75 0.78 0.68 0.88 No.8

0.75 0.70 0.68 0.65 No.7

0.60 0.40 0.63 0.65 No.6

0.78 0.78 0.60 0.53 No.5

0.75 0.80 0.75 0.63 No.4

0.73 0.68 0.70 0.75 No.3

0.45 0.63 0.55 0.43 No.2

0.48 0.90 0.48 0.45 No.1

FfsSM em ber

Evaluation Matrix

=

00.188.093.090.0

88.000.188.084.0

93.088.000.192.0

90.084.092.000.1

)(

F

f

s

S

RFSM

FfsS

FSM(R) Fuzzy Similarity Matrix

=

00.187.097.096.0

89.000.194.091.0

89.083.000.194.0

84.078.091.000.1

)(

F

f

s

S

RFCM

FfsS

FCM(R) Fuzzy Connectivity Matrix

Fuzzy Contingency

Table Analysis

=

00.188.093.090.0

88.000.188.084.0

93.088.000.192.0

90.084.092.000.1

)(

F

f

s

S

RFSM

FfsS


=

00.188.093.090.0

88.000.188.084.0

93.088.000.192.0

90.084.092.000.1

)(

F

f

s

S

RFSM

FfsS


=

00.187.097.096.0

89.000.194.091.0

89.083.000.194.0

84.078.091.000.1

)(

F

f

s

S

RFCM

FfsS


=

00.187.097.096.0

89.000.194.091.0

89.083.000.194.0

84.078.091.000.1

)(

F

f

s

S

RFCM

FfsS


Fuzzy Contingency

Table Analysis

Fuzzy Contingency

Table Analysis




[6] Kurosawa K., Work Member Productivity Improvement through Organizational

Revolution: General Scheme of Practice and Example, 2002, Revised and Extended

Edition, for XII World Productivity Congress, Hong Kong – Beijing, 2001, p.29.

[7] Kurosawa K. (1989), Diagnostic System for KIS Productivity －Organizational

Climate Nexus, Journal of the University of the AIR, No.7, pp.65-88.

[8] Kurosawa K., 1991, Productivity Measurement and Management at the Company

Level: The Japanese Experienced, Elsevier, Chapter 2.

[9] Harada K., 2001, Discover of Group Theory, Iwanami, ch.1.

[10] Kurosawa K., , Questionnaires for Diagnosing the Organizational Climate, Japan

Academy of Productivity Science, Meisei University Abe Laboratory, 1-47.

[11] Kurosawa, K. Work Member Productivity Improvement through Organizational

Revolution: General Scheme of Practice and Example, 2002, Revised and Extended

Edition, for XII World Productivity Congress, Hong Kong – Beijing, 2001, p.29.

[12] Yamashita, H., et al. Fuzzy Approach to Educational Technology, Waseda

University Press, 1993, chap. 4.

paper 174

Documents

international conference

pucpr pucpr pucpr pucpr

productivity science

organizational productivity

kis productivity scheme

kis productivity kis

productivity improvement

sf scheme