Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015, Pages: 158- 165
Academic Journals
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches
ISSN
2345-6086
www.academicjournalscenter.org
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors
Affecting Creativity of Staff Using Fuzzy DEMATEL (Case
Study: University of Qom)
Ahmad Vedadi 1, Mohammad Hasan Maleki 2, Fereshte Norouzi *3
1 Assistant Professor, Department of management, Central Tehran Branch Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Qom University, Qom, Iran
3. M.S. Candidate of Master of Business Administration, Field of Strategic, Department of management, Central Tehran Branch Islamic
Azad University, Tehran, Iran
* Corresponding Author: E-mail: Fereshte_6760@yahoo.com
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
Creativity
Organizational factors
Fuzzy DEMATEL
ABSTRACT
Lack of attention to managerial problem in creative of staff caused the failure of
anticipated benefits and lead to failure and frustration. Meanwhile, identification
the important factors affecting the creative of staff and their relationship play a key
role in managerial decision making. The aim of this project is to identify and assess
the relationships between organizational factors that influence employee creativity
using Fuzzy DEMATEL at University of Qom. For this purpose, by using of 19
expert and literature review initially 39 factors affecting the creations were
identified at University of Qom then these factors by using of network analysis
process were ranked. At the end, seven factors were identified with the highest
degree of importance. The results showed that the most important organizational
factors include the organizational structure, leadership style, reward systems,
organizational climate, competition, diversity of work and quality of work life.
© 2014 Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches. All rights reserved for Academic Journals
Center.
1. Introduction
Some people think that the lack of creativity in organizations will lead to destroy of organizations in long-term. Each
organization has not creativity, cannot be survive and fades over time. Thus, organizations are constantly looking for ways to
strengthen creativity both in individual level and enterprise level and solving their problems. Because the increase of
creativity in organizations can improve service quality, reduce costs, avoid waste, reduce bureaucracy and increase
competition and efficiency. The importance of creativity and innovation in organizations is not limited to the manufacturing
section, but this is important in the service sector and universities to foster human resources (Hosseini et al, 2010). Creativity
is not a mystical talent that some people have it and others do not have it. Lateral thinking is a kind of creative thinking that
anyone can learn, practice and apply it (Edward de Bono, 2007). The overall situation is that creativity is still regarded as
something luxurious and accessories. In the future successful organizations have a different approach about creativity.
Creativity to flourish the potential power of employees and organization is essential (Edward de Bono, 2007). In a broader
sense, all human creative activity is an attempt to solve the problems. Creative show the direction and provide comments and
create other ideas (Saaty, 2007).
2. Literature Review
According to Niler (2001) creativity is a flexible and variable phenomenon. This person has stated that the creativity is a
process of change and development in organization (Niler, 2001). Vernon believes that creativity is the ability to create
ideas, theory of insights, new objects and reconstruction in science and other fields that from researcher’s perspective is
innovative and in terms of scientific is aesthetic. Elsewhere also states that creativity is Arabic word that root of this word
means is creating. In dictionary of Dehkhoda, creativity is creating and bringing new ideas and creative person who has
ideas. Kraft (2001) argues that creativity consists of five concepts: imagination, Procedures, targeted searching, innovation
and valuable. Guildford believed that creativity is synonymous with achieving new approaches to solving problems and
achieving the correct answer (Madani, 1996). Luthans (1992) is a professor of organizational behavior states that creativity is
a creating a fusion of ideas and approaches by individuals or groups in a new way. Barzman believed that creativity is a
cognitive process that develops an idea, concept and product. Organizational factors that influence creativity of employee are
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors …
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015
divided into three factors that include individual, group and organizational factors. Individual factors directly and
organizational and Group factors indirectly affects creativity (Amiri, 2007). Among the factors that has the greatest impact
on creativity as ability, personality, and cognitive style. Ability includes three components of intelligence, knowledge and
technical skills. Personality traits can include strong impression of being creative (Linda 1991), perseverance and endurance
(layer, 2001), ambiguity (Amabile, 1998), Risk (layer 2001), Independence (Nilson et al, 1994), need to be successful (Shali
et al, 2004) and confidence. Cognitive style and thinking style (layer, 2001) also are individual factors (Tahmasei et al,
2010). Organizational factors included leadership style (Amabile, 1998), organizational structure (Drazin et al. 1999), reward
structure (Martin et al, 2003), climate of Organization (Isaksen et al, 1990) and resources (financial and material) and
organization (Shali et al, 2004). Group factors affecting the creativity also include: the size of group (Amabile, 1998),
diversity of group (Gassman, 2001), integrity of group (Arad et al, 1997) Communication systems (Gilson, 2004). These
factors have a huge impact on creativity and investigation of each factor and determining original factor, we can better focus
on factors affecting creativity. For example, considering individual factors will increase the bearing of risk, confidence and a
sense of achievement. Group factors create working groups with different specializations, encourage collaboration, putting
the group's success versus personal success, encourage of employees to corporate transactions, investment in order to create
a better working environment to easier communicate. Organizational factors lead to supporting the forces that have failed to
implement their ideas, pay compensation according to qualifications and abilities of people as well as help regulate and
maintain optimum pressure for the intellectual forces.
3. Questions of Research
- What are the most important factors that influence on employee creativity at Qom University?
- Which organizational factors in employee creativity is the core factor?
- Which organizational factors in employee creativity is a major factor?
- Which organizational factors in employee creativity is an independent factor?
4. Research Methodology
This research in terms of objective is practical and in terms of methods is descriptive and analytical. The population of this
research is Qom University experts that are 80 people. The sample is 66 people were selected by Cocran formula. For
gathering data, both questionnaire and interviews were used. In addition to using descriptive statistics in this research, the
Delphi technique and fuzzy DEMATEL were used to analyze the data. In questionnaire of DEMATEL, all responses were
obtained on a 5-point Likert-type scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The following section presents a concise
treatment of the basic concepts of fuzzy set theory. Section 4.2 presents the methodology of fuzzy DEMATEL.
4.1. Fuzzy sets and Fuzzy Numbers
Fuzzy set theory, which was introduced by Zadeh (1965) to deal with problems in which a source of vagueness is involved,
has been utilized for incorporating imprecise data into the decision framework. A fuzzy set 𝐴̃ can be defined mathematically
by a membership function µ𝐴̃ (𝑋), which assigns each element x in the universe of discourse X a real number in the interval
[0,1]. A triangular fuzzy number 𝐴̃ can be defined by a triplet (a, b, c) as illustrated in Fig 1.
𝜇𝐴̃ (𝑥)
1
0
L
U
M
Figure 1: A triangular fuzzy number 𝐴̃
The membership function µ𝐴̃ (𝑋) is defined as
𝑥−𝑎
𝑏−𝑎
𝑎≤𝑥≤𝑏
µ𝐴̃ (𝑥) = {𝑥−𝑐
𝑏≤𝑥 ≤𝑐
0
𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
𝑏−𝑐
(1)
Basic arithmetic operations on triangular fuzzy numbers A1 = (a1,b1,c1), where a1 ≤ b1 ≤ c1, and A2 = (a2,b2,c2), where a2 ≤ b2
≤ c2,can be shown as follows:
Addition: A1 ⊕ A2 = (a1 + a2 ,b1 + b2,c1 + c2)
(2)
159
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors …
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015
Subtraction: A1 ⊝ A2 = (a1 - c2 ,b1 - b2,c1 – a2)
(3)
Multiplication: if k is a scalar
(𝑘𝑎 , 𝑘𝑏1 , 𝑘𝑐1 ), 𝑘 > 0
k ⊗ A1 = { 1
(𝑘𝑐1 , 𝑘𝑏1 , 𝑘𝑎1 ) , 𝑘 < 0
A1 ⊗ A2 ≈ (a1a2 ,b1b2,c1c2) , if a1 ≥ 0 , a2 ≥ 0
Division: A1 Ø A2 ≈ (
𝑎1
𝑐2
,
𝑏1
𝑏2
(4)
𝑐
, 1 ) , if a1 ≥ 0 , a2 ≥ 0
(5)
𝑎2
Although multiplication and division operations on triangular fuzzy numbers do not necessarily yield a triangular fuzzy
number, triangular fuzzy number approximations can be used for many practical applications (Kaufmann & Gupta, 1988).
Triangular fuzzy numbers are appropriate for quantifying the vague information about most decision. The primary reason for
using triangular fuzzy numbers can be stated as their intuitive and computational-efficient representation (Karsak, 2002). A
linguistic variable is defined as a variable whose values are not numbers, but words or sentences in natural or artificial
language. The concept of a linguistic variable appears as a useful means for providing approximate characterization of
phenomena that are too complex or ill defined to be described in conventional quantitative terms (Zadeh, 1975).
4.2. The fuzzy DEMATEL method
The Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method is presented in 1973 (Fontela & Gabus, 1976),
as a kind of structural modeling approach about a problem. DEMATEL is an extended method for building and analyzing a
structural model for analyzing the influence relation among complex criteria. However, making decisions is very difficult in
fuzzy environment to segment complex factors. The current study uses the fuzzy DEMATEL method to obtain a more
accurate analysis. The steps of Fuzzy DEMATEL as follow:
Step 1: Set up fuzzy matrix which is shown by 𝑧̃ 𝑝 and called Assessment Data Fuzzy Matrix.
For forming fuzzy matrix, we use fuzzy linguistic variables as shown in Table1.
Table 1. The fuzzy linguistic scale
Linguistic terms
Triangular fuzzy numbers
No influence (No)
(0.00, 0.00, 0.25)
Very low influence (VL)
(0.00, 0.25, 0.50)
Low influence (L)
(0.25, 0.50, 0.75)
High influence (H)
(0.50, 0.75, 1.00)
Very high influence (VH)
(0.75, 1.00, 1.00)
Next (Lin & Wu, 2004), it must acquire and average the assessment of executives’ preferences using
𝑧̃ =
(𝑧̃ 1 ⊕𝑧̃ 2 ⊕…⊕𝑧̃ 𝑝)
(6)
𝑝
Then, fuzzy matrix z̃ is produced which is shown as
0
𝑧̃21
𝑧̃ = [
⋮
𝑧̃𝑛1
𝑧̃12
0
⋮
𝑧̃𝑛2
⋯ 𝑧̃1𝑛
0 𝑧̃2𝑛
]
⋱
⋮
⋯ 0
(7)
which is called initial direct-relation fuzzy matrix. In this matrix, z̃ij = (iij,mij,uij) are triangular fuzzy numbers and z̃ij = (i =
1,2,…,n) will be regarded as triangular fuzzy number (0, 0, 0) whenever is necessary. Then, by normalizing initial directrelation fuzzy matrix, we acquire normalized direct-relation fuzzy matrix x̃ by using
𝑥̃11
𝑥̃
𝑋̃ = [ 21
⋮
𝑥̃𝑛1
𝑥̃𝑖𝑗 =
𝑍̃𝑖𝑗
𝑟
𝑥̃12
𝑥̃21
⋮
𝑥̃𝑛2
⋯ 𝑥̃1𝑛
0 𝑥2𝑛
]
⋱
⋮
⋯ 𝑥̃𝑛𝑛
𝑙𝑖𝑗 𝑚𝑖𝑗 𝑢𝑖𝑗
=( ,
𝑟
𝑟
,
𝑟
(8)
)
(9)
160
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors …
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015
R = max1≤𝑖≤𝑛 (∑𝑛𝑗=1 𝑢𝑖𝑗 )
(10)
It is assumed at least one i such that ∑𝑛𝑗=1 𝑢𝑖𝑗 < r
̃ is computed. Total-relation fuzzy matrix is defined as
After computing the above matrices, the total-relation fuzzy matrix T
(Lin & Wu, 2004)
̃= lim𝐾→∞ (𝑋̃ 1 + 𝑋̃ 2 + ⋯ + 𝑋̃ 𝐾 )
T
(11)
Then,
̃
𝑡11
̃
̃= [𝑡21
T
⋮
𝑡̃𝑛1
̃
𝑡12
̃𝑡21
⋮
𝑡̃𝑛2
⋯
0
⋱
⋯
̃
𝑡1𝑛
𝑡̃2𝑛
]
⋮
𝑡̃𝑛𝑛
(12)
′′
′′
′′
In which 𝑡̃𝑖𝑗 = (𝑙𝑖𝑗
, 𝑚𝑖𝑗
, 𝑢𝑖𝑗
) and
′′
′′
′′
−1
[𝑙𝑖𝑗
]= Xl × (I –𝑋𝐼−1 ), [𝑚𝑖𝑗
]= Xl × (I –𝑋𝑚
), [𝑢𝑖𝑗
]= Xl × (I –𝑋𝑢−1 )
(13)
̃, then it is calculated (𝐷
̃𝑖 + 𝑅̃𝑖 ) and (𝐷
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 ) in which 𝐷
̃𝑖 and 𝑅̃𝑖 are the sum of row and the sum of
By producing matrix T
̃ respectively. To finalize the procedure, all calculated 𝐷
̃𝑖 + 𝑅̃𝑖 and 𝐷
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 are defuzified through suitable
columns of T
̃𝑖 + 𝑅̃𝑖 )𝑑𝑒𝑓 which shows how important the strategic
defuzification method. Then, there would be two sets of numbers: ( 𝐷
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 )𝑑𝑒𝑓 which shows which strategic objective is cause and which one is effect. Generally, if the
objectives are, and ( 𝐷
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 )𝑑𝑒𝑓 is positive, the objectives belong to the cause group, and if the value ( 𝐷
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 )𝑑𝑒𝑓 is negative, the
value ( 𝐷
objectives belong to the effect group.
5. Case Study
In the first stage based on literature review and interviews with regard to organizational factors influence on employee
creativity, a list of organizational factors (39 factors) were prepared and collected. In the second stage this list distributes
between experts of University of Qom so that a list of 18 factors was prepared. In the third stage questionnaire that was
developed on the basis of previous stage distribute at University of Qom and finally 7 factors were identified.
Table 2: criteria (factors)
criteria
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
organizational structure
leadership style
reward systems
organizational climate
competition
diversity of work
quality of work life
In the final step by using of Fuzzy DEMATEL, the degree of importance of these criteria was identified. For this paper, first
the matrix of (õ) (7*7) that integrate their views with regard to seven factors affecting the employees' creativity was
calculated. In the first step, we need to determine the criteria for decision-making and we should offer these criteria by
language scale to compare with each other’s.
Table 3: The linguistic scale
Linguistic terms
Triangular fuzzy numbers
No influence (No)
(0.00, 0.10, 0.30)
Very low influence (VL)
(0.10, 0.30, 0.50)
Low influence (L)
(0.30, 0.50, 0.70)
High influence (H)
(0.50, 0.70, 0.90)
Very high influence (VH)
(0.70, 0.90, 1.00)
In the second step, we asked of each respondent to fill the questionnaire and determine the effect of each factor on other
criteria. So the sample of matrix shows in table 4 as follow:
161
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors …
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015
C1
C2
Table 4: The Initial direct-relation fuzzy matrix
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C1
(0.0000,0.0000, (0.5000,0.7000, (0.3000,0.500 (0.5000,0.7000, (0.7000,0.9000, (0.5000,0.7000 (0.3000,0.5000
0.0000)
0.9000)
0,0.7000)
0.9000)
1.0000)
,0.9000)
,0.7000)
C2
(0.3000,0.5000, (0.0000,0.0000, (0.3000,0.500 (0.7000,0.9000, (0.5000,0.7000, (0.5000,0.7000 (0.5000,0.7000
0.7000)
0.0000)
0,0.7000)
1.0000)
0.9000)
,0.9000)
,0.9000)
C3
(0.1000,0.3000, (0.1000,0.3000, (0.0000,0.000 (0.3000,0.5000, (0.5000,0.7000, (0.3000,0.5000 (0.5000,0.7000
0.5000)
0.5000)
0,0.0000)
0.7000)
0.9000)
,0.7000)
,0.9000)
C4
(0.1000,0.3000, (0.3000,0.5000, (0.3000,0.500 (0.0000,0.0000, (0.5000,0.7000, (0.5000,0.7000 (0.5000,0.7000
0.5000)
0.7000)
0,0.7000)
0.0000)
0.9000)
,0.9000)
,0.9000)
C5
(0.3000,0.5000, (0.3000,0.5000, (0.5000,0.700 (0.5000,0.7000, (0.0000,0.0000, (0.7000,0.9000 (0.7000,0.9000
0.7000)
0.7000)
0,0.9000)
0.9000)
0.0000)
,1.0000)
,1.0000)
C6
(0.1000,0.3000, (0.3000,0.5000, (0.3000,0.500 (0.5000,0.7000, (0.5000,0.7000, (0.0000,0.0000 (0.3000,0.5000
0.5000)
0.7000)
0,0.7000)
0.9000)
0.9000)
,0.0000)
,0.7000)
C7
(0.3000,0.5000, (0.1000,0.3000, (0.1000,0.300 (0.5000,0.7000, (0.7000,0.9000, (0.3000,0.5000 (0.0000,0.0000
0.7000)
0.5000)
0,0.5000)
0.9000)
1.0000)
,0.7000)
,0.0000)
In the third step, from the simple average of all questionnaires, preliminary decision matrix (z) can be built.
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C1
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
(0.3895,0.5842,
0.7684)
(0.2895,0.4789,
0.6684)
(0.3000,0.5000,
0.6895)
(0.3000,0.5000,
0.6947)
(0.2368,0.4368,
0.6316)
(0.2263,0.4263,
0.6263)
C2
(0.5263,0.7211,
0.8895)
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
(0.2947,0.4895,
0.6895)
(0.3211,0.5105,
0.7105)
(0.3263,0.5211,
0.7158)
(0.2579,0.4579,
0.6579)
(0.2368,0.4368,
0.6316)
Table 5: Average opinion of all experts
C3
C4
C5
(0.4579,0.6579, (0.5105,0.7105, (0.5211,0.7211,
0.8263)
0.8789)
0.8737)
(0.4526,0.6474, (0.5789,0.7737, (0.5105,0.7105,
0.8263)
0.9105)
0.8842)
(0.0000,0.0000, (0.4526,0.6474, (0.4632,0.6579,
0.0000)
0.8211)
0.8421)
(0.3842,0.5737, (0.0000,0.0000, (0.4526,0.6474,
0.7579)
0.0000)
0.8263)
(0.3421,0.5316, (0.4105,0.6053, (0.0000,0.0000,
0.7211)
0.7895)
0.0000)
(0.3000,0.5000, (0.3632,0.5632, (0.4105,0.6053,
0.6947)
0.7579)
0.7842)
(0.2421,0.4368, (0.3789,0.5737, (0.4421,0.6368,
0.6368)
0.7579)
0.8158)
C6
(0.5737,0.7737,
0.9263)
(0.5526,0.7526,
0.9158)
(0.5211,0.7211,
0.8842)
(0.5263,0.7211,
0.8895)
(0.5263,0.7211,
0.8684)
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
(0.3263,0.5211,
0.7105)
C7
(0.5526,0.7526,
0.9000)
(0.5632,0.7632,
0.9211)
(0.5632,0.7632,
0.9316)
(0.5632,0.7632,
0.9105)
(0.5579,0.7526,
0.8947)
(0.4842,0.6789,
0.8316)
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
C6
C7
In fourth step we calculate normalized matrix that table 6 show this matrix.
Table 6: Normalized matrix
C1
C1
C2
C3
C2
C3
C4
C5
(0.0000,0.0000, (0.0994,0.1362, (0.0865,0.1243, (0.0964,0.1342, (0.0984,0.1362, (0.1083,0.1461, (0.1044,0.1421,
0.0000)
0.1680)
0.1561)
0.1660)
0.1650)
0.1750)
0.1700)
(0.0736,0.1103, (0.0000,0.0000, (0.0855,0.1223, (0.1093,0.1461, (0.0964,0.1342, (0.1044,0.1421, (0.1064,0.1441,
0.1451)
0.0000)
0.1561)
0.1720)
0.1670)
0.1730)
0.1740)
(0.0547,0.0905, (0.0557,0.0924, (0.0000,0.0000, (0.0855,0.1223, (0.0875,0.1243, (0.0984,0.1362, (0.1064,0.1441,
0.1262)
0.1302)
0.0000)
0.1551)
0.1590)
0.1670)
0.1759)
162
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors …
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015
C4
C5
C6
C7
(0.0567,0.0944,
0.1302)
(0.0567,0.0944,
0.1312)
(0.0447,0.0825,
0.1193)
(0.0427,0.0805,
0.1183)
(0.0606,0.0964,
0.1342)
(0.0616,0.0984,
0.1352)
(0.0487,0.0865,
0.1243)
(0.0447,0.0825,
0.1193)
(0.0726,0.1083,
0.1431)
(0.0646,0.1004,
0.1362)
(0.0567,0.0944,
0.1312)
(0.0457,0.0825,
0.1203)
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
(0.0775,0.1143,
0.1491)
(0.0686,0.1064,
0.1431)
(0.0716,0.1083,
0.1431)
(0.0855,0.1223,
0.1561)
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
(0.0775,0.1143,
0.1481)
(0.0835,0.1203,
0.1541)
(0.0994,0.1362,
0.1680)
(0.0994,0.1362,
0.1640)
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
(0.0616,0.0984,
0.1342)
(0.1064,0.1441,
0.1720)
(0.1054,0.1421,
0.1690)
(0.0915,0.1282,
0.1571)
(0.0000,0.0000,
0.0000)
Table 7: Total-relation fuzzy matrix
C3
C4
C5
(0.1483,0.3563, (0.1722,0.3995, (0.1777,0.4092,
1.2824)
1.3925)
1.4188)
(0.1448,0.3483, (0.1801,0.4017, (0.1730,0.4003,
1.2669)
1.3801)
1.4032)
(0.0554,0.2131, (0.1469,0.3529, (0.1523,0.3621,
1.0539)
1.2826)
1.3107)
(0.1224,0.3090, (0.0674,0.2418, (0.1498,0.3582,
1.1701)
1.1385)
1.2984)
(0.1138,0.2984, (0.1374,0.3396, (0.0688,0.2443,
1.1465)
1.2483)
1.1430)
(0.0985,0.2736, (0.1194,0.3104, (0.1301,0.3235,
1.0804)
1.1759)
1.2026)
(0.0854,0.2538, (0.1174,0.3004, (0.1303,0.3162,
1.0390)
1.1399)
1.1703)
C6
(0.1919,0.4307,
1.4601)
(0.1852,0.4198,
1.4410)
(0.1660,0.3831,
1.3476)
(0.1659,0.3807,
1.3380)
(0.1635,0.3754,
1.3140)
(0.0616,0.2310,
1.1019)
(0.1150,0.3085,
1.1827)
C7
(0.1968,0.4463,
1.5028)
(0.1952,0.4399,
1.4878)
(0.1802,0.4063,
1.3974)
(0.1791,0.4037,
1.3836)
(0.1757,0.3965,
1.3596)
(0.1516,0.3596,
1.2771)
(0.0622,0.2326,
1.1022)
In the next step total-relation fuzzy matrix is obtained that show as follow:
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C1
(0.0562,0.2189,
1.0632)
(0.1225,0.3125,
1.1755)
(0.0973,0.2731,
1.0889)
(0.0986,0.2746,
1.0836)
(0.0972,0.2709,
1.0673)
(0.0799,0.2434,
1.0004)
(0.0752,0.2328,
0.9690)
C2
(0.1528,0.3518,
1.2529)
(0.0596,0.2255,
1.0939)
(0.1029,0.2856,
1.1338)
(0.1067,0.2872,
1.1282)
(0.1060,0.2849,
1.1113)
(0.0872,0.2563,
1.0426)
(0.0805,0.2436,
1.0070)
After that non-fuzzy matrix is obtained and show as follows:
Table 8: Defuzzified total-relation matrix
C3
C4
C5
C1
C2
C6
C7
C1
0.3893
0.5273
0.5358
0.5909
0.6037
0.6284
0.6481
C2
0.4808
0.4011
0.5271
C3
0.4331
0.452
0.3839
0.5909
0.5942
0.6165
0.6407
0.5338
0.5468
0.57
0.5976
C4
0.4329
0.4523
0.4776
0.4224
0.5412
0.5663
0.5925
C5
0.4266
0.4468
0.4643
0.5162
0.4251
0.5571
0.5821
C6
0.3918
0.4106
0.4315
0.479
0.4949
0.4064
0.537
C7
0.3775
0.3937
0.408
0.4645
0.4833
0.4787
0.4074
̃𝑖 + 𝑅̃𝑖 ) and (𝐷
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 ) in which 𝐷
̃𝑖 and 𝑅̃𝑖 are the
To access the casual relationships between factors, we will calculate ( 𝐷
sum of row and the sum of columns of our total-relation fuzzy matrix respectively. Our partial results and the result of
ranking are shown in Table 9.
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
̃𝑖 + 𝑅̃𝑖 ), (𝐷
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 )
Table 9: The value of ( 𝐷
̃𝑖 + 𝑅̃𝑖 )𝑑𝑒𝑓
̃𝑖 − 𝑅̃𝑖 )𝑑𝑒𝑓
(𝐷
(𝐷
6.8553
0.9917
6.9350
0.7675
6.7452
0.2888
7.0829
-0.1126
7.1072
-0.2710
6.9744
-0.6720
7.0181
-0.9924
At the end, the degree of effective and effectiveness by using of Fuzzy DEMATEL was determined.
163
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors …
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015
Figure 2: The result of Fuzzy DEMATEL
6. Conclusion
In this study, using a diagram and amount of (Di + Ri), (Di - Ri) and the number of input and output and assumptions of
DEMATEL, we conclude that the degree of impact, as well as the severity of the impact and effect of the criteria mentioned
as below. In these study organizational factors on employee creativity was conducted. The results show that the criterion C1
(organizational structure) which is a criteria that influence on C2, C3, C4, C5, C6 and C7. According to assumption of fuzzy
DEMATEL because of D + R = 6/8553 and D-R = 0/9917 so it is said that the organizational structure is a core factor.
Criterion C2 (leadership style) is a criteria that is affected and influence on C3, C4, C5, C6 and C7. As well as D + R =
6/3950 and D-R = 0/7675, therefore, a leadership style is a core factor. Criterion C3 (reward system) is a criteria that is
affected by C1 and C2 and influence on criteria C4, C5, C6 and C7 and because of D + R = 6/7452 and D-R = 0/2888, this
factor considered as a core factor. Criterion C4 (organizational climate) is a criteria that is affected by C1, C2, C3, and also
influence on criteria C5, C6 and C7 and because of D + R = 7/0829 and DR = -0 / 1126, this factor affecting the creativity of
staff is the main criteria. Criterion C5 (competition) is a criteria that is affected by C1, C2, C3 and C4 and also influence on
criteria C6 and C7 and because of D + R = 7/1072 and D-R = -0 / 2710, this criterion also like organizational climate is the
main factor. Criterion C6 (diversity of work) is a criteria that influence on criteria C7 and because of D + R = 6/9744 and DR = -0 / 6720, this criteria is an independent factor. Criterion C7 (quality of work life) is a criteria that is affected by all
criteria and is not influenced by other factors and also this criteria is an independent factor. According to the results, it is
suggested that in conjunction to boost the creativity of its employees in various sectors of university and higher productivity
should have special attention to 7 factors and in implementation focus on them and also between these seven criteria,
organizational structure, leadership and reward systems that are the core factors in priority (and highest accuracy and energy
and resources spent for these factors) because these factors have a leverage role on creative staff at University of Qom.
7. References
Edward de Bono,. (2007) efficient creation, management thought Translation: malekdokht Ghasemi Nikmanesh, first
edition, Akhtaran press.
[2] Niler, J., (2001) art and creation, Translation by Ali Asghar, second printing, Shiraz University Press.
[3] Tahmasebi, S., Azar, M., (2010) the relationship between individual and organizational factors with creation of
managers of middle school in Ardabil province, creation journal, 1(1).
[4] Fontela, E., & Gabus, A. (1976). “The DEMATEL observer”, Battelle Institute, Geneva Research Center.
[5] Karsak, E. E. (2002). “Distance-based fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating flexible manufacturing system
alternatives”. International Journal of Production Research, Vol.40, No.13, pp.3167–3181.
[6] Kaufmann, A., & Gupta, M. M. (1988). “Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science”.
Amsterdam: North-Holland.
[7] Lin C. L. & Wu, W. W. (2004).” A fuzzy extension of the DEMATEL method for group decision making”, European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol.156, pp. 445–455.
[8] Zadeh, L. A. (1965). “Fuzzy sets. Information and Control”, Vol.8, No.3, pp.338–353.
[9] Zadeh, L. A. (1975). “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I”. Information
Sciences, Vol.8, No.3 , pp.199–249.
[10] Saaty, T., (2007), creative thinking, problem solving and decision making Translation:Dr. Majid Azizi and Ghandi,
Tehran University Press.
[11] Jamali, G., Hashemi, M., (2011) investigation the relationship between factors influence on risk of IT projects using
fuzzy DEMATEL Technology Management Journal, 3(9), pp. 21-40.
[12] Hosseini, A., (2010) nature of creativity,1 , Razavi Press.
[1]
164
Assessment the Relationship between Organizational Factors …
Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches, 2(3) 2015
[13] Amiri, M., (2007) systematic approach of creativity, Imam Hussein University Press.
[14] Reyes f., reyes n., candia J vejar a., bardeenm (2011) the optimization of success probability for software projects
using genetic algorithms, the journal of systems and software:775-785.
[15] Quan z., huangweilai.,zhangy (2011) identifying critical success factors factors in emergency management using a
fuzzy dematel method, safety science; 243-252.
165