‫ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬

‫ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ‬

‫ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‬

‫ﺃﻁﺭﻭﺤﺔ ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ‬

‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ـ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‬

‫ﻭﻫﻲ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﻨﻴل ﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺩﻜﺘــــﻭﺭﺍﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﻋﻤﺎل‬

‫ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل‬
‫ﺴـﻨـﺎﺀ ﻋﺒـﺩ ﺍﻟـﺭﺤـﻴﻡ ﺴـﻌـﻴﺩ‬

‫ﺒﺄﺸــــــﺭﺍﻑ ﺍﻷﺴــــﺘﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﺩﻜﺘــــــﻭﺭ‬

‫ﺴـﻌــﺩ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻌــﻨﺯﻱ‬

‫‪2005‬‬

‫ت‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴــﺘﺨﻠــﺹ‬
‫ﻴﻬﺩﻑ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﺤـﺙ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻭﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﻨﻅــﺎﻡ ﻤﺘﻁــﻭﺭ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴــﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠــﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌـﺭﺍﻗﻴــﺔ‪ ،‬ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻫﻲ " ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ " ﻤﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺔ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺘـﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻭﻤﻜﻨﻨـﺔ ﻨﻅـﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺸﺨﻴﺹ ﻤﻌﺎﻟـﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻡ ﺤﺎﻟﻴﺎﹰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﻗﻭﺘﻪ ﻭﻀﻌﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺒﺎﻟﺨﺼﺎﺌﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﺠـﺭﺍﺀ ﻋﻤﻠﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‪.‬‬

‫ﻲ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﻠﻭﺼـﻭل ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒـﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺴﻠﻭﺒ ‪‬‬
‫ﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺒﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻭﺘﺸﺨﻴﺹ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟـﻲ ﻭﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻓﻠﻡ ﻴﻜﺘ ‪‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﺘﻌﺩ‪‬ﻯ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ " ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ " ﻭﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺫﻟـﻙ‬
‫ﺍﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﻤﻘﺎﺒﻼﺕ ﻋﺩﺓ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﻴﻥ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺠﻬﺎﺯ ﺍﻹﺸﺭﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ‪ /‬ﻗـﺴﻡ ﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻊ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻓـﻲ ﻤﺨﺘﻠـﻑ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﺸﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺎﻤﺕ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻌﺽ‬
‫ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺭﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻔﺼﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺼﻭل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﺃﻅﻬﺭﺕ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻲ ﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺸﺎﻤل ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﻜﻠﻴﺎﺘﻬـﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﺇﺫ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻴﻌﺎﻨﻲ ﻤﻥ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﻀﻌﻑ ﺘﻤﺜﻠﺕ ﺒـ ‪ " :‬ﻋﺩﻡ ﻤﻼﺀﻤـﺔ ﺒﻌـﺽ‬
‫ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺘﻪ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﻻ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺩﻗﻴﻕ‪ ،‬ﺨﻠل ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺃﻭﺯﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﺇﺨﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻤﻴﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﻓﺘﻘﺎﺭ ﻟﻠﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻔﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﻌل‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻓﺘﻘﺎﺭﻩ ﻟﻠﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘـﻴﺱ ﻜﻔـﺎﺀﺓ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺘﺸﺎﺭﻙ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺘﻪ "‪.‬‬

‫ﺘﻭﺼل ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺃﻫﻤﻬﺎ ‪:‬‬

‫‪ .1‬ﺇﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴـﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺃﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺼـﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤﻠـﺔ ﻟـﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﺩ ﺒﺎﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺘﻌﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺒﺴﺒﺏ ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ ﺍﻻﻫﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﻴﺔ ﻻﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﺩﺍﺌﻪ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﺇﻥ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻫﻭ ﻓﺤﺹ ﺩﻗﻴﻕ ﻟﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﺎل‪ ،‬ﻴﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻴﻥ ﺃﺠﺎﺩﺕ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ؟ ﻭﻟﻤـﺎﺫﺍ ؟‬
‫ﻭﺃﻴﻥ ﺍﺨﻔﻘﺕ ؟ ﻭﻜﻴﻑ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺝ ؟‪ .‬ﻭﺇﻥ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ‬

‫ث‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺼﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻤﻨﺘﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﺭﺠﻡ ﺭﺴـﺎﻟﺔ ﺨﻠـﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﺤﺭﻜﻲ ﺸﺎﻤل ﻭﻤﺘﻤﺎﺴﻙ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .4‬ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﻭﺼﻔﹰﺎ ﻟﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﻔﺼﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﺘﺄﺸـﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨـﺏ ﺍﻻﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻼ ﻟﻠﻘﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﺩﻗﻴﻕ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﺩﺍﻭل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻌﺭﻀﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﻤـﺩﺨ ﹰ‬
‫ﻼ ﺁﺨـﺭ ﻟﻠﻘﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ ﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺇﺫ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻻﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻘـﺩﻡ ﻤـﺩﺨ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺯﺌﻲ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .5‬ﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻭﺏ‪ ،‬ﺠﻌﻠﺕ ﺒﺎﻻﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺍﻓﺫ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘـﺴﻡ ﺒﻘﺎﺒﻠﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺘﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻓﺭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺠﺎﻉ ﻤﺤﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻭﻋﺭﻀﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺸﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ ؛ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺇﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺤﺫﻑ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﺴﻬل ﻤﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴـﺔ ﺍﺩﺨـﺎل‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻘﻠل ﻤﻥ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺄ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺩﺨﺎل‪.‬‬

‫ج‬
‫ﻭﺍﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﻤﻜﻨﻥ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻬﺎ ‪:‬‬

‫‪ .1‬ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺭ ﻟﺸﻤﻭﻟﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻓﻴﻬـﺎ " ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﻴﻌﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻤـل‬
‫ﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻋﻡ ﻭﺍﺴﻨﺎﺩ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺘـﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻻﺠﻬـﺯﺓ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺩﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻤﻴﻥ ﺒﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‪." ...‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻱ ﺇﺤﺎﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻤﺒﺩﺃ " ﻋﻼﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ "‪.‬‬

‫‪ .4‬ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻟﻼﻋﺘﺭﺍﺽ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﻨﻘﻠﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .5‬ﻭﻀﻊ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺤﻭﺍﻓﺯ ﻴﺭﺘﺒﻁ ﺒﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻁﻠﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ‪:‬‬

‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪،‬‬

‫ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ‪،‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ‪ ،‬ﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻨﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﹼﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪.‬‬

‫ح‬
 ABSTRACT

This research aims to design and mechanize a developed system for

evaluating the strategic performance of Iraqi universities depending on a new
technology named " The Balanced Scorecard " .
We study and diagnose the present system and determine its strengths and
weaknesses, in addition to that we design and mechanize information system
capable of providing data of the desired features, through it, we can achieve the
evaluation process in term of the proposed system.
The research has depended on two styles: case study and empirical study to
reach the desired results, and it didn’t only study what is in hand, diagnose the
weaknesses in present system, and treat them by the proposed system, but
further it applied the proposed system on a sample of Iraqi universities,
university of Baghdad; and various interviews were made with the managers
responsible for performance evaluation in the Scientific Supervision &
Evaluation Apparatus / Performance Evaluation department in Ministry of
Higher Education & Scientific Research, other interviews were made with the
instructors in various colleges continuously, and there were field visits the
researcher made to the Ministry & Baghdad university and some colleges to
know work details and to get the data .
Of the field study, it was clear that the Education Ministry was in need for a
comprehensive system for evaluating its universities & colleges performance as
the present system suffers weaknesses representing in: some of its indicators
were unsuitable because they couldn’t reflect the universities performance
accurately, there were a shortage in determining the system weights and failure
in determining the critical success factors that contribute in distinguishing the
universities, and the system lacked the descriptive indicators that make
university costumers take part in evaluation process, Moreover, the system
lacked financial indicators that measure financial performance efficiency and the
benefit of its output was limited.
The research came out with several theoretical and applied conclusions, the
most important of them were:
1. The strategic performance measurements measure the strategic plans
performance by concentrating on key activities which accomplish strategic
objectives that require various measurement tools, financial & unfinancial.
The performance measurements on the basis of balanced score card
technology present a whole picture about result and reason connections
that lead the businesses toward maintaining strategic objectives.
2. The technology of balanced scorecard is considered more objective
because of its scientific methodology in determining the relative
importance of strategic performance dimensions and it’s key performance
aspects.

‫خ‬
3. The university performance evaluation is an accurate examination for
the reality, it shows where the university is doing well, why? And where it
fails, and how it can treat this failure?. The dependence on balanced
scorecard technology in evaluating university performance gives a chance
for forming an organized series of measurement which interpret the
message of creating knowledge and participation, and benefit of it in
cohesive general dynamic framework.
4. The proposed system presents a description of the university in
details, the positive and negative aspects through the accurate analysis and
schedules, and also presents an approach for the whole measurement of the
universities performance as all the dimensions are measured totally; and an
approach for the partial measurement.
5. The system automation on computer enables us of using various
windows characterized of a distinguished capability of linking more than
one database or taking the database contents and showing them on the
screen directly, for the purpose of adding or deleting some data, and this
facilities the process of inserting data, and eliminate the probability of
error in data insertion.
The research concludes with suggesting an automated system to evaluate
the universities performance besides several recommendations are made, the
most important were:-
1. Using the proposed system to evaluate the universities performance
as it involves various financial & unfinancial measurements that present a
clear and objective picture about university performance outcomes.
2. Providing the necessary requirements for the successful application
of the proposed system including the comprehension of all measurements,
supporting the top management, providing the required human resources,
equipments, and training the people responsible for performing this
process.
3. Supplying the university with the evaluation outcomes by
depending on "Evaluating Publicity "
4. The importance of existing an objection system against evaluation
results as an attempt to turn the system from the formal state to objective
state.
5. Setting an incentive system linked with the proposed evaluation
system.
Key Words
Strategic Performance, Performance Measurement, Strategic Performance
Management, Strategic Performance Measurement, Strategic Performance
Evaluation, Balanced Scorecard, Critical Success Factors, Key Performance
Indicators, Outcomes, Academic Process Quality, Support Service Quality,
Learning & Improvement, Financial Performance.

‫د‬
 ‫ﻗﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ‬
‫ﺃ–ﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﻠﺹ‬
‫ﺕ‪-‬ﺙ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺝ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﺍﻷﺸﻜﺎل‬
‫ﺡ‪-‬ﺥ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﺍﻭل‬
‫ﺩ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺤﻕ‬
‫‪2-1‬‬ ‫ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻷﻁﺭﻭﺤﺔ‬
‫‪37-3‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻷﻭل ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪18-3‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل ‪:‬ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‬
‫‪6-3‬‬ ‫ﻻ‪:‬ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪13-6‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫‪16-13‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﹰﺎ ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‬
‫‪16‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‬
‫‪18-16‬‬ ‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺩﻤﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫‪37-19‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ‪ :‬ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪20-19‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪21-20‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪22-21‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪27-22‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﹰﺎ‪:‬ﺃﺴﻠﻭﺏ ﺃﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪33-27‬‬ ‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴﹰﺎ‪:‬ﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻭﻋﻴﻨﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫‪33‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺩﺴﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺤﺩﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪35-33‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺒﻌﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫‪35‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻤﻨﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﻹﺤﺼﺎﺌﻲ‬
‫‪37-35‬‬ ‫ﺘﺎﺴﻌﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ‪ :‬ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫‪101-38‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ )ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻨﻅﺭﻱ(‬
‫‪57-38‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل‪ :‬ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ‬
‫‪47-38‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺃﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪57-47‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ ‪:‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺃﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‬
‫‪76-58‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‪:‬ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫‪70-58‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ‪:‬ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪76-70‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫‪101-77‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ ‪:‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫‪79-77‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪ :‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻪ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪83-79‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ‬
‫‪101-83‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﻭﺴﻊ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫‪133-102‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ ‪:‬ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫‪115-102‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل ‪:‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‬
‫‪111-102‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬

‫ذ‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ‬
‫‪115-111‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ ‪:‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‬
‫‪129-116‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ‪:‬ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ‬
‫‪124-116‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪129-124‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫‪133-130‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ ‪:‬ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫‪132-130‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪133-132‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ‬
‫‪187-134‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺒﻊ ‪:‬ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‬
‫‪159-134‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل‪ :‬ﻤﺩﺨل ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬
‫‪137-136‬‬ ‫ﻻ‪ :‬ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪137‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫‪154-137‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺃﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻭﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻪ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫‪155-154‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﹰﺎ ‪ :‬ﺃﻭﺯﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬
‫‪156-155‬‬ ‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴﹰﺎ ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻲ ﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫‪159-156‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺩﺴﹰﺎ ‪ :‬ﺴﻠﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﻟﻠﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬
‫‪187-160‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫‪186-160‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪ :‬ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪187‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ ‪:‬ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫‪234-188‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻤﺱ ‪:‬ﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‬
‫‪191-188‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل ‪:‬ﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬
‫‪234-192‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ‪:‬ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‬
‫‪193-192‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪ :‬ﻨﺒﺫﺓ ﻤﺨﺘﺼﺭﺓ ﻋﻥ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪234-194‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪ :‬ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺃﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻭﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻪ‬
‫‪249-235‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺱ ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫‪243-235‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل ‪:‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫‪238-235‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪243-238‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ‬
‫‪249-244‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ‪:‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫‪245-244‬‬ ‫ﻻ ‪:‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪247-245‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‬
‫‪249-247‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﹰﺎ ‪:‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺭﻓﻊ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‬
‫‪249‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ‬
‫‪249‬‬ ‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴﹰﺎ ‪ :‬ﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫‪260-250‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺤﻕ‬
‫‪A-B‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﻠﺹ ﺒﺎﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻹﻨﻜﻠﻴﺯﻴﺔ‬

‫ر‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ )ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻨﻅﺭﻱ (‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل‪ :‬ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ‬

‫ﺃﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺃﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺃﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‪ :‬ﺍﺴـﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨـﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪ :‬ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ‪ :‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻪ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﻭﺴﻊ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‬

‫‪38‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫)ﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﻨﻅﺭﻱ(‬
‫ﻴﻨﺼﺭﻑ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﻔـﺎﻫﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴـﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﺘﻜـﺯﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻴـﺔ ﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ )‪ Balanced Scorecard (BS‬ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻻ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺠﻊ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺼﻭ ﹰ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻨﻁﻠﻕ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺘﻴﺔ ﺘﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺴـﺘﺨﻼﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﻔـﺎﻫﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤـﺎﺫﺝ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺴﻡ ﺍﻻﻁﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺤﺔ ﻟﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻲ ﻟﻠﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻻﻭل‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ‬
‫ﻴﺤﺎﻭل ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﺭﺍﺽ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺭﺍﺤل ﺘﻁﻭﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﻤﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻻﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺘﻨﺎﻗﺵ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﺓ ﻤﺎﻫﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ‪ Strategic Performance‬ﻭﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻜـﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺼﻭﻻ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﺭﺍﺽ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﻭﺴﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻨﺎﻭل ﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺘﻴﺔ‪-:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‪:‬‬
‫ﻴﺅﺸﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻨﻬﻡ ﻋﻥ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻀﻴﻕ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟـــــــﻰ ﺍﻻﻁﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺴﻊ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺤﺎﻭل ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻌﺎﺏ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤــــــﺔ ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋـــــــﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﺒﺘﺩﻋﻴﻡ ﻓﻜﺭﺘﻬـــــــﺎ ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‬
‫ﻴﺴﻌــــــﻰ ﺍﻟــــﻰ ﺘﻌﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻟـــــﺭﺒﺢ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﺘﺨــﺫ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓــــﻲ ﻀـــــﻭﺀ‬
‫ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻔﻬـﻭﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼـﺎﺩﻱ ﻟﻤـــﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‬
‫) ‪ .( Hellriegll & Slocum , 1991 :18‬ﻭﺍﻋﺘﻤﺩﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﻤﺜل ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ‬
‫)‪ ( Profitability‬ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ ) ‪ ( Added Value‬ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻋﺒﺭ ﻜل ﻤﻥ ) ‪ ( Miller & Bromiley , 1990 :757‬ﻋﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﻜﻭﻨﻪ ﺍﻨﻌﻜﺎﺴـﺎ ﻟﻘـﺩﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﻁﻭﻴﻠـﺔ ﺍﻻﻤـــﺩ) ﺍﻟﺒﻘـﺎﺀ ‪ , Survival‬ﺍﻟﻨﻤـﻭ ‪ , Growth‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴـﻑ‬
‫‪.( Adaption‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺸﻴﻭﻉ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﺼﻁﻠﺢ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﻤﺘﻔﻕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺍﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ ﻭﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﺎﺴـﻪ‪ ،‬ﻤـﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻭﺼﺎﻑ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻁﻠﺢ‪ .‬ﻓﺭﺃﻯ ) ‪ ( Weston 1970 :10-13‬ﺍﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﻅﺭ‬
‫ﻤﺘﺨﺫﻱ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻴﺸﻤل‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻱ ‪ ،Managerial Performance‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘــــﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ‪Operating‬‬
‫‪ ،Performance‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ‪ Strategic Performance‬ﻭﺍﻻﺨﻴﺭ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﻟﻪ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﺨﺘﺒـﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻤل ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻑ ﻤﻌﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻤﺎ )‪ ( Venkatraman & Ramanijam , 1986: 801-814‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻁﺭﺤﺎ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻤﻴﻥ ﻟـﻸﺩﺍﺀ‪،‬‬

‫‪39‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﻭل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ) ‪ ( Financial performance‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻀﻴﻕ ﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺭﻜـﺯ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﺴـــﻴﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﺜـﺎﻨﻲ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺘــﻲ‬
‫)‪ ( Operations performance‬ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺍﺤﺩ ﺍﻻﺭﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺴﻊ ﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺫﻱ‬
‫ﻴﻘﺎﺱ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺅﺸﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ )‪ ،( Market Share‬ﻭﺨﻠﺼﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻨﻪ " ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﻭﺴﻊ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﻌﻜﺴﻪ ﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺜﺔ ) ﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﺎ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻭﻫﻭ ﺠﻭﻫﺭ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ (‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺘﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﻻﺜﻨـﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻤﻌﹰﺎ" ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ (7‬ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ‪.‬‬

‫‪+‬‬ ‫‪+‬‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ)‪(7‬‬
‫ﻣﺠﺎﻻت اﻷداء اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﻲ‬
‫‪Source: Venkatrama , N , & Ramanuja ,V. , Management of Business‬‬
‫‪Performance in Strategy Research:Comparison of Approache,‬‬
‫‪Management Review ,Vol.(11) , No(4) , 1986 , p: 803‬‬

‫ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﺍﻜﺩ )‪ ( Zammuto , 1982: 437‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻫـﻭ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟـﺫﻱ ﺘﻤﺜﻠـﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺘﻜﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺘﻅﻬﺭ ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺒﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﻭﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻘﺩ ﺍﺸﺎﺭ ) ‪ ( Glunk & Wilderom , 2000: 14‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻜﻭﻨﻪ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻤﻭﺠﻪ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺒل ﺍﻨﻪ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻭﺴﻊ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻏﻴـﺭ ﻤـﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﺼـﺒﺢ‬
‫ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﺘﻤﻴﻥ ﺒﺎﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﺫ ﻴﺸﻤل‪-:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ‪ Operational Performance‬ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻔﺘﺭﺽ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل‬
‫ﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ‪ ،‬ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﺠﺩﻴﺩ‪ ..... ،‬ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﺒﺘﻜـﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺤـﺴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ ‪ /‬ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﻔﻌﻴﻥ‬
‫‪ Stockeholder Satisfaction / Social Performance‬ﺃﻱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺎﺨﺫ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﺒﺎﻥ ﺭﻀـﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻋﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻭﻤﺠﻬﺯﻴﻥ ﻭﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻪ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﺘﻤﻡ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻘﺩ ﺍﺸﺎﺭ )‪ (Daft , 2001: 102-104‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ‬
‫ﻤﺅﺸﺭﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﻭل ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﺍﻥ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﹰﺎ ) ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻲ ( ﺍﻭ ﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﹰﺎ )ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬﺎ (‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﻜل ﻭﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻤﺴﺘﻘﺭﹰﺍ ﺍﻭ ﻤﺭﻨﹰﺎ‪ .‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﺤﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﻴﻥ ﻤﻌﹰﺎ ﻴﻌﺭﺽ ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﻟـﻸﺩﺍﺀ‬

‫‪40‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﻜﺴﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ (8‬ﺍﺫ ﻴﺭﻜﺯ ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻤﺎ ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ) ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺭﺸﻴﺩﺓ ( ﻓﻴﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ) ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺭﺠـﺎﺕ(‪ ،‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤـﺎ ﻴﺭﻜـﺯ‬
‫ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺘﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻨﺎﺥ ﻤﻼﺌﻡ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺨﻴﺭﹰﺍ ﻴﺭﻜﺯ ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓـﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﺤـﺎﻟﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﻤﺜـل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻗﻴﻤﹰﺎ ﻤﺘﻌﺎﺭﻀﺔ ﺍﺫ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺌﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺘﻪ ﻟﻘﺩﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﻤﺘﻐﻴـﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻗﻑ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﺘﻤﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺜﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻜﺘﺴﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤـﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻭﻫـﻲ ﺍﻗـل‬
‫ﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎﻤﹰﺎ ﺒﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺘﻤﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻜﺜﺭ ﻨﻀﺠﹰﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻨﻤـﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁـﻴﻁ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪.‬‬

‫اﻟﻬﻴﻜﻞ‬
‫ﻣﺮن‬ ‫ﺁﻟﻲ‬
‫إﻧﻤﻮذج اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬ ‫إﻧﻤﻮذج اﻟﺘﺨﻄﻴﻂ‬
‫ﺧﺎرﺟﻲ‬ ‫‪ -‬اﻟﻤﺮوﻧﺔ‬ ‫‪ -‬اﻟﻜﻔﺎءة‬
‫‪ -‬اﻟﺘﻜﻴﻒ‬ ‫‪ -‬اﻻﻧﺘﺎﺟﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ -‬اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻲ‬ ‫‪ -‬اﻟﺮﺑﺤﻴﺔ‬

‫إﻧﻤﻮذج اﻻﺑﺪاع واﻟﺘﻄﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫إﻧﻤﻮذج اﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎت اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﻴﺔ‬

‫‪ -‬ﻓﺮص اﻻﺑﺪاع‬ ‫‪ -‬اﻻﺳﺘﻘﺮار واﻟﺘﻮازن‬
‫‪ -‬رﺿﺎ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠﻴﻦ‬ ‫‪ -‬آﻔﺎءة اﻷداء اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﻲ‬
‫داﺧﻠﻲ‬ ‫‪ -‬ﺗﻄﻮﻳﺮ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠﻴﻦ‬ ‫‪ -‬ادارة اﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ ) ‪(8‬‬
‫ﻣﺪﺧﻞ اﻟﻘﻴﻢ اﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫‪Source:Daft,2001"OrganizationTheory&Design,4th.ed., South‬‬
‫‪West,2001,p:102‬‬

‫ﻭﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ) ﻤﺩﺨل ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺘﻨﺎ ﻫﺫﻩ( ﻓﺎﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﻟـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ﻭﻤﻌﺩل ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺭﺴﺎﻟﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻭﻅﻴﻔﻲ ﻟﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ‪.‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓـﻕ ﺫﻟـﻙ ﻓـﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺘﻴﺔ‪( Kaplan & Norton , 1992:72) :‬‬
‫• ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫• ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻤﻨﻔﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﻴﻥ ﺒﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪.‬‬
‫• ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﺒﺎﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺒﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ )ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ (‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺘﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪41‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻘﺩ ﺍﺤﺘل ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻜـﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤـﻲ ﺍﻫﻤﻴـﺔ ﺤﺎﺴـﻤﺔ ﻷﻋﺘﺒـﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺘﺘﻌﻠــــﻕ ﺒـﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪.( Brown & Laverick ,1994: 89) -:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻜﻭﻨﻪ ﻤﺤﻭﺭﹰﺍ ﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﹰﺎ ﻟﺘﺨﻤﻴﻥ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻭﻓﺸل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺨﻁﻁﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻌـﺩﻡ‬
‫ﺘﻭﺍﻓــﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻔﺴﻴﺭ ﻜل ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﻭﺍﺠﻪ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺎﺕ ﻋﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻻﺴﻴﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﻀﻴﻊ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴــﺔ ﺍﻟﺘــــــﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺅﺸـــﺭ ﺘﺒــﺎﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻭﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﺨﺘﻼﻑ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺎﺕ ﻭﻁﺒﻴﻌﺘﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺨﺘﻼﻑ ﺍﻫـــﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﻁﺭﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﺘﻠﺯﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﺎﻫﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺩﻤﺞ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻜﺩ )‪ ( Czepile , 1992: 40‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺘﺘﻤﺤﻭﺭ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻋﺎﻡ ﺤﻭل ﻗﺩﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﻜﻠﻑ ﺍﻨﺸﻁﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺘﺭﻴﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻭ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻻﻗﺒﺎل‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﺭﺍﺀ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﻓﻀل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺩﺍﺌل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻭﻀﺢ )‪ ( Ginsberg & Vankatramun , 1985‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﺘﺒﺭﺯ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﻌﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﻭﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟـﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘــــﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺘﺠﺔ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻤﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼـﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻫﻤﻴـﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻠﻘـــﺩ ﺍﺸــــﺎﺭ )‪ ( Hofer 1980‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻅﻬﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺯﺍﻴﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻤﻴﺯ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒـل‬
‫ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﻨﺘﺎﺌﺠﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪) .‬ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻴﻨﻲ‪.( 232 :2000 .‬‬
‫ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻤﻌﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﻬﺘﻡ ﺒﺎﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻻﺴﻴﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻅل ﺘـﻭﺍﻓﺭ ﺴـﻭﻕ ﺘﻨﺎﻓـﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﺍﻻﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻼﻤﺢ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻨﺎ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﻗﺩﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻤﺯﺍﻴـﺎ‬
‫ﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ ﻷﻨﺸﻁﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺴﻭﻴﻕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤـﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒـﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤـﺙ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﻠﺠﺄ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻷﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﻘـﻕ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺴﻌﻰ ﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺹ ﺍﻟﻔﺠﻭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ )‪ (Strategic Gap‬ﻋﻨﺩ ﻅﻬﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻜﻔـﺎﺀﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻭﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻀﺎﻤﻴﻨﻪ ﺒﺎﺤﺘﻭﺍﺌﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺍﺘﻔﺎﻕ ﻀﻤﻨﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺒﻴـﺭ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻪ ﺒـ‪ ":‬ﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ"‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺱ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺒﻌﺩﻩ "ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺒﻨـﺎﺀ ﻤﻌﺭﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺭﺍﻜﻤﻲ ﻭﺸﺎﻤل ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻗﺩﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻑ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤـﻭ ﻭﺍﻻﺴـﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺘﻤﺜﻠﻪ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻭﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺸﺘﻘﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﺭﺍﻤﺠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻨﻭﻋﺔ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺎﺕ"‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻤﺎ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻴﺤﻅﻰ ﺒﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻭﻴﻜﺎﺩ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻤﺜـل ﺍﻟﻅـﺎﻫﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺠﻤل ﻓﺭﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﻭﺤﻘﻭﻟﻬﺎ ﻟﻜﻭﻨﻪ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺼﻭﺍﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﺨﺘﺒـﺎﺭﹰﺍ‬
‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻭﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﹰﺎ ﻟﻤﺼﺩﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩ‪ .‬ﻜﻤـﺎ ﺍﻨـﻪ ﻴﻭﻀـﺢ ﺍﺒﻌـﺎﺩ ﻭﺤـﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴـﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﺘﻔﻕ ﻤﻌﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺘﺸﺘﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺜﻼﺙ ﻤﺭﺍﺤل ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺼـﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴـﺫ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺘﻡ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺨﻴﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻜﺄﺴﻠﻭﺒﹰﺎ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﹰﺍ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺘﻐﺫﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﺴﺎﻟﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻌﻤﻠﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪42‬‬
 ‫‪ -2‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻴﻌﺩ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻨﺼﺭﹰﺍ ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻴﹰﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫ ﻴﺴﺎﻫﻡ ﻓـﻲ ﺘﻘـﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﺘﺨﺩﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺭﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫـﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻼﺤﻘﺔ ﻷﻨﺸﻁﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘـﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤـﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ ﻤـﺴﻴﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻫـﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻘﺩ ﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﺘﺴﻌﺕ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺤﺘﻰ ﺍﺼﺒﺢ ﺍﺤﺩ ﺍﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﻅﻰ ﺒﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻤﻌﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﺭﻴﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻴﻘﺼﺩ ﺒﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ)‪(Strategic Performance Appraisal‬ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﺍﺤﺩ ﻤﺭﺍﺤل‬
‫ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺤﺎﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼﻟﻬﺎ ﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴـــﺫ ﻟﻠﺨﻴـــــﺎﺭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫)‪ (Straegic Option‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺎﻜــﺩ ﻤــﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻫــﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺨﻴــﺎﺭ ﻴﺘﻔــﻕ ﻤــﻊ ﺍﻫــﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤــﺔ‪.‬‬
‫)‪.( Lawrence & William , 1989: 18‬‬
‫ﻭﺭﺃﻯ )‪ ( Mehren & Lehmaun , 1994: 5‬ﺒﺎﻨﻪ " ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘﻬـﺘﻡ ﺒﺠﻤـﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤـﺔ ﺒـﺸﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠـﺔ ﺠﻭﺍﻨـﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ ﻭﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺓ " ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻤـــــﺎ )‪ ( Samuel , 1994: 139-140‬ﻓﻘــــﺩ ﻋـﺭﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟـــــﺫﻱ ﺍﻋﺘﺒــــــﺭﻩ ﻤـﺭﺍﺩﻑ ﻟﻠﺘﺩﻗﻴــــﻕ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ )‪ ( Strategic Audit‬ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤــــﺭﺍﺠﻌـــــــــــــــــﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴــــــــــــــــــــﺔ‬
‫)‪ (∗)(Strategic Review‬ﺒﺎﻨﻪ " ﻓﺤﺹ ﻭﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻭﻤﺅﻜﺩﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻭﺠﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻜﺎﻓﻪ"‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻜـﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﻤﺜل ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺹ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺸﺎﻤ ﹰ‬
‫ﻤﺭﻜﺯﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠــــﺯﺀ ﻭﺍﺤــــــﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﺜـل ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴـل ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌـﻲ ) ‪Environmental‬‬
‫‪ .( Analysis‬ﻭﺍﻟﻰ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﺭﺴﻤﻴﺎ ﻴﻠﺘﺯﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﺒﺘﺔ ﻭﺍﺠﺭﺍﺀﺘﻬـﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﻨـﻪ ﻏﻴـﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺴﻤﻲ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺴﻤﺢ ﻟﻠﻤﺩﺭﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺍﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺹ ﺭﺴﻤﻴﺎ ﺍﻡ ﻏﻴـﺭ‬
‫ﻼ ﺍﻡ ﻤﺭﻜﺯﺍ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻌﻤل ﻤﻥ ﺍﺠل ﺠﻌل ﺍﻟﻭﻅﺎﺌﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﻤﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺴﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺸﺎﻤ ﹰ‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﺭﻑ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺒﺎﻨﻪ "ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻜﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺘـﺴﻌﻰ ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺘﻨﻔﻴـﺫ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ")‪(Amaratunga ,2000:180‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻬﺎ )‪ ( Hunger & Wheelem , 2000: 230‬ﺒﺎﻨﻬﺎ " ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺘـﺎﺌﺞ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﻘﻘﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻏﻭﺏ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﺫﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻭﺍﺘﺨـﺎﺫ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺩﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ "‪ .‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﻴﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻤﺱ ﺨﻁﻭﺍﺕ ﻜﻤـﺎ‬
‫ﻴﺼﻭﺭﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪(9‬‬

‫)*( ﻻﺗﺘﻔ ﻖ اﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜ ﺔ ﻣ ﻊ ه ﺬا اﻟﺘ ﺮادف إذ ان اﻟﺘﻘ ﻮﻳﻢ اﺷ ﻤﻞ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺘ ﺪﻗﻴﻖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻨ ﺮى ﺑ ﺎن اﻟﺘ ﺪﻗﻴﻖ ه ﻮ ﻋﻤﻠﻴ ﺔ ﻣﻨﻈﻤ ﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ درﺟ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟ ﺸﺊ اﻟﻤ ﺮاد ﺗﺪﻗﻴﻘ ﻪ واﻟﻤﻌ ﺎﻳﻴﺮ اﻟﻤﻮﺿ ﻮﻋﺔ وﺗﻮﺻ ﻴﻞ اﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠ ﺔ اﻟ ﻰ اﺻ ﺤﺎب اﻟﻌﻼﻗ ﺔ اﻣ ﺎ اﻟﺘﻘ ﻮﻳﻢ ﻓﻬ ﻮ ﻳﺘﺠ ﺎوز‬
‫ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻟﺘﺪﻗﻴﻖ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺎوﻟﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻬﻮض ﺑﻬﺬا اﻟﺸﺊ اﻟﻰ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻓﻀﻞ اذا آﺎن ﺿﻌﻴﻔًﺎ او اﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻈ ﺔ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻪ وﺗﻄ ﻮﻳﺮﻩ اذا آ ﺎن ﺟﻴ ﺪًا‬
‫ﻣﻊ اﻟﺘﻌﺮف ﻋﻠﻰ اﺳﺒﺎب اﻟﻀﻌﻒ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺎوﻟﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻮﺻﻞ اﻟﻰ ﺳﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ او اﻟﺤﺪ ﻣﻨﻪ‪.‬‬

‫‪43‬‬
 ‫‪5‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪3‬‬ ‫‪2‬‬ ‫‪1‬‬
‫ﻻ‬
‫اﺗﺨﺎذ اﺟﺮاءات‬ ‫هﻞ ﻳﺘﻄﺎﺑﻖ اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻗﻴﺎس اﻷداء‬ ‫وﺿﻊ ﻣﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﻤﻜﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺤﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻊ اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻗﻴﺎﺳﻪ‬

‫ﻧﻌﻢ‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﻤﺴﺎر‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻗﻒ‬
‫ﺻﺤﻴﺢ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪(9‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ واﻟﺘﻘﻮﻳﻢ‬
‫‪Source: (Hunger,David&Wheelem,ThomasL.,Strategic Management, Addison‬‬
‫‪Wesley Longman,2000 p:231.‬‬

‫ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﻋﺒﺭ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ )‪ (Hill & pullen,2001:1‬ﺒﺎﻨﻬﺎ " ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺸـﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﺘـﺅﻁﺭ ﺭﺤﻠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﻜﻴﺩ ﺒﺎﻥ ﻜل ﻓﺭﺩ ﻴﻔﻬﻡ ﻤﻭﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺤﺎﺠﺘﻬـﺎ ﻟﻠﻨﻤـﻭ‪ ،‬ﻟﺨﻠـﻕ ﻗﻴﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﺔ "‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺠﻴﹰﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻪ " ﺁﻟﻴﺔ ﻀﺒﻁ ﺍﻭ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻌﻴﻴﻥ ﻤﻭﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻭﺯﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺎ ﻭﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﹰﺎ "‪.( Stewart & Carpenter , 2001: 37) .‬‬
‫ﻭﺼﺎﻏﺕ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻻﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬــــﻭﻡ ﻀﻤـــــﻥ ﺍﻁـــــﺎﺭ ﺒﻌﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻜﻔـﺎﺀﺓ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴــﺔ )‪ ( Efficieney & Effectiveness‬ﻜﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺭﺒﻁﻬﺎ ﺒﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﻫﺩﻑ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﻼ ﻟﻠﻨﺸﺎﻁﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺇﺫ ﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ )‪ ( Mohd Isa , 2002: 3‬ﺒﺎﻨﻬﺎ " ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ ﺩﻟﻴ ﹰ‬
‫ﻭﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﻭﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘﺘـﻀﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ "‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩﻩ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻭﺍﺴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺩﺏ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻷﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﻭﻀﺢ ) ‪ ( Samuel , 1994: 138-150‬ﺍﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ ﻴﺸﻜل ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺤﻠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻰ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺤل ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁﺔ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﻭﻫـﻲ ﺘـﺸﻤل‪ :‬ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻻﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺤﻴﺤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻭﻀﺤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟـﺸﻜل )‪(10‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻅﻬﺭ ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺠﹰﺎ ﻋﺎﻤﹰﺎ ﻟﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺒﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﻴﻨﻁـﻭﻱ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻪ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻓﺸﻠﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﻭﻟﻡ ﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻨـﺩﻫﺎ ﻴـﺼﺒﺢ ﺍﻻﺠـﺭﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺤﻴﺤﻲ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﹰﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﻗﺩ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴـﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴـﺯ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺨﻁﻭﺓ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﻫـﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴـل ﻴﻤﻜـﻥ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻴﺤﺴﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺩﻗﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻭﻴل ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪44‬‬
 ‫ﻟﻴﺲ هﻨﺎك ﺿﺮورة ﻷﺗﺨﺎذ‬
‫اﺟﺮاء ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺤﻲ‬

‫ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻻهﺪاف واﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﻗﻴﺎس اﻷداء اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﻲ‬ ‫ﺗﺒﺪأ‬

‫‪ -‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﻧﻮﻋﻴﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ‬
‫ﻗﺎرن اﻷداء ﺑﺎﻻهﺪاف واﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ‬
‫)ﺗﺴﺎؤﻻت ﺣﺎﺳﻤﺔ(‬ ‫اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻋﺪم ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻻهﺪاف‬ ‫‪ -‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ آﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫واﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ‬ ‫اﺗﺨﺎذ اﺟﺮاء ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺤﻲ‬ ‫)اﻟﻌﺎﺋﺪﻋﻠﻰ اﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎر (‬
‫‪ -‬ﺗﻐﻴﺮ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻋﻤﻞ اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﺔ‬ ‫‪ -‬ﺗﺪﻗﻴﻖ اﻟﻤﻨﺘﻔﻌﻴﻦ‬
‫‪ -‬ﺟﻌـــﻞ اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴـــــﺮ واﻻهﺪاف‬
‫اﺻﻌﺐ‬
‫‪ -‬ﺗﻐﻴﺮ وﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻞ اﻻدارة‬
‫اﻟﺘﻐﻴﺮات ﺗﺄﺧﺬ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﻬﺎ‬
‫اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ -‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻋﻤﻠﻴــــــﺔ اﻟــﺮﻗﺎﺑــــﺔ‬
‫اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬

‫ﺷﻜﻞ )‪(10‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫& ‪Source: Samuel C.Certo,&perter,Paul,"StrategicManagement:Concepts‬‬
‫‪Application,3rd.ed., RichardIrwin,Ine.1994:150‬‬

‫ﺍﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ (11‬ﻓﻴﻭﻀﺢ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺒـﺎﻟﺨﻁﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴـﺴﺔ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫رﻗﺎﺑﺔ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻲة‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬ ‫وﺿﻊ اﺗﺠﺎﻩ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻤﻲ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﻴﺌﻲ‬

‫ﺘﻐﺫﻴﺔ ﻋﻜﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪(11‬‬
‫اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ واﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫‪Source: Samuel C.certo,&Perter, Paul,"Strategic Management‬‬
‫‪Concepts&Application",3rd.ed.,Richard Irwin,lnc.1994:150‬‬

‫ﻴﺒﺩﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻕ ﺍﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺘﺸﻤـــل ﻋﻠـــﻰ ﺘﻘﻴﻴــﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌـﺔ‬

‫‪45‬‬
‫)ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺒﻴﺌﻲ (‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ )ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﺘﺠـﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﻲ (‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﻥ ﻟﻠﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴـﺔ ) ﺼـﻴﺎﻏﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ(‪ ،‬ﻭﻭﻀﻊ ﺨﻁﺔ ﻟﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻋﻤل ) ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ( ﻭﺍﺨﻴـﺭﹰﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺯﻭﺩ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻐﺫﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ ﻤـﺩﻯ ﻜـﻭﻥ ﺨﻁـﻭﺍﺕ ﻋﻤﻠﻴـﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻜﺎﻓﺔ ﻤﻨﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﻭﻤﺘﻨﺎﺴﻘﺔ ﻭﺘﻌﻤل ﺒﺎﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺴﺏ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻘﺩ ﺍﻭﺠﺯ )‪ ( Hill & pullen , 2001: 3‬ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺒﺎﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻵﺘﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫﹰﺎ ﻨﻅﺎﻤﻴﹰﺎ ﻷﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺀﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺴﺠﺎﻡ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺠـ ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻴﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻻﺭﺒﺎﺡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺘﺨﺼﻴﺹ ﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻜﻔﻭﺀ ‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻭﻀﺢ ﻤﺭﻜﺯﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻲ ﻟﻸﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺼﻐﻴﺭﺓ‬
‫ـﺎﺭﻴﺭ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫)‪ ( Small Business Technology Development Center‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘــ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﻭﻫﻲ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﻌﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ ‪ -‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﻌﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻓﻀل ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻋﻤﺎل‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﻜﺴﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﻭﺘﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺩﻓﻊ ﺍﺠﻭﺭ ﻤﻨﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫـ ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺭﻙ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺒﻌﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﺒﺎﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺯ‪ -‬ﺠﻌل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﺘﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺒﺎﻜﺴﺎﺒﻬﺎ ﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﻴﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺼﺎﻏﺕ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻜﻭﻨﻪ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﻟﻠﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﺍﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻟﻔﻬﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺘﻬﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﻤﺎﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﻤﻠﻪ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻘﺒل‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴـﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻟﻔﻜﺭﺓ " ﻻﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﻤﻘﺩﻭﺭﻙ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﺎﻻﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ" )‪.( Marr,Nelly&Thomas,2002:5‬‬
‫ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﺕ ﺍﻻﺸﻜﺎل )‪ -12‬ﺃ ( )‪ -12‬ﺏ( )‪-12‬ﺝ( ﺘﺠﺴﻴﺩﹰﺍ ﻷﻫﻤﻴـﺔ ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺄﺘﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻓﻬﻲ‪( www. sbtdc. org) :‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺘﺨﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻤﺎﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﺨﺼﻴﺹ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻗﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺴﺒﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﻔﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻓﻀل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﻭل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﺸﻜل )‪ -12‬ﺃ ( ﻴﻭﻀﺢ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤـﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﺒـﺸﻜل ﺠﻴـﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘـﺭﺘﻴﻁ‬
‫ﺒﺎﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ -12‬ﺏ( ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻫﻭ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻟﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ -12‬ﺝ( ﻴﺸﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺜﻼﺙ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻤﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻫﻭ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻁﺒﻴﻌﻲ ﻭﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤـل‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪46‬‬
 ‫ادﺧﺎل‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺴﻴﻨﺎت‬

‫ﻗﻴﺎس‬ ‫اﻧﺠﺎز‬
‫وﺗﻘﻮﻳﻢ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ رﻗﻢ )‪ -12‬أ (‬

‫ﻓﺮﻳﻖ‬ ‫اﻟﻘﻴﺎس‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺎذا ﻳﺴﺘﺨﺪم‬

‫اﻻدارة‬ ‫واﻟﺘﻘﻮﻳﻢ‬ ‫اﻟﺬي ﻳﺪﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻟﻼدارة‬

‫اﻧﻈﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻟﺬي‬
‫اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﻳﺘﻢ ادارﺗﻪ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ ) ‪ - 12‬ج (‬ ‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪ - 12‬ب (‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ ) ‪(12‬‬
‫اهﻤﻴﺔ اﻟﻘﻴﺎس واﻟﺘﻘﻮﻳﻢ‬
‫)‪Source: (www.opm.gov/perform/articles‬‬

‫ﺒﺎﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻭﺠﻬﺕ ﺍﺭﺍﺀ )‪( Neely& et al.,1995:19‬‬
‫ﺒﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺜﻼﺜﺔ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ‪ :‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺤﻠل ﺒﻁﺭﺡ ﺘﺴﺎﺅﻻﺕ ﻤﺜل ﻷﻱ ﺸـــﺊ ﺘـﺴﺘﻌﻤل‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴــــﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ؟ ﻭﺍﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ؟ ﻭﻜﻡ ﺘﻜﻠﻑ ؟ ﻭﻤﺎﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻭﺍﺌﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﻓﺭﻫﺎ ؟‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻜﻜﻴﺎﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺤﻠل ﺒﺄﺴﺘﻜﺸﺎﻑ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼـﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺀﻤـﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘــﻲ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺒﻨـﺴﺒﺔ ﻤـــــﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤـﺴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻁﻭﻴﻠـــﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻋﻤﻭﺩﻴـﺎ ﻭﺍﻓﻘﻴـﹰﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻤل ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺤﻠل ﺒﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻜــﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺘﻌﺯﺯ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺘﺘﻭﺍﻓﻕ ﻤﻊ ﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺒﺎﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻤﺎﻴﺯ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻴﺒﺩﻭ ﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻨﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺒﻴﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻤﺎﻫﻴﺔ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‬

‫‪47‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻻ ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﻻﻴﺼل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻭﻫﻲ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺤﺩﻭﺩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻻﺘﺘﻌﺎﺭﺽ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺭﻜﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻨﺠﺩ ﺍﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﻋﺭﺽ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ‪ " :‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻻﺠل ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﻔﻲ ﺒﺎﻟﺤﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﻗﻌﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺘﻌﻘﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻰ ﻭﺘﻘﻠﻴﺹ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻴﻀﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻴﺩ ﺫﻜﺭﻩ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻤﻴﺯ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻫﻭ ﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻪ ﻤﺸﺘﻘﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺼﻨﻊ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻴﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻜﻔﻭﺀ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﺒل ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻜﻭﻨﻪ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺍﻜﺜـﺭ‬
‫ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺘﻭﺤﻴﺩ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺎﻜﻤﻠﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺴﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﺤﻠﻴﻼﺕ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻭﻓﻕ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻻﻴﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻪ ﺁﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻌﻴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺜﻭﺍﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻘﺎﺏ ﻓﻘﻁ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﺍﻨـﻪ ﺠـﺎﺀ ﻟﻴﻌـﺯﺯ ﻓﻬـﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻬﺩ ﺒﺎﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﻭ ﻴﺤﻘـﻕ ﺘﻐﺫﻴـﺔ ﻋﻜـﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻌل ﻤﻥ ﻨﺎﻓﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﻴﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻜﺜﻴﺭﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﺎﺒﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻭﻟﻭﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺨﻴﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﻁﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﻔﻴـﺫ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺇﺫ ﻻﺘـﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﺎﻻ ﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ‪ .‬ﺒل ﺘﻌﺩ ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺤل ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫ ﺍﻥ ﻜل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻫﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻑ ﻓﻼﺒﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻭﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻴﻌﺎﺏ ﺍﻻﺜﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺘﻭﺍﺠﻪ ﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﻓﻲ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﺨﻴﺎﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺩﺍﺌﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺜﻨﺎﺀ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻠﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺩﻴل‬
‫ﺍﻨﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺘﻜﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﻤـﻊ ﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺒﻤﺜﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻟﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺀﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﺨﻁﻁ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﻀﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌ‪‬ﺭﻓﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺼﺭﺓ ﻫﻲ ﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﺘﻌﻘﺏ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯﻩ‪ .‬ﻭﻫــــــــــﻲ ﻭﺍﺤــﺩﺓ ﻤـﻥ ﺴﺒـــــــﻊ ﺍﺼﻨــﺎﻑ‬
‫ﻓــــــــــــــــﻲ ﻤﻌﻴـــــﺎﺭ )‪ (Malcom Baldrige‬ﻟﺘﻤﻴـﺯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﺤﻘــــــــــــــــــــﺎﺌﻕ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻤـــــــــــــــــــــﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫‪ (MBF) Management By Facts‬ﺍﺫ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﻤﺯﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﻴﻜل ﻋﻤل ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻌـﺎﻟﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻤﻌﻅـﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻷﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻋﻘﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻴﻭﺠﺩ ﺠﺩل ﺒﺴﻴﻁ ﺤﻭل ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨـﺘﺞ ﻤﻨﻬﻤـﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺅﺍل ﺤﻭل‪ :‬ﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻘﺎﺱ ؟ ﻭﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﺇﺫ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺘﺸﻜل ﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻲ ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﹰﺎ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺍﺼﺒﺢ ﻫﻨـﺎﻙ ﺘـﺩﺭﺝ‬
‫ﻤﻭﺴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﻟﺘﻤﺜل ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻻ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﺓ ﺴﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﻭﺘﺼﻨﻴﻔﺎﺕ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺼـﻭ ﹰ‬
‫ﻟﻌﺭﺽ ﺍﻫﻡ ﻤﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫‪-1‬ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﺭﻫﺎ‬
‫ﹸﺘﻤﺜل ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻋﺎﻡ ﺤﻘﺎﺌﻕ ﻟﻁﻤﺄﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺤﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﺘﹸﻅﻬﹺﺭ ﻟﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻠﻪ ﻭﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﻠﺤﺩ ﻤـﻥ ﺍﻻﻭﻟـﻰ ﻭﺘـﺫﻟﻴﻠﻬﺎ‬

‫‪48‬‬
 ‫ﻭﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺜﻤﺎﺭﻫﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺒﺩﺀ ﺒﻌﺭﺽ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻤﻬــــﺎ ﻭﺘﻁــــــﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻭﻤﺩﺍﺨﻠﻬــــﺎ‪ .‬ﻻﺒــــــﺩ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻋـــﺭﺽ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻴــــــﻪ )‪ (Simons , 2000: 32‬ﺤـﻭل ﻤﻭﻀـﻭﻉ ﺃﺴـﺱ ﻨﺠـﺎﺡ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻨﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﻗﻊ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴـﺘﻡ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﻭﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤـﻥ ﺜـﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺒﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺭﻗﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻴﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺠﻤﻴـﻊ ﺍﻻﻨـﺸﻁﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ ﺍﻻﻨـﺸﻁﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻌل ﻤﺎﻴﻔﻴﺩ ﻗﻭﻟﻪ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﺸﺎﺭﺓ )‪ ( Simons‬ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﺯﺓ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﻌـﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺤﺩ ﺍﺭﻜﺎﻥ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻬﺎ ﻴـﺘﻡ ﺍﻟـﺭﺒﻁ ﺒـﻴﻥ ﺭﻜﻨـﻴﻥ ﺍﺴﺎﺴـﻴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻟﻸﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻭﻟﻬﻤﺎ‪ :‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻊ ﺘﺤﺕ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺜﺎﻨﻴﻬﻤـﺎ‬
‫ﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺭﺴﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻻﻋﻠﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﻲ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﻌﺩ ﺤﻠﻘﺔ ﺭﺒـﻁ ﺒـﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤـﺎ ﻴﻭﻀـﺤﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪:(13‬‬

‫رﺳﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﺔ‬

‫اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﻄﻠﻮﺑﺔ‬

‫اﻻهﺪاف واﻟﺨﻄﻂ‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ اﻷداء‬

‫اﻻﻧﺸﻄﺔ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪(13‬‬
‫اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ واﻻﻧﺸﻄﺔ‬
‫‪Source:Simons R."PerformanceManagement&Control system for‬‬
‫‪Implementing IStrategy",Prentice Hall,2000,p:32‬‬

‫ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﻘﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺼـﻨﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺒﹰﺎ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺼﺎﺤﺏ ﺒﺎﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺘﻭﺴﻌﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻔﻴﺯ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﺠﺊ "‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻷﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﻟﻴل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﻤـﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﻭﺤﻴﻭﺘﻬــــــﺎ‬
‫)‪.(Walsh,2000:3‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﻨﺎﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﻴﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻟﻜﻲ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﺼﻑ ﺒﺎﻟﺨﺼﺎﺌﺹ ﺍﻵﺘﻴـﺔ‪:‬‬

‫‪49‬‬
 ‫)‪.(Thacker & Associates , 2002: 6‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺠﻌل ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻭﺍﻀﺢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻁﻭﻴﻠﺔ ﻭﻗﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﻤﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﺤﻭ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻤﺘﺼﻠﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﻭﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﻤﺴﺘﻌﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺭﻴﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ‪.‬‬
‫ﺯ‪ -‬ﻓﺎﻋﻠﺔ ﻭﻜﻔﻭﺀﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻭﻀﻊ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻬـﺫﺍ ﺍﻟـﺼﺩﺩ‬
‫ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺜﻼﺙ ﺍﻨـﻭﺍﻉ ﻤـﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌـﺎﻴﻴﺭ ) ‪ (Powell , 2002: 5‬ﻫــﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻴﺨﻴــــﺔ )‪(Historical‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻘـــــﺔ ) ‪ (Absolute‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﻌﻴﺔ )‪.( Benchmarking‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻴﺨﻴﺔ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻤﻘﺎﺒل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻫل ﺘﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل‬
‫ﺍﻓﻀل ﺍﻭ ﺍﺴﻭﺀ ﺒﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻘﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﺔ ﻤـﻥ ﻗﺒـل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﻌﻴﺔ ﻓﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻤﺜل ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻓﻀل ﻤﺜل ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ )‪ (A‬ﻗﺩ‬
‫ﻼ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻻﻓﻀل ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺩﻟﻴ ﹰ‬
‫ﻟﻭ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺘﺒﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻴﺨﻲ ﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﻴﻼﺤﻅ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺘﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟـﺴﺒﻌﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻗﻴﻤﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺸﺎﻤل ﺘﻘﺭﻴﺒﹰﺎ ﺒﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ‪ ،Financial Measurements‬ﻭﺨـﻼل‬
‫ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﺎﻨﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﻗﺎﻤﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺒﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻋﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻠﺔ ‪ Analyzed Measurements‬ﻭﻟﻜـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺩﺕ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻗﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﻌل ﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯﻫـﺎ ﻗـﺼﻴﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗـل‬
‫ﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻌﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﻗﺎﻡ ) ‪ (Kaplan & Norton‬ﺒﻁﺭﺡ ﻓﻜﺭﺓ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻫﻲ‬
‫ﺒﻤﺜﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﺒﺘﻜﺎﺭ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﺫ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻭﺘﻭﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﺎﺭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺠﻌﻠﻪ ﺜﺎﺒﺕ ﻭﺫﻭ ﻤﻌﻨﻰ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻨﺫ ﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻌﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﻘﺭﻴﺒﹰﺎ ﻭﺴﻌﺕ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴـﺴﺔ ﻗﻨـﻭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﻬﻴﺯ‪ ،‬ﻭﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻋﺒﺭ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺭﻨﻴﺕ ﻭﺍﺼـﺒﺤﺕ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺸﺒﻜـﺔ )‪ .(∗)(Web-Based Measurements‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺒﺎﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺠﻤﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻻﺸﻴﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻀﻠﺔ ﻟﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﺫﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺴﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺤﺼﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻜﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻟﺘﻭﻟﻴﺩ ﺍﻴﺭﺍﺩ ﺍﻜﺒﺭ ﻭﺒﻜﻠﻑ ﺍﻗل‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺎﺕ ﺤـﺩﺩﺕ ﻭﺍﺨﺘﺒـﺭﺕ‬
‫ـﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‬
‫ـﻲ ﺍﻫـ‬
‫ـﺭﻜﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺘﻠﺒـ‬
‫ـﺕ ﺸـ‬ ‫ـﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨـ‬
‫ـﺩﻴﺭ ﻤـ‬ ‫ـﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻼﻤـ‬
‫ـﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﺘﻘـ‬ ‫ـﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤـ‬
‫ـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟـ‬
‫ـﺕ ﻤﻘـ‬ ‫ﻭﺤﻠﻠـ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.( Swamy , 2002: 44-45).‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭل )‪ (10‬ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﺠﺩﻭل ) ‪(10‬‬
‫ﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫‪2000-1999‬‬ ‫‪1998-1990‬‬ ‫‪1980‬‬ ‫‪1970‬‬ ‫‪1960‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬

‫)∗( أي ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﺳ ﺎس اﻻﻋﻤ ﺎل اﻻﻟﻜﺘﺮوﻧﻴ ﺔ ‪ e-Business‬واﻟﻤﻘ ﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﺗﺤ ﺪد اﺳﺎﺳ ًﺎ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ﻼل ﺗﺤﻠﻴ ﻞ ﺑﻴﺎﻧ ﺎت اﻟﻤ ﺮور ﻓ ﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﺸﺒﻜﺔ ‪ Web-Sit‬ﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻧﺠﺎح اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ‪.‬‬

‫‪50‬‬
‫‪ Web‬ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪/‬ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ /‬ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺤﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻔﺢ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻲ ﻜﻠﻑ ﺍﻟﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺭﺍﺀ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻟﻜل ﺴﻬﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻴﺭﺍﺩ ﺍﻻﻀﺎﻓﻲ ﻨﻘﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﺩل‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﻴﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺢ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﻭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺩﻓﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻴﺯﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺼﺎﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫‪Source:Swamy,Ramesh,Strategic Performance Meaurement in the New‬‬
‫‪Millennium,May2002 p:44 ,[email protected]‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﻜﺫﺍ ﻨﻼﺤﻅ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺩﻴﺭ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﺤـﺴﻨﺕ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻟـﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺨﻴﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﻠﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺼل ﻓﻲ ﻗﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻻﻁﻼﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺯﺍﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﺼﻨﻴﻔﺎﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻴﺸﻤل ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻴـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺘﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟﺘﻀﻴﻑ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻨﹰﺎ ﺍﺨﺭ ﻴﻜﺸﻑ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﺘﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﺘـﺎﺏ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻤﻌـﺎﻴﻴﺭ‬
‫ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﺯﻯ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﻬﻡ ﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻤﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺤﺩﺩ )‪ ( Kapbn & Norton , 1992: 71-79‬ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﻌﺘﻤـﺩ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺸﺨﻴﺹ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ)ﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ( ﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻗﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﻭﻁﻭﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻋـﺭﺽ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟﻸﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭل )‪.(11‬‬
‫ﺠﺩﻭل ﺭﻗﻡ )‪(11‬‬
‫ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ) ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﻠﻜﻴﻥ (‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ‬ ‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺌﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﺩﻓﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺩﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺒﻘﺎﺀ‬
‫ﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺨل ﺩﺭﺠــﺔ ﺍﻻﺴــﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ‬
‫ﻟﺘﺠﻬﻴــﺯ ﻁﻠﺒــﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ﻟﻸﻗﺴﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺤــﺼﺔ ﺍﻟــﺴﻭﻕ – ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺯﺩﻫﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻤﺌﻭﻴﺔ ﻜﺒﻴـﺭﺓ ﻤـﻥ ﺤـﺴﺎﺒﺎﺕ‬ ‫ـﻕ ﺘﺠﻬﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻬﺯﻴﻥ‬‫ـﻰ ﺤـ‬ ‫ـﺩ ﻋﻠـ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌـ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﺭﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻜﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻬـﻭﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ‬ ‫ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺤل ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‬

‫‪51‬‬
‫ـﺼﻨﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴـﺘﺨﺩﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺠﻴل ﺠﺩﻴـﺩ‬ ‫ـﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻬﻨﺩﺴـ‬
‫ـﺔ ﺍﻟـ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘـــ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻻﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴـﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺠــﺔ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤــﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺌﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﺎﻭﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ % 80‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﻴـــــﺯ ﺯﻤﻥ ﺩﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻨﺘـﺎﺝ‪ ،‬ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ‬ ‫ﻜﻠﻔﺔﺍﻟﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺔ –‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﻲ‬
‫ﺯﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻭﻴﻕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻗﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭﻟــﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻁــﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠـﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‬
‫‪Source: (Kaplan,R.,&Norton,D.The Balanced Scorecard Measures that Drive‬‬
‫‪Performance,Harvard Business Review,(January- February),1992,p:76‬‬
‫ﺍﻤﺎ )‪ ( Samuel , 1994: 140-148‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺼﻨﻑ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻴﻥ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ‪Qualititative Organizational Measurements‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻴﺔ ‪Quantitative Organizational Measurements‬‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻤﺎﺕ ﺒﺼﻴﻐﺔ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻻﺭﻗﻤﻴﺔ ﺘﻠﺨﺹ ﻭﺘﻨﻅﻡ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻥ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼل ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻓﻀل ﺍﻨﻭﺍﻉ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻫﻲ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﻴـﺏ‬
‫ﻋﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺼﻤﻡ ﻟﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻻﻤﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺴﺌﻠﺔ‪:‬‬
‫• ﻫل ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﺴﻘﺔ ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﹰﺎ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﻼﺌﻤﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﻨﺎﺴﻘﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻤﺨﺎﻁﺭﺓ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻲ ﻟﻸﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻜﺎ ‪‬‬
‫ﻑ؟‬
‫ﺍﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻬﺫﻩ ﺘﻌﻁﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﻜل ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺭﻗﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻤـﻥ ﺍﻤﺜﻠـﺔ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ )‪Return On Investment (ROI‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺸﻴﻭﻋﹰﺎ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻨﺤﺼل ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺤﺎﺼـل ﺼـﺎﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺨل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻜﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﻴﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅـﻤﺔ ﻭﺒﻴـــــﻥ‬
‫ﻜﻤﻴـــــــــﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤـــﺔ ﻟﻌﻤــــل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤــــــﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ )‪Weighted Performance Score (WPS‬‬
‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻴﺠﻤﻊ ﺨﻤﺱ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﺎﺕ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﻠﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻻﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ ﻴـﺼﺒﺢ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺱ ﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻌﺭﻀﺔ ﻟﻸﻓﻼﺱ ﻭﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻌﺭﻀﺔ ﻟﻸﻓـﻼﺱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﺘﻤﺜـل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻻﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺒﻘﻴﻤﺔ )‪.( Z‬‬
‫‪Z = 1.2 X 1 + 1.4 X 2 + 3.3 X 3 + 0.6 X 4 + 1.0 X 5‬‬

‫‪52‬‬
 ‫ﺇﺫ ﺍﻥ‪:‬‬
‫‪Working Capital / Total Assets‬‬ ‫ﺭﺃ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤل ‪ /‬ﺍﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ‬ ‫‪X1‬‬
‫‪Retained Earnings / Total Assets‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ‪ /‬ﺍﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ‬ ‫‪X2‬‬
‫‪Earning Befor Interst and Taxes /‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺭﺒﺎﺡ ﻗﺒل ﺩﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻭﺍﺌﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻀﺭﺍﺌﺏ‪/‬‬ ‫‪X3‬‬
‫‪Tolal assets‬‬ ‫ﺍﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫‪Markel Value of Equity /Book Value‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﻟﺤﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻜﻴﺔ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ‬ ‫‪X4‬‬
‫‪of Total Liabilite‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﻓﺘﺭﻴﺔ ﻷﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫‪Sales / Total Assets‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ‪ /‬ﺍﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ‬ ‫‪X5‬‬

‫ﺍﻤﺎ ﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ )‪ ( Z‬ﻓﻴﺘﺭﺍﻭﺡ ﺒﻴﻥ )‪ ( 5-10‬ﻤﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ ﻴﻘل ﻋﻥ )‪ ( 1.8‬ﻓﺎﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺅﺸـﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻓﻼﺱ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ )‪ ( Z‬ﺍﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻥ )‪ (3.0‬ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻓﻼﺴﻬﺎ ﻀﺌﻴﻠﺔ ﺠـﺩﹰﺍ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ )‪ (Z‬ﺒﻴﻥ )‪ (3.0-1.8‬ﻓﻬﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﻤﻘـﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫)‪ (Z‬ﻴﻌﻁﻲ ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻓﻜﺭﺓ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺘﺩﻗﻴﻕ ﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ‪Stakeholders Audit‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﻫﻡ ﺍﺸﺨﺎﺹ ﻤﻬﺘﻤﻭﻥ ﺒﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻷﻨﻬﻡ ﻴﺘﺄﺜﺭﻭﻥ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﺒﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﻫﻡ ) ﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﺘﻤﻴﻥ ﺒﺘﺜﻤﻴﻥ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻬﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﻴﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﻬﺯﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻬﺘﻤﻭﻥ ﺒﺎﻻﺒﻘﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻜﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺍﺌﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﺘﻤﻭﻥ ﺒﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺩﻓﻊ ﺩﻴﻭﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺎﺒـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻬﺘﻤﺔ ﺒﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻻﺠﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻫﻲ ﺘﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻴﺘﻔﻕ )‪ ( Wright , et al., 1998 , 271‬ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻕ ﻓﻴﺼﻨﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻰ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻜﻤﻴﺔ‪ ):‬ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ ‪ -‬ﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ‪ -‬ﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ (‬
‫ﺏ ‪ -‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ ) :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻭﺤﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ (‬

‫‪53‬‬
 ‫ﻭﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺘﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﺍﺨﺭ ﻷﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻪ ﻴﻌﻜﺴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭل )‪:(12‬‬
‫)‪.( Rowe , et al. , 1995: 207-208‬‬
‫ﺠﺩﻭل )‪(12‬‬
‫ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺒﻌﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ -‬ﺼﺎﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺢ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ‬
‫ﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ – ﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻋﺩﺍﻟﺔ ﻤﻌﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﺤﻤﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ) ﺍﻻﺭﺒﺎﺡ ﻟﻜل ﺴﻬﻡ (‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻌﺭ – ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ‬
‫ﺩﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﺍﺌﺏ ‪ -‬ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﺭﺱ –ﻤﺩىﺎﺭﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻜﺎﻻﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺒﻤﻁﺎﻟﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﺎﻭﻱ ﺘﺠﺎﻫﻬﺎ‬

‫ﻭﺍﻋﺘﻤﺩ )‪ ( Hunger & wheelem, 2000: 234-238‬ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﺜﻠﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻵﺘﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻗﻴﺎﺴﺎﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ‪ Traditional Financial Measures‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺘﻀﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻵﺘﻴﺔ‪) :‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌـﺩ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ‪ ،Return On Investmen‬ﻋﺎﺌﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺤﺩ ‪ ،Earning Per Share‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺤﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻜﻴﺔ ‪.( Return on Equity‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻗﻴﺎﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ‪Stakeholders Measures‬‬
‫ﺠـ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ )‪Economic Value Added (EVA‬‬
‫ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀـﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺒﺴﻁ ﻓﺎﻥ )‪ ( EVA‬ﺘﻤﺜل ﺍﻻﺭﺒﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﺍﺌﺏ ﻤﻁﺭﻭﺤـﹰﺎ ﻤﻨﻬـﺎ ﺍﻟﻜﻠـﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺠﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل‪ .‬ﻭﻭﻀﺢ )‪ ( Young , 1997: 344‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﻫﻲ ﻤﻘﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻤﺭﻜﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻔﻴﺩﺓ ﺤﻭل ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻓﺘﺭﺍﺕ ﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﻤﻭﺠﺒﺔ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺫﻟـﻙ ﻴﻭﻀـﺢ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻨـﺸﻁﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻟﺩﺕ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺨﻼل ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺴﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﻓﺘﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺨﺎﺴﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ )‪Market Value Added (MVA‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻤـﺸﺎﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﺴـﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺭﺃﺱ ﻤـﺎل ﺍﻟـﺸﺭﻜﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﺤﺴﺎﺏ )‪ ( MVA‬ﻴﺘﻡ‪:‬‬
‫• ﺍﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﻜل ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﻡ ﻭﻀﻌﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒـل ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺎﻫﻤﻴﻥ ﻭﺤـﺎﻤﻠﻲ ﺍﻻﺴـﻬﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻨــــﺩﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻻﺭﺒﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﺠﺯﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ـﺘﻌﻜﺱ‬
‫ـﻭﻴﺭ ﻟـ‬‫ـﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁـ‬
‫ـﺼﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﺤـ‬
‫ـل ﻤـ‬ ‫ـﺴﻭﺒﺔ ﻤﺜـ‬‫ـﺼﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺤـ‬
‫ـﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤـ‬ ‫• ﺍﻋـ‬
‫ـﺎﺩﺓ ﺘـ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤـــــﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠــــﻲ ﻟﻸﺭﺒﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻬﺫﺍ ﺴﻭﻑ ﻴﻬﻴﺊ ﺭﺃﺱ ﻤـﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪.‬‬
‫• ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﺴﻌﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺠﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻜل ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺴﻭﺒﺔ ﻭﺍﻀـﺎﻓﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟــــﻰ ﺩﻴﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻋﻅﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﺜﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﻠـﻲ‬

‫‪54‬‬
‫ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺜﺭﻭﺓ ﺤﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫـ ‪ -‬ﻤﺩﺨل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ‪Balanced Scorecard Approach‬‬

‫‪55‬‬
 ‫ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ) ‪ (Walsh , 2000: 1-4‬ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺼﻨﻑ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻓﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﺒﻌﺩﻴﻥ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﻥ ﻫﻤﺎ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺭﻏﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ )ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﺩﺍﻤﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ( ‪ -‬ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ )ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨﻼﺕ(‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﺫﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩﺍﻥ ﻭﺼﻔﻬﻤﺎ )‪ ( Walsh‬ﺒﺎﻟﺠﺩﻭل )‪(13‬‬
‫ﺠﺩﻭل ) ‪(13‬‬
‫ﻤﺨﻁﻁ ﺘﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟـ ‪Walsh‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺩﺍﻤﺔ ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫‪Maintenance‬‬ ‫‪Strategic‬‬
‫ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﻗﻌﺔ‬ ‫ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﻗﻌﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ‪Outcomes‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨﻼﺕ ﺘﺨﺼﻴﺹ ﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻜﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻟﺨﻠﻕ ﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﺨﺼﻴﺹ ﻤـﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻜﺎﻓﻴـﺔ ﻷﺩﺍﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤل‬ ‫ﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ‬ ‫‪Drivers‬‬
‫‪Source:Walsh,Paul,The Balanced Scorecard:TheAustralian‬‬
‫)‪.Experience,2000:3,(www.cpaonline.com‬‬
‫ﻭﻗﺩﻡ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺒـ‪:‬‬
‫‪Economic‬‬ ‫• ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻓﺔ‬
‫‪Value Added‬‬
‫‪Return on‬‬ ‫• ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‬
‫‪Investment‬‬
‫• ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ‬
‫‪profitability‬‬
‫‪Sales‬‬ ‫‪from‬‬ ‫‪New‬‬ ‫• ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‬
‫‪Products‬‬
‫‪Costomer Loyalty‬‬ ‫• ﺍﺴـﺘﺒﻘﺎﺀ ﻭﻭﻻﺀ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‬
‫‪&Retention‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺒـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــﺩﺍﻉ‬ ‫•‬
‫‪Innovation‬‬
‫‪Investment in Research‬‬ ‫• ﺍﻻﺴــﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻓــﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺤــﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁــﻭﻴﺭ‬
‫‪&Development‬‬
‫‪Employee‬‬ ‫ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﻤﻬﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌـﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‬ ‫•‬
‫‪Skill Levels‬‬

‫‪56‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﻤﻘﺘﻀﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﻏﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻪ ﻓﺎﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜـﺔ ﺘﺠـﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﻨﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺘﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﻁ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺘﻭﺍﻓﺭ ﻜﻼ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﻥ ﻟﻴﺠﺭﻱ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺒﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻲ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻴﺔ ﺘﻜـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺴﻬل ﺘﻠﺨﻴﺼﹰﺎ ﻭﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﹰﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻓﻬـﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺤﻴﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺅﺸﺭ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﺼﻌﻭﺒﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻔﻴﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﺍﻥ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﻗﺩ ﻴﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﺒـﺸﻜل ﻜﺒﻴـﺭ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻗـﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﺠﺘﻬﺎﺩﺍﺘﻬﻡ‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﻀـﻊ ﺒﻜـل‬
‫ﺩﻗﺔ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻲ ﻟﻬﻡ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺘﺨﺫ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻏﻴﺭ ﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﺴﻴﺠﻌل ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﻏﻴـﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﺴﻴﺤﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﺼﺒﺢ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻓﺸل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﺨﻔﺎﻗﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻭﺍﻓﺭ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺫﺍﺘﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺍﻨﻪ ﺘﻡ ﺒﻨﺎﺅﻫﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩﹰﺍ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺘﺤﻅﻰ ﺒﺎﺘﻔﺎﻕ ﻭﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﻠﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﻤﺩﺍﺨل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻱ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ‪ .....‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺨﻴﺭﺓ ﺒﺩﺍﺕ ﺘﺜﺎﺭ ﺘﺴﺎﺅﻻﺕ ﻓﻴﻤـﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠـﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤﺭ ﺒﺎﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﻭﻤﻥ ﺍﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﺎﺅﻻﺕ‪:‬‬
‫• ﻫل ﺘﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﺍﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻴﻘﻴﻡ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻲ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ؟‬
‫• ﻫل ﺘﺸﺘﻕ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ؟‬
‫ﺼﻨﻑ ) ‪ ( Ruben , 1999 : 1-3‬ﻤﺩﺍﺨل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺘﻴﻥ‪:‬‬
‫• ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫• ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻤﺎ ) ‪ ( Powell & Mc Guire ,2002: 2 ) ،( Hill & Pullen , 2001: 2-6‬ﻓﻘـﺩ ﺍﺘﻔﻘـﻭﺍ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﻤﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺘﻴﻥ ﻫﻤﺎ‪:‬‬
‫• ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻱ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫• ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺼﺭ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻭﻀﺢ ) ‪ ( Glunk & Wilderom , 2000: 1 – 2‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻋﺎﺩ ﹰﺓ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺘـﻪ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴﻡ ﺍﻭﺴﻊ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ‬
‫ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻻﺘﺭﻓﺽ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﺘﻁﺭﺡ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﺍﻵﺘﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﺴﻴﻡ ﻤﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ‪:‬‬
‫• ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪.‬‬

‫‪57‬‬
 ‫• ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ‪ /‬ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻟﻤﺩﺍﺨل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺴﻴﺘﻡ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤـﺩﺍﺨل‬
‫ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻑ ﺍﻻﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺨﺘﺒﺭ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﺒـﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺸـﺎﺌﻌﺔ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ‪ /‬ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺘﻔﺘﺭﺽ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺍﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻗﺘـﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻟﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﻴﻘﻴﻡ ﺒﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﻤﺜـــــــــل )‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﻜﺎﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ( ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻼ ) ﻋﻭﺍﺌﺩ ﺴﻭﻕ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ (‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﻤﺯﻴﺞ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ ﻤﺜ ﹰ‬
‫ﻼ‬ ‫ﺍﺴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ ﻤﺜ ﹰ‬
‫) ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﺭ ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ (‪ .‬ﻭﻟﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﻋﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻭﻤﺎﺯﺍﻟﺕ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﻴـﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺎﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻻﺯﺍﻟﺕ ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ ﻟﺤﺩ ﺍﻻﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﻓﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﺨﻀﻌﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﻘﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋــﻥ‬ ‫‪ -1‬ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻗل ﺩﻋﻤﹰﺎ ﻟﻸﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻁﻭﻴل ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺒﺴﺒﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴـﺯ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺘﺤـﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﺌـﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓـﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻜﻭﻨﻬـــﺎ ﺘﺩﻋـــﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻋﻭﺍﺌﺩﻫﺎ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﻘﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺴـﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻋﻠـــﻰ ﻓــﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺤﺴﺏ ﻗﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺴﻬﻭﻟﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﺒـل ﺍﺴـﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺍﺩﻨـﻰ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴﺔ ﻓــــﻲ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋـــﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ‪ ،‬ﻤﻬـﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ...‬ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻏﺎﻟﺒــــﹰﺎ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻋﻭﺍﺌﺩﻫﺎ ﻗـﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻤـﺩ ﺼـﻌﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ‪.‬‬
‫)‪.( porter , 1993: 73‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺎﺭﻴﺨﻴﺔ ﺘﻔﺘﻘﺭ ﻟﻠﻘﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺒﺅﻴﺔ ﻭﻻ ﺘﻤﺴﻙ ﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻭﻻ ﺘﻌﻁ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﹰﺍ ﻜﺎﻓﻴـﹰﺎ ﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻴﻌﻴﺔ ﻤﺜل ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻱ )‪.( Brancato,1995:31‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺘﻔﺸل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻭﺘﻜــــﻭﻥ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﻤـــــﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺤـــﺩﺩﺓ ﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴـــﺩ ﺍﻻﺤﺘﻴﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ )‪.( Hexter,1997: 18‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋـﻥ‬ ‫‪ -4‬ﻻﺘﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ ﻟﻤﻭﺍﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﻭﻻ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﺎﺌﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓـﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻜﻭﻨﻬــــﺎ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺭﻨﺔ ﻭﺘﻤﻨﻊ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ‪ ،‬ﻭﻻ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻭ ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﻬﻡ ﻟﻠﻘﻀﺎﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻻ ﻤــــﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟـــﻲ‪ .‬ﻜﻤــﺎ ﻭﺍﻨﻬــــﺎ ﺘﺭﺍﺠــــــﻊ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌــــﺞ ﺒــــــﺩ ﹰ‬
‫ﻤـــﺭﺍﺠﻌﺘﻬــــــــــﺎ ﻷﺴﺒـــﺎﺒﻬـــــــــﺎ )‪( Hill&pullen,2001:2-6‬‬
‫)‪( Thacker&Associates,2002:2‬‬
‫ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻭﺤﺩﻫﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤـﻀﻠﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻼ ﻤـﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠـﻕ ﺒﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠـﺔ‬‫ﻷﻨﻪ ﻗﺩ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻼﻋﺏ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻟﺘﺒﺩﻭ ﺠﻴﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﻟﻨﻘﺹ ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﺜ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻀﺨﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺯﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺩﺜﺎﺭ ﻭﺤﺴﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴـﺔ ( ﻭﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯﻫـﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀﻲ ﺇﺫ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻜﺸﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻴل ﺤﻭل ﺍﻻﺤﺘﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺢ ﻴﻤﻜـﻥ‬
‫ﻼ ) ﻟﻸﻋﻼﻥ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁـﻭﻴﺭ (‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻥ ﻴﻅﻬﺭ ﺒﺴﻬﻭﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻴﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﻤﺜ ﹰ‬
‫ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺅﺍل ﻴﺒﻘﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻴﻘﻴﻡ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻨﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ؟ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﻤﺎ ﺤﺩﺍ ﺒﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻤﺜل ) ‪ ( Hable,1992‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻓﺘﺭﺍﺽ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﺴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ ﻜﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻓﻀل ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ) ‪.( Powell & McGuire , 2002: 96‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺴﻭﻕ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﻴﻔﺘﺭﺽ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺜﻤﺭﻴﻥ ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒل ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤل ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺜﻡ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﻴﻤﺘﻬﺎ ﻁﻭﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺭﺍﺽ ﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺜﻤﺭﻴﻥ ﻴﻘﻴﻤﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻜﺄﺴـﻭﺍﻕ‬
‫ﺘﺎﻤﺔ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺴﻭﻕ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﻴﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻜﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﻭﺤﺴﺎﺴﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ .‬ﻫﺫﺍ ﻭﻗﺩ‬

‫‪58‬‬
‫ﺍﺜﺒﺘﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺍﺭﺘﺒﺎﻁ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻨﻭﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ) ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ‪/‬ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ (‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﺍ ﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ‬
‫ﺒﻴﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻤﻜﻨﹰﺎ ﻤﻊ ﺍﺤﺘﻔﺎﻅ ﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﺒﺤﺩﻭﺩﻫﺎ )‪.( Glunk & Wilderom , 2000: 14‬‬
‫ﻟﻘﺩ ﺘﻭﺠﻬﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻻﺤﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻓﻭﺍﺌﺩ ﻜﺜﻴﺭﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺼـﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺍﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋــــــﻥ‬
‫ﻁﺭﻴـــﻕ ﻤﺯﺍﻤﻨــــﺔ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺯﺓ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﺭﻴﻊ ﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺨـﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﺎﺌﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺜﻡ ﺘﻨﻘل ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺯﺍﻤﻥ ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻟﻴﻔﻬﻤـﻭﺍ ﺍﻟـﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻘـﻰ ﻋﻠـﻴﻬﻡ ﻟـﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﻻﺘﺠـﺎﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻴﺴﺘﻁﻴﻌﻭﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺼﺒﺤﻭﺍ ﻤﻭﺭﺩﺍ ﺫﺍ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯﹰﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺘﺩﻋﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻤـﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴـﺯ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠـــــﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺼﻤﻡ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺠﻴﺩ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺴﻬﺎ ﻭﻤﻜﺎﻓﺄﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -4‬ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻜﻔﻭﺀ ﻴﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻜـل ﺠﺎﻨـﺏ ﻭﻜــــل‬
‫ﻓـــــﺭﺩ ﺩﺍﺨـــل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪59‬‬
 ‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﻭﺴﻊ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﺒﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ‪ /‬ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻭﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﺎﻨﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺤﺩﺜﺕ ﺍﻋﺎﺩﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤـﻥ ﻜﻭﻨـﻪ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤـﺎﻟﻲ ‪/‬‬
‫ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻤﻭﺠﻪ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﺍ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻭﺴﻊ ﻤﻊ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻏﻴـﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﺍﺼـﺒﺤﺕ‬
‫ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺒﻌﺎﺩ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ‪ /‬ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ‬
‫ﻤﺜـل ) ﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ‪ ،‬ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻭﻴﻘﻴﺔ‪ ( ......‬ﻭﻟﻘﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻜﺩ )‪ ( Iness&et al. , 1994:104-105‬ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟﻴﺴﺕ ﻤﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺨﺭﺍﺝ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻨﺤﺭﺍﻓﺎﺕ ﻓﻘﻁ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﻋﺭﺽ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻟﻤﺭﺍﺤل ﻭﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻑ ﺍﻋﻁﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﻨﺤـﻭ ﺘﻁـﻭﻴﺭ ﻭﺘﺤـﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﻟﻜﻲ ﺘﺒﻘﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺸﺎﻁﻬﺎ ﻭﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ ﺒﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺴﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺒـﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﻌـﺩ‬
‫ل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺤﺩﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﺘﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺭﻓﻊ ﺩﺍﻓﻌﻴﺘﻬﻡ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻜﻤﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺴﻠﻭﻜﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻋﺎ ٍ‬
‫ﻤﻤﺎ ﺘﺠﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺼﺭﺓ ﻤﺜل ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨـﺸﺎﻁ‬
‫)‪ Activity Based Costing system ( ABC‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻑ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘـﺭﺒﻁ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺯﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻭﺯﻉ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻑ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﻟﻠﻨـﺸﺎﻁ ﻤﺒﺎﺸـﺭﺓ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠـﺎﺕ‬
‫)‪ ( Atkinson , et.al. , 1995: 291‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﻠـــــﻰ ﺍﺴـــــﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨـﺸــــﺎﻁ‬
‫)‪)) Activity Based Management ( ABM‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ )‪ (ABC‬ﻟﻠﻨﻅـﺭ ﺍﻟــــﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺸﻜل ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻤـــﻥ ﺨﻼﻟﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻤﻬﺎ(( )‪ ( Senyshen 1998: 20‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻭﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻗﹸﺩﻤﺕ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻭﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺠﻬﻭﺩﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺫﻭﻟـﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻔـﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗـﺕ ﺘﻌـﺩ ﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ ﺴـﻠﻭﻜﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﺤﻔـﺯﺓ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺩﻭﺍﻓـــﻊ ﺒﺎﺘﺠــﺎﻩ ﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴــــــــﺫ ﺍﻟﺨـــﻁﻁ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴـﺔ ﻗـﺼﻴـﺭﺓ ﻭﻁﻭﻴﻠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤــــــﺩ‪.‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺤﺩﺩ )‪ ( Iness&et al.,1994: 107‬ﺴﺘﺔ ﺨﺼﺎﺌﺹ ﻷﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺭﺽ ﻭﺘﻔﺴﻴﺭ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺜـل ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴـﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴـﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺠﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺝ ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﻋﺭﻀﻬﺎ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺩﻭﺭﻱ ﻭﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻐﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻁﺭﺃ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌـﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻴﻁـﺔ‬
‫ﺒﻬـــﺎ ﻤـــﻥ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻔﺴﺭ ﻟﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻥ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘـﺭﺒﻁ ﺘﻠـﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻻﻫـــــﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﺘﻭﺍﻀﻊ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻤﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﻴﺠﺭﻱ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺎﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺒﺜﻘﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨـﺸﺎﻁ )‪ (ABC‬ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ )‪):(ABM‬ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﻷﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻭﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﻭﻨﻭﻋﻴـﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤـل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺩﻯ (‬

‫‪60‬‬
 ‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﺩﺏ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺙ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﻔﻌﻴﻥ ﻭﻟﻘﺩ ﺍﺜﺒﺕ‬
‫ﻜل ﻤﻥ )‪ ( Brown , Laverick , 1994: 15) & ( Doyle,1994: 8‬ﺍﻨﻪ ﻜﻠﻤﺎ ﺍﻋﺘﻤـﺩﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺭﻀﻰ ﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ) ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻬﺯﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ‪ ( ...‬ﻜﻠﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺘﺼﺒﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﺍﻗﻭﻯ ﻟﺘﻀﻤﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﻔﻌﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟـﺭﺍﻱ ﻴﺅﻜـﺩ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻔـﻭﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ‪ /‬ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻫﻭ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻓﻘﻁ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺒﻨﺎﺀﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺠـﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺒـﺎﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ‪ ) :‬ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺤﻤﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﻌﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻤـل‬
‫ﺒﻴﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ( ﻴﺘﻭﺍﻓﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﻓﻊ ﻷﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗـﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻤﻊ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼـﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴـﺴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻤﻬﻤﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻭﺭﺅﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﻋﺎﻡ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل‬
‫ﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻁﺎﻗﻡ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﺌﺭﺓ ﻟﻭﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﻤﺎﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﻡ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺤﻠﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻓﺎﺌﺩﺓ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﻤﻊ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺤﺎﺴــﻡ ﻭﺘﺴــــــــﺎﻫﻡ ﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ‬
‫ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺫﺍﺘﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴــﺯ ﻭﺍﻻﺠﻤـﺎﻉ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅـﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻠﺒﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﺒﻁﺭﻴﻘــــﺔ ﻨﻅﺎﻤﻴـــﺔ ﻫــــــﻲ ﻓﻜـــــﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺒﻁﺎﻗـــﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠــﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨـــﺔ ﺍﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻁـــــﻭﺭﻫﺎ ) ‪(Kaplan & Norton ,. 1990‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻭﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻤـﻥ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﻫﻴﻜل ﻋﻤل ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻤﺎ ﺘﺠﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻤﺘﻊ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﺫ ﻴﺠﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ‪( Brewer & Speh , 2001: 63 ) :‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ‪ :‬ﻜﻠﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻓﻀل‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﻴﻔﺘﺭﺽ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺅﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﻜﻠـﻑ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﺤـﺴﺒﺎﻥ ﻋﻨـﺩ ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻓـﺎﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘـــﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻜــــﺭﺱ ﻟﻘﻴــﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘﻠل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻀﻴﻑ ﻗﻴﻤﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺴﻴﻁﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﻋﺎﺩﻟﺔ‪ :‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻓﻌ ﹰ‬
‫ﻼ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﻗﺎﺒﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ‪ :‬ﺃﻱ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﻪ ﻓﻌ ﹰ‬
‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﺠﺎﺩﺓ‪ :‬ﻴﻌﻭل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﻤﻘﺒﻭﻟﺔ‪ :‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﺴﺴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻀﻤﻨﻴﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻨﻘل ﻻﺠﺯﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﺠﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻘـﻭل‬
‫ﻟﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻴﻌﺘﻘﺩ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﻴﻔﺘﺭﺽ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻤﺘﻊ‬
‫ﺒﻬﺎ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪:‬‬
‫ﺯ‪ -‬ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺭﺍﻱ ﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻤﺘﺼل ﺒﺎﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺡ‪ -‬ﺴﻬﻠﺔ‪ :‬ﻭﻤﻔﻬﻭﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻴﻊ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻭﻟﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﻁ‪ -‬ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺸﻜل ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺘﺤﻴﺯ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻔﺫ ﻓﻌ ﹰ‬
‫ﻱ‪ -‬ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﻤﺸﺘﻘﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻤﻥ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﺨﻁﻁﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺭﻜﺯ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﺼل ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻐﺭﺽ‬

‫‪61‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻨﻘل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻜل ﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻊ‬ ‫ﺘﻌﻘﺏ‬
‫ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺘﻨﺒﺅﻴﺔ ﻭﺫﺍﺕ ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﻤﺘﻁﻠﻌﺔ ﻭﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻌﻤل ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ‬
‫ﻼ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻘﺎﺱ ﻴﺼﺒﺢ ﻤﺭﺌﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬ﻭﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ‬ ‫ﻏﺎﻟﺒﹰﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻔﺸل ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻻﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻨﻪ ﻓﻌ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﺎﻻﻴﺴﺘﻁﺎﻉ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﻤﻊ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﺍﻤﺭ ﻤﻬﻡ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺤﻜﻡ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻭﻫﻭ ﺍﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻓﻀل ﺍﻻﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻨﺔ ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻴﺘﻭﻗﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺩ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻬﺎ ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺩ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﺇﺫ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻤﺜل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺠﺩﹰﺍ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﻟﻜﻥ ﻻﺘﺼﻠﺢ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺘﺭﻏﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﻤﺜل ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪.‬‬

‫‪62‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺸﺒﻜﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﻭﺍﺴﻴﺏ ﺘﻨﺠﺢ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻭﻴل ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺘﻘـﺎﺭﻴﺭ‬
‫ﻜﺜﻴﺭﺓ ﺨﺎﻀﻌﺔ ﻟﻸﺘﻤﺘﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺠﻭﻉ ﻟﻬﺎ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺴﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻌﻘل ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻱ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ‬
‫ﻴﻔﻬﻡ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺤﺩﺙ ﻭﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﺒﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻼﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﺘﻭﺼل ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻬﻭ ﻻ ﻴﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﻋـﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺍﻜـﺩﺍﺱ‬
‫ﻀﺨﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺒل ﻜل ﻤﺎﻴﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻜﻔﻭﺀ ﻭﺩﻗﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺨﺎﺭﺠﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﻴﺴﺕ ﻜل ﺍﻻﻤﻭﺭ ﺘﺴﺘﺩﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﻓﻲ ﻜل ﻭﻗﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤـﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﻴﻥ ﺴﻭﻯ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺭﻴﺩﻭﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﺒـﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺴـﻠﻴﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺫﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻘـﺎﺀ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﺯﺩﻫﺎﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻨﻅﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻤﻨﺒﺜﻘﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻭﻗﺩﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻗﺩ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺒـﺸﺄﻥ ) ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗـﺎﺕ ﺒﺎﻟﺯﺒـﺎﺌﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻔـﺎﺀﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ ( ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﺒﻭﺍﺴﻁﺔ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـﺎﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴـﺔ ﻓﻘـﻁ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭ ﻫﻲ ﻟﻴﺴﺕ ﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﻤﺎﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻨﻤﺎ ﻫﻲ ﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﻤﺎﺒﻴﻥ ﻨﻤـﺎﺫﺝ‬
‫ﻋﻤل‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻨﺩﺨل ﺍﻷﻟﻔﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺜﺔ ﺴﻨﺭﻯ ﺘﻐﻴﺭﹰﺍ ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻴﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻤﻊ ﻅﻬﻭﺭ ﻜل ﺠﻴل ﺠﺩﻴﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻨﺤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺤﺎﻓﺔ ﺜﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻴﺘﻭﻗﻑ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒل ﺒﻘﺩﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻏﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴﺔ ﻤﺜل ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﻜل ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻤﺜل ﺘﺤـﺩﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﻭﺍﺠـﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻭﻋﻠﻴﻬﻡ ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻫﻡ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻤﺎﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﻤﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻸﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻭﻴل‪ .‬ﻭﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ )‪ (BS‬ﺘﻬﺘﻡ ﺒﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻤﺎﻡ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻼﺀﻤـﺔ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﻭﻗﺘﻨﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ )‪ ( BS‬ﻜﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﻼ ﻨﻅﺭﻴﹰﺎ ﺸﺎﻤ ﹰ‬
‫ﺘﺄﺴﻴﺴﹰﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺴﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﻋﺭﻀﹰﺎ ﻭﺘﺤﻠﻴ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻋﺭﺽ ﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﻤﺤﻭﺭﻴﻥ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻭﻜل ﻤﺤﻭﺭ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻘﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﺭﻋﻴﺔ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺽ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﺎﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪ :‬ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺒﻤﻁﻠﻊ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﺎﻨﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀﻲ ﻭﺍﺠﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻻﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺩﺓ ﺘﻬﺩﻴﺩﹰﺍ ﺘﻨﺎﻓـﺴﻴﹰﺎ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻜﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻭﺍﺠﻬﺔ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻬﺩﻴﺩ ﻗﺩ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺘﻘﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺒﺤﺔ ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﺴﻌﺎﺭ ﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﺭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺁﻨﺫﺍﻙ ﻤﻨﻌﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﻤـﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜـﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻑ ﺴﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻬﻡ ﺍﻡ ﻻ‪ .‬ﻟﻘﺩ ﻗﺩﻡ ) ‪ ( Cooper & Kaplan , 1988‬ﻓﻜﺭﺓ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻑ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ )‪ (ABC‬ﻟﺘﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺄ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﺭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﺫ ﺍﻨﻬـﺎ ﻁﺭﻴﻘـﺔ‬
‫ﻟﺭﺒﻁ ﻜﻠﻑ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﺒﺄﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻭﺘﻌﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﺎﻤﻴﻊ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻓﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺴﻤﺤﺕ ﻟﻤﺘﺨـﺫﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺼﻨﻌﻭﺍ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻑ ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﻭﻭﻓﺭﺕ ﻓﺭﺼﹰﺎ ﻟﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻑ ﺒﺩﻭﻥ ﺘﻌﺭﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺨﺎﻁﺭﺓ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻗﺩ ﻗﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻓﻜﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨـﺸﺎﻁ )‪ (ABM‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﻓﻴﻬـﺎ ﻴـﺴﺘﻌﻤل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ )ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ –ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ( ﻟﺼﻨﻊ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺜﺎﺒﺘﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﺓ ﻴﺅﻜﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺩﺍﺓ ﻟﺘﻌﻘﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻭﺤﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﺴـﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻟﻬـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻓﻘــــﺩ ﻁـــﻭﺭ ) ‪ ( Kaplan & Norton , 1992‬ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨـﺔ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ‬
‫ﻤﻜﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻭﺠﺩﺕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺎﺕ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺕ ﻤﻔﻴﺩﺓ ﻓﻘﻁ ﻷﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺨﻁﻁﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻌﻘﺏ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﻭ ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻴﻀﺎ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺭﺠﻤﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬

‫‪63‬‬
‫ﻋﺭﻓﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨـﺔ )‪ ( BS‬ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻨﻬـﺎ " ﻤﺠﻤــﻭﻋﺔ ﻤـــﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴــﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴــــﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤـــــﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘـــﻲ ﺘﻘـﺩﻡ ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴــــﺎ ﺼــــﻭﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻭﺴﺭﻴﻌـﺔ ﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ "‪.‬‬
‫)‪ .( Kaplan& Norton,1992: 71‬ﻭﺸﺎﻁﺭﻩ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ )‪ ( Carlson&Mc Narlin,1992:8‬ﻓﻌﺭﻓﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﻋﻤل ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻴﺩﻤﺞ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺍﻨﻭﺍﻉ ﻭﺤﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ"‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﺭﻓﻬﺎ) ‪ ( Rimar & et al. , 2000: 3‬ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﻷﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﺩﺓ ﻫﻲ ‪ ):‬ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅـﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ(‬
‫ﺍﻤﺎ )‪ ( Curry & Brysland , 2000: 11‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻋﺒﺭ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ " ﺍﺩﺍﺓ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺨـﻼل‬
‫ﺍﺭﺒﻊ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ) ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺒﺎﺩﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻭﻴل ( ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﻁﻭﻴل ﺍﻻﻤﺩ "‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻬﺎ ) ‪ ( Davis & Albrigiht , 2000: 292‬ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻨﻬـﺎ " ﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻟﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺸـﺭﺓ ﻭﻏﻴـﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺸـﺭﺓ ﻟﻐـﺭﺽ ﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ"‪ .‬ﻭﻴﺘﻔﻕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻤﻊ ﻤﺎ ﻁﺭﺤﻪ)‪ ( Bontis , 2001: 281‬ﺒﻘﻭﻟﻪ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﻤـﺩﺨل ﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺍﺒﺭﺯ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ " ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤـﺎﻭل ﺍﻅﻬـﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﺘﺴﺘﺜﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﺨﻠﻕ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ "‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﺍﺨﺭﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﺍﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺘﻌﻁـﻲ ﺼـﻭﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﻭﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻟﻠﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺭﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻴﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻭﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ")‪ (Rawling&et al.,2001:15‬ﻭﺍﺘﻔـﻕ ﻤـﻊ ﻫـﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﻤﺎﻁﺭﺤﻪ )‪ (Andersen,2001:2‬ﺍﺫ ﻋﺭﻓﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﻨﻬﺎ " ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻤﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﻨﺴﺒﻴﹰﺎ ﻟﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ) ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻭﺍﻻﺒـﺩﺍﻉ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻭﻴل (‪ .‬ﻭﻻﺘﺼﻤﻡ ﻟﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻤﺎ ﻴﻘﺼﺩ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﻴﺒﻴﻥ )‪ ( Ryan , 2001: 3‬ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺼـﻭﺭﺓ ﺴـﺭﻴﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﺤﻭل ﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻟﺩﻯ ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ"‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺼﻭﺭ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫﺎ ﺍﺨﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﺍﺫ ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭﻭﺍ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻓﺭﺃﻯ)‪ ( Van Grembergen,1991:1‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟـﺫﻱ‬
‫ﻴﺴﻤﺢ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﻤﺎ ﺒﻌﺩﻩ ﻤـﻥ ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻤـﺎﺕ ﻭﻤﺭﺍﺠﻌـﺎﺕ " ﻭﻭﻀـﺢ‬
‫)‪ ( Drury,2000:493‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ " ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻴﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﺘﺤﻭﻴل ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺍﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻜل ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ) ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻭﻴل ( ﻭﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺜﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻟﻜل ﻫﺩﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ "‪ .‬ﻜﻤـﺎ ﺍﺸـﺎﺭ )‪ ( Robinson,2002:2‬ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺍﻨﻬـﺎ "‬
‫ﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻁﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺎﺨﺫ ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ "‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﺨﻴﺭﹰﺍ ﻓﻘﺩ ﻋﺭﺽ )‪ ( Phadnis,2002:2‬ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻔﻪ ﻟﻴﻘﻭل ﻋﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻨﻬﺎ "ﻫﻴﻜل ﻋﻤل ﺘﻭﺤﻴﺩ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺒﻁﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ"‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﺘﺭﺠﻡ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﺘﻤﺎﺴﻜﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﻔﻴﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺒـﻁ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻸﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒل‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻭﺤﻴﺩ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﺒﻌـﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻴﺴﺘﻜﻤل ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻟﻴﺘﻡ ﺨﻠـﻕ‬
‫ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻭﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺤﻭل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪64‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﺔ ﻟﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﻲ ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬـﺎ ﻻﺘﺘﻔـﻕ ﻤـﻊ‬
‫ﻤﺎ ﻨﺤﺎﻭل ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻁﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭ ﻜﺎﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻱ‪ ...‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺤﺎﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻅﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺭﻜﺯﻭﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤل ﺍﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺎل ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ " ﺍﻨﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﻡ ﺒﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻫﺎ ﺴﺘﺄﺘﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ )‪ .( Brinker,1996:1‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﻻ ﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘـﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻓـﻼ ﻴﻤﻜـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺤﺴﺎﺏ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻻﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻟﺴﻠـﺴﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻀﺢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺘﺄﺴﻴﺴﹰﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﻫﻭ ﻋﺭﺽ ﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻟﻜل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴـﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺠﺎﺀﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﺴﺩ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻤﺜل ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘـﺯﻭﺩ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺒﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻭﺴﺭﻴﻌﺔ ﻟﻸﻋﻤﺎل‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺸﺘﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺘﺯﻭﺩ ﺒﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻔﺫﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺴﺘﻜﻤل‬
‫ﺒﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺴﻤﺢ ﻟﻠﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﺭﺒﻊ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻬﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻌﻁﻲ ﺍﺠﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﻷﺭﺒﻌـــﺔ ﺍﺴـﺌﻠﺔ‪Kaplan & Norton ,1992: 72) :‬‬
‫(‪.‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻜﻴﻑ ﻴﺭﻯ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ؟ ) ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ (‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ ـ ﻤﺎﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻭﺘﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺒﻪ؟ )ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ :‬ﻫل ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﻪ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ؟ )ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ :‬ﻜﻴﻑ ﺘﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺤﺎﻤﻠﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ؟ ) ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻲ (‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ (14‬ﻴﻭﻀﺢ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻤﻊ ﻗﺩﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﺒﻁ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻻﺨﺭ‪.‬‬

‫اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻮر اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫اهﺪاف‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ‬

‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﻟﺰﺑﻮن‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﻻﻋﻤﺎل اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﻴﺔ‬

‫اهﺪاف‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ‬ ‫اهﺪاف‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ‬

‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﻻﺑﺪاع واﻟﺘﻌﻠﻢ‬

‫اهﺪاف‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪(14‬‬
‫رﺑﻂ ﺑﻄﺎﻗﺔ اﻟﺪرﺟﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﻮازﻧﺔ ﻟﻤﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ اﻷداء‬
‫‪Source:Kaplan,R.,&Norton,D."The Balanced Scorecard Measures that‬‬
‫‪Drive Performance", H.B.R.,(January-February),1992,p:72.‬‬

‫‪65‬‬
‫ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ )‪ ( BS‬ﺘﻘﻠل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺍﺌﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﺩﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻬـﻲ‬
‫ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﺠﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﻜﺜﺭ ﺤﺴﻤﺎﹰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺩ ﻜﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺤﺭﺠﺔ ﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻘﺩ ﻤﻴﺯﺕ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻻﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺴـﻌﺔ ﻭﺘﺠﺎﺭﺒﻬـﺎ ﺍﻟـﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻜﺩﺕ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻔﻲ ﺒﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻜﺜﻴﺭﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻜﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ )‪ ( Phadnis,2002:73‬ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﻭﺤﺩ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻷﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺘﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺘﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻘﻠﻴل ﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻟﺤﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺘﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓﺭﻕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل‬
‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﺴﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﺴﻥ ﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻡ ﻟﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻴﻼﺤﻅ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘـﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺤـﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﻋل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ) ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻭﻴل (‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ‪ :‬ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺩﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻘـﺩﻱ‪ ....‬ﺍﻟـﺦ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻴﺸﺨﺹ ﺍﺴﻭﺍﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﺩﻑ‪ ،‬ﻭﺤﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟـﺴﻭﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﺩﻑ ﺘﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﻠﻙ‪ ،‬ﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﻠﻙ‪ ،‬ﺍﻜﺘﺴﺎﺏ ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺠـﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺴـﺘﺒﻘﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﺎﺌﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺩﺍﻤﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ‪ ....‬ﺍﻟﺦ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﻷﺭﻀـﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘﺠـﺫﺏ ﻭﺘـﺴﺘﺒﻘﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺘﺭﻀﻲ ﺘﻭﻗﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺘﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟـﺸﺎﻤل‪،‬‬ ‫ﻟﺨﻠﻕ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﻨﻤﻭ ﻁﻭﻴل ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻓﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻤﺜل ﺤﻠﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺼل ﺒﻴﻥ ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﻗﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻤـﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻗـﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻀﺢ )‪ ( Kaplan&Norton,1996:75-85‬ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺴﻤﻰ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ )‪ ( Cause&Effects‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻤﻭﻀﺤﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺸﻜل )‪: (15‬‬

‫)‪(+‬‬
‫اﻟﻌﺎﺋﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ رأس اﻟﻤﺎل اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﺪم‬
‫اﻟﺬﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺪﻳﻨﺔ‬ ‫)‪(+) (+‬‬ ‫اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻮر اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺼﺎرﻳﻒ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ‬

‫)‪(-‬‬
‫رﺿﺎ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﻠﻚ‬ ‫)‪(+‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﻟﺰﺑﺎﺋﻦ‬
‫) ‪(+‬‬

‫)‪(+‬‬ ‫اﻻﻧﺘﺎج اﻟﻤﻌﺎد‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎت واﻻﻧﺸﻄﺔ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﻴﺔ‬

‫)‪(-‬‬

‫)‪(+‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺎت اﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠﻴﻦ‬ ‫اﻗﺘﺮاﺣﺎت اﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠﻴﻦ ‪66‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﻟﻨﻤﻮ واﻟﺘﻌﻠﻢ‬
67
‫ﺇﺫ ﻴﻭﻀﺢ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ (15‬ﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﺘﺘﻔﺎﻋل ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺒﻴﻨﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺼﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﺘﻀﺢ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺤﺭﻜﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﻔل ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺍﻻﻋﻠـﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻤﻌﻨﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻜﻠﻤﺎ ﺯﺍﺩﺕ ﺍﺩﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺴﻠﻊ ﻭﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﻟﻠﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺭﻀـﺎﻫﻡ‬
‫ﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﻀﺎ ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺴﻭﻑ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﺫﻤﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﻨـﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻨـﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﻴﻭﻥ ﺼـﻌﺒﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺼﻴل‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻨﺎﺒﻊ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﺍﻻﺨﻼﻗﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺒﻲ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﺍﻟﺫﻤﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﻨـﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺜﻤﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻴﺘﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻌـﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻤﻌﻨﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻴﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺤﺎﺘﻬﻡ ﺒﺎﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻴﻘﻠـل ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺩ ﻭﻴﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺨﻔـﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌـﺩ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤـﺎل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻌﻤل‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺍﻵﺘﻴـﺔ‪Kaplan ) :‬‬
‫‪( &Norton , 1996: 85‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻭﺘﻔﺴﻴﺭ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﻭﺼﻴل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ :‬ﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﻭﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ :‬ﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻁﻭﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫـ‪ :‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻭﺘﺸﺨﻴﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﺭﺒﻁ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺠﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻬﻴﻥ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﻫﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﻴﺘﻔﻕ ﻤﻌﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻫﻭ ﺘﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﺸﺎﻤل ﻟﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﺘﻤﺎﺴﻜﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ )‪ .( Drury,2000:493‬ﻭﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻤﺘﺨﺫﻭﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﺫ ﺘﻤﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻤـﻥ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺎﺕ ﺘﻌﺘﻤـﺩﻫﺎ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ ﺍﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﻋـﺩﺓ ﻤـﻥ ﺒﻴﻨﻬـﺎ‪:‬‬
‫)‪(www.successprofiles.com‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ :‬ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻭﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ :‬ﻨﻘل ﻭﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻭﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﻭﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ :‬ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻐﺫﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴـﺔ ﻭﻏﻴـــــﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴـــــﺔ ﻷﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭﻫﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﺘﺴﻌﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﻟــ )‪ (BS‬ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﺤﺩﺩﻫﺎ ﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﺍﺨﺭﻭﻥ ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺘﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻏﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﻔﺠﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻋﻤـﺎل ﻭﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺘﻬـﺎ ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻤﻴـﺔ ﺒﻤـــﺎ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻬـــﺎ ﺍﺘﺨـــﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘـﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺫﻟـﻙ ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺭﺒـﻁ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟــــــﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻼﻤﺎﻟـــﻲ ﺒﺭﺅﻴـــﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤـــل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.( Towle , 2000: 12-15 ) .‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻲ ) ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ( ﻓﻬﻭ ﺤﺠﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺱ ﻟﻜـل ﻋﻤـل ﻷﻨﻬـﺎ ﺘـﻭﺤﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻭﺠﻬﻴــﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻭﺠﺩﻭﺍ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻲ ﻭﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻁﻭﻴل ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺠﻭﺍﻨـﺏ ﺍﺨـﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻤﺜـــل ﺘﻁـــﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‪McCann,2000:1-) ..‬‬

‫‪68‬‬
 ‫‪(3‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻜل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﻴﺔ ﻟﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻬـﺩﻑ‬ ‫ﺝ‪ :‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﻌﻁﻲ ﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯﹰﺍ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﻼﻗـــﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒــــﻭﻥ ﻭﺇﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻬﻲ ﺘﻜﻤل ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﻓﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻻﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻫـﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻹﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﻴﺤﺙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺱ ﻭﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤــــﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﺠـــﺎﺡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ‪.( Malhotra , 2003: 7 ) .‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺒﻁﺭﻴﻘﺘﻴﻥ‪( Walsh , 2000: 5-7 ) :‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻰ‪ :‬ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤﻠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻜﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻴـﺔ‪ :‬ﺘـﺴﺘﻌﻤﻠﻬﺎ ﻜﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻜﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤﻠﻬﺎ ﻜﻨﻅـﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ‪ Key Performanc Indictors‬ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻠﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﺸﺘﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﺸﺘﻘﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ‬
‫ﻴﻭﻓﺭ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺸﺎﻤل‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺴﺘﺭﺘﺒﻁ ﻟﺘﻭﻀﺢ ﻜﻴﻑ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴـﺔ ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﻭﺍﺴﻌﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻜﻤﺎ ﻤﻭﻀﺤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ .(16‬ﺇﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﻟـﻥ ﺘـﺴﻌﻰ ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻔﺭﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺴﻭﻑ ﺘﺒﺤﺙ ﻋﻥ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺯﺩﺍﺩ ﻋﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻨﺔ ﻀﻤﻥ ﻤﺤﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻘﻴﺩ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺘﺠﻨﺏ‬
‫ﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻅﻬﺎﺭ ﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﻭﺍﺴﻌﺔ‪.‬‬‫ﺍﻅﻬﺎﺭ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﻤﺨﺘﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﺩ ﹰ‬

‫ﺍﳌﺎﱄ‬

‫ﺍﻟﺰﺑﻮﻥ‬

‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ‬

‫ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻢ ﻭﺍﻻﺑﺪﺍﻉ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪(16‬‬
‫رواﺑﻂ واﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻨﻈﻮرات اﻷداء‬
‫‪Source: Walsh,Paul,The Balanced Scorecard:The Australion‬‬
‫)‪Experience,2000:6, (www.cpaonlion.com‬‬

‫‪69‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻜﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪.‬ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟـﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺍﻟـﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺼﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻭﺍﻀﺢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻭﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅـﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻬـﺩﻑ‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﻟﻸﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼﻟﻬﺎ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺘﻨﺎﻓـﺴﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟـﺸﻜل )‪(17‬‬
‫ﻴﻌﻁﻲ ﻤﺜﺎل ﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻓﺭﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺭﻏـﺏ ﺒﻨﻘﻠﻬـﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻌـﺯﺯ ﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯﻫـﺎ ﻤـــــﻥ ﺨـﻼل‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـــــــــــــــــﺔ‪ .‬ﻟﻘــــــــــــﺩ ﺍﻜـــــــــــــــﺩ‬
‫)‪ ( Drury ,2000:493‬ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺘﻌﺩ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻜﻭﻨﻪ ﻴﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺭﺅﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻜل ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ) ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﺒـﺩﺍﻉ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ( ﻭﺒﻌﺩﻫﺎ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻟﻜل ﻫﺩﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪ ،‬ﻤـﻊ ﺘﺄﻜﻴـﺩ ﻀـﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠـــــﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤــــﺔ ‪ ، Critical Success Factors‬ﻭﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻴﺘﻐﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻭﻗﺕ ﻷﺨﺭ ﻭﺤﺴﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﺒﻌﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫اﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬

‫رﺿﺎ اﻟﺰﺑﻮن‬ ‫ﻗﻴﻤﺔ اﻟﺰﺑﻮن‬ ‫اﻟﺰﺑﻮن‬

‫ﺳﻠﺴﺔ اﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎت ﺟﺪﻳﺪة‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎت ﺣﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬

‫رﺿﺎ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﺪم‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ اﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت‬ ‫اﻻﺑﺪاع واﻟﺘﻌﻠﻢ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪(17‬‬
‫ﻣﺨﻄﻂ اﻟﺮواﺑﻂ اﻻﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫‪Source:Walsh,Paul,TheBalanced Scorecard:The Australian‬‬
‫)‪Experience,2000:7, (www.cpaonline.com‬‬

‫ﻭﺍﻜﺩ ) ‪ ( www.2GC.co.uk) ،( Gobbold&Lawrie,2000:3-10‬ﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺍﺴـﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻴﻥ‬

‫ﺍﺨﺭﻴﻥ ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻫﻤﺎ ﻷﻏﺭﺍﺽ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﻨﺎ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻁﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤـﻊ‬
‫ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻓﻀل ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ‪ .‬ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﻤﺭﻜﺯﺓ ﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻭﺠﺯﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅـﻭﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﻬﻡ ﻷﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﺍﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤـﺴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺠﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺼﻤﻡ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺘﻤﻴل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﻌﻴـﺔ‬
‫) ‪ (BenchMarking‬ﺒﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪.‬‬

‫‪70‬‬
 ‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﺘﻨﻔﺫ ﺍﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﻤﺘﺯﺍﻤﻨﺔ ﻋﻨﺩ‬
‫ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺨﻁﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺘﺤﻭل ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻌﻘﺏ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻭ ﻟﻡ ﻴـﺘﻡ‬
‫ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺒﻪ ﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﻴﻭﻓﺭﻫـﺎ ﻫـﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﻟﺩﻋﻡ ﺼﻨﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﻜل ﻤﺎ ﻗﺩ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒـﹰﺎ ﻟـﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺒﻨﺠﺎﺡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻴﻌﺯﺯ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻭﻀـﻊ ﺍﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻼﺌﻤﺔ ﺘﺴﻤﺢ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﻘﺎﺒل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻨﻬـﺎ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺘﻭﻀﺢ ﻭﺘﻨﻘل ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻭﺴﻊ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻴﻭﻀﺤﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﺤﺜـــﻭﻥ ﺍﺨــــــــﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻤﺜــــﺎل ‪: Stewart , Shulver & Antarker‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻨﻘل ﻭﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻋﺒﺭ ﺤﺩﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﻫﻴﻜل ﻋﻤـل ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﻴﻬﺘـــــﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻜﺜـــﺭﺒﻨﻘـــــــل ﻭﺘﻭﻀـــﻴﺢ ﺍﻻﺴـــﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟـــﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﻤـــﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘـــﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫)‪.( Shulver&Antarker,2001:4‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴﺔ‪ :‬ﺇﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻤﻴﻴﺯﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻜﻤﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺤﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ )‪.( Stewart,1997:11‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﻜﺘﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﺘﻜﺸﻑ ﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﻤﺘﻨﻭﻋﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﻭﺴﺔ ﻭﻤـﻥ ﺒﻴﻨﻬـﺎ ﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺇﺫ ﻗﺩﻤﺕ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺘﺒﺘﻌﺩ ﻋﻨﻪ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ ﻨﺤﻭ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﹰﺎ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ‬
‫ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺤﻬﺎ‪" :‬ﺍﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺘﺒﺩﻉ ﺴﺘﺤﺴﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴـﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺘﺤﺴﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﺴﺘﻘﻨﻊ ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻬﺎ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﻓﻀل‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﻨﻌﻬﻡ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﻓـﻀل ﺴﺘﺤـﺼل ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻴﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻓﻀل"‪ .‬ﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺼﻭل ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻁﺎﻟﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻜل ﻤﻨﻅـﻭﺭ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﺸﺘﻘﺎﻗﻬـــﺎ ﻭﺭﺼﻔﻬﺎ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟـﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‪Kaplan & Norton , 2000: ) .‬‬
‫‪( 167-168‬‬
‫ﻤﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻴﺘﻀﺢ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﻤﻥ ﺍﺠﻠـﻪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻤـﺘﻼﻙ‬
‫ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻜﺎﻓﻴﺎﹰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺴﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻨﺎﻓﻌﺔ ﻓﻘﻁ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻡ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴـﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺴﺘﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻭﻙ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﻨﻘل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﺫ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﺠـﻪ ﻁﺎﻗـﺎﺕ ﻭﻗﺎﺒﻠﻴـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﻜﺎﻓﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -4‬ﺩﻟﻴل ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﻴﺼﻑ ‪ Michael Porter‬ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘﺨﺘﺎﺭﻫـﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﻭﺘﺄﺴﻴﺴﹰﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻫـــﻲ " ﺍﺨﺘﻴـﺎﺭ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴـﺫ ﻤﺌـﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻨـﺸﻁــــﺔ "‬
‫)‪ ( Phadnis , 2002:2‬ﻓﻬﻲ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﻷﺸﺨﺎﺹ ﻗﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻔﻬﻤﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﻭﻴﻨﻔﺫﻫﺎ ﻜل ﺸﺨﺹ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻨﻅﻡ ﺤﻭل ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻌﻅﻡ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﺼﻤﻡ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻨﻬﻡ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻌـﺯﺯﻭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺘﻴﻜﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ ﻫﻭ ﺠﺯﺀ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻜﺎﻓﻴﹰﺎ ﻓﻼ ﻨـﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺒﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﺼﻤﻡ ﻟﻠﻭﺴﺎﺌل‪ .‬ﻓﺠﺎﺀﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻜﺄﺩﺍﺓ ﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻷﻴﺠـﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﺒﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺘﻁﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ‪. ،‬ﻓﻬـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻗﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻁﻭﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴـﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴـﺯ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬

‫‪71‬‬
 ‫ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﻭﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻤﺴﺘﻬﺩﻓﺔ ﺘﺩﻓﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻀﺒﻁ ﻭﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻴﻭﻤﹰﺎ ﺒﻴﻭﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺘﺒﺩﺃ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺒﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﻭﻴل ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺤﺩﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﺍﻁـﺎﺭﹰﺍ ﻟﺘﺭﺠﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﺘﻤﺎﺴﻜﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻭﺍﺴﺒﻘﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﻁﺎﺭ ﻴﺸﺠﻊ ﺍﺴـﺘﻌﻤﺎل‬
‫ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﺘﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﺤﺩﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺼل ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻴﺎﺩﻴﻥ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻤﺜل ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺒﻌﺒﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﺘﺴﻌﻰ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻫـﺫﺍ ﻤـﺎ‬
‫ﻴﺴﻤﺢ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻴﻴﻥ ﺒﻔﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺘﺠﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩ ﺍﻴﺼﺎل ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟﺭﺴﻡ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻤل ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻭﻴل‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺘﻴﻜﻲ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺤل ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻰ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺘﺴﺘﺨﺩﻡ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻜﻭﺴـﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ ﻭﻨﻘـل‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻌﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﺼﺒﺢ ﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺘﻘﻴﻴﻤﻪ ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﺘﺯﺩﺍﺩ ﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺎﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻋﻨﺩﺌﺫ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻜﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﺒﻭﺀ ﺒﺎﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ ﻭﻟﺘﻌﻘﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻤـﺎ ﺒـﻴﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩ ﻨﺯﻭل ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺩﻨﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺤـﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﻗﻌـﺎﺕ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺠﻤﻴـﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﺼﺎﻍ ﺨﻁﺔ ﻋﻤل ﻭﺘﺭﺴل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﻗﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺠـﺭﻯ ﻤﻘـﺎﺒﻼﺕ‬
‫ﺸﺨﺼﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺸﺨﻴﺼﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻴﺠﺭﻱ ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﻻﺤﺘﻴﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟـﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠـﻭﺏ‬
‫ﻟﺘﺴﻬﻴل ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﻭﺍﺴﻁﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻻﺘﺼﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻋﺎﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺘﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻻﻟﻜﺘﺭﻭﻨﻴـﺔ ﺒـﺸﻜل‬
‫ﺨﺎﺹ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻨﻘل ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺒﻤﺜﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﺒﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﺍﺫﺍ ﺍﺭﻴـﺩ‬
‫ﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﻔﻬﻡ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻴﺴﺘﻁﻴﻌﻭﻥ ﺒـﺩﻭﺭﻫﻡ‬
‫ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻓﺭﻋﻴﺔ ﻷﺴﻨﺎﺩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪ .‬ﻭﻜﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﻨﺸﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﺒﺘﻐﻴـﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﻟﻤـﺩﺓ ﺘﺘـﺭﺍﻭﺡ ﻤـﺎﺒﻴﻥ ) ‪( 3-5‬‬
‫ﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺴﺘﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻏﻭﺒﺔ ﻜﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻭﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻤﻜﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻜﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ )‪ ( Goh , 2000: 3‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺴﺘﺅﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻤﻜـﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻥ‪-:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺭﻏﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺒﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﻭﻷﻤﺩ ﻁﻭﻴل‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪-‬ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻴﺭ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺨﻴﺭﺓ ﻫـﻲ ﺍﻋـﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﻜﺄﻁـﺎﺭ ﻟﻠـﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ‪(Strategic‬‬
‫)‪ ،Learning‬ﻭﺘﻌ ‪‬ﺩ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﺒﺩﺍﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﺫ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ‪،‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻤﻜﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻓﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻭﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺘﻬﻡ ﻭﺍﺠـﺭﺍﺀ‬ ‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ ﺇﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﻋﻤل ﻟﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻗـﺩﻡ ﻤﺭﻜـﺯ ﺍﻟـﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻻﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴـﻪ‬
‫‪ Academic Health Centers‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻻﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺩﺓ ﻭﻜﻨﺩﺍ‪.( Rimar&et al.,2000:4-5) :‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ‪ Determine Your Mission‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺘﺘﻀﻤﻥ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺠﻌﻠﻬﺎ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ )‪(Make it specific‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﻓﻘﻁ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻓﻴﺠـﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﻀـﺢ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺅﺍل ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺘﻜﺭﺭ ﻤﺎﺫﺍ ﻨﻌﻨﻲ ﺒﻬﺎ ؟ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺘﻨﻘﺢ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪72‬‬
 ‫‪ -2‬ﺠﻌﻠﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺔ ) ‪( Make it realistic‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻤﻀﺔ ﺴﻭﻑ ﺘﺜﺒﺕ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺅﺜﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺠﻌﻠﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻊ ﺒﺎﻟﻔﻌل ) ‪( Make it happen‬‬
‫ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺴﺄل ﻜل ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ :‬ﻜﻴﻑ ﺴﺘﻨﺠﺯ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ؟ ﻭﺍﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻁﻭﺭﺕ ﺒـﺸﻜل ﺼـﺤﻴﺢ ﻓـﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻀﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ‪Determine Your objectives‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻻﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻔﺭﻀﻬﺎ ﻜل ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺤـﺩﺩ ﻭﻭﺍﻗﻌـﻲ ﻗـﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻼ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺜ ﹰ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﻜﻴﻑ ﻴﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ؟‬
‫‪ -2‬ﻤﺎﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻨﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﻓﻴﻪ ؟‬
‫‪ -3‬ﻜﻴﻑ ﻴﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻨﺎ ﺍﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ؟‬
‫‪ -4‬ﻫل ﻴﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﺇﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺎﻴﺠﺎﺩﻫﺎ ؟‬
‫ﺠـ‪ -‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ‪Determine Your Measures‬‬
‫ﺘﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﻤﺎﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻤﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻟﻜل ﻫﺩﻑ‪Design a measure for each objective .‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻋﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺘﺎﻤﺔ ﻭﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻁﻼﻕ‬
‫‪ Do not seek perfect or obsolutely comprehensive measures‬ﻤـﻊ ﺍﻟﺘـﺫﻜﻴﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﺒـﺩﺀ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﻓﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ– ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ‪Compare Your Strategy to Mission‬‬
‫ﻭﻴﺘﻡ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﻭﻀﻊ ﻤﺨﻁﻁ ﻟﻸﻫﺩﺍﻑ ) ‪(Diagram your objective‬‬
‫ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ ﺍﻻﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺘﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻫل ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻤﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁﺔ ؟‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻫل ﺘﺩﻋﻡ ﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺨﺭ ؟‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﻫل ﺘﺒﻨﻰ ﻟﺘﻨﺠﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ؟‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﻫل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺤﻘﹰﺎ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺘﻨﺎ ﺍﻭ ﻤﻬﻤﺘﻨﺎ ؟‬
‫‪ -5‬ﺍﻟﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻫﻲ ﻓﻜﺭﺓ ﻤﺘﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻷﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺭﻜﺯ ﺍﻫﺘﻤـﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻘﻴﻡ ﺠﺴﺭﹰﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻭﻅﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﻨﺎﻟﺕ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﻘـﺎﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﺩﻨﺎﻩ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻷﻫﻡ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺍﺕ‪:‬‬
‫ﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻡ ﺘﻭﻜﻴﺩﻩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‪ ،‬ﻫﻲ ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺤـﺩﺩ‬

‫‪73‬‬
‫ﻋﻴﻭﺏ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﻁ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻀﻤﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﺜﻼﺜﺔ‬
‫ﺍﺼﻨﺎﻑ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻀﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﺘﺭﺠﻡ ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺤـﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤـل ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻤﺘﻨﻭﻋﺔ ) ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻨﻤﻭ ﻭﺍﺒﺩﺍﻉ (‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻌل ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻴﺩ ﺫﻜﺭﻩ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺯﻴﺔ ﺘﺘﻤﺘﻊ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﻴﺯﺘﺎﻥ ﺭﺌﻴـﺴﺘﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺫﻜﺭﻫﻤﺎ‪.( Akkermans & Vanorschot ,2002:2-4 ) :‬ﻭﻫﻤﺎ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻓﺤﺼﻬﺎ ﺍﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ‪ :‬ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﺒﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻷﻥ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻓﺤﺼﻬﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻭﻓـﻕ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺼﻑ )‪ (3-5‬ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺼﻤﻡ ﻟﻜل ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻬﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺠﺒــــﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻓﻘﻁ‪ ،‬ﻭﻀﻤﻥ ﻜل ﻤﺠﺎل ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻤـﻥ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﻅـﺭ ﻤﻌﺭﻓﻴــﺔ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻴــﺯﺓ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻀﻭﺡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴـــﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻔﻌـــــﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴـــــﺭﺓ ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗــــــﺔ‪Kaplan & Norton , ).‬‬
‫‪.( 2000:5‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺨﺩﻡ ﻜﺠﺴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺤﻘﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‪ :‬ﺍﻥ ﻜﻼ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺘﻡ ﺘﻀﻤﻴﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻼ ﻓـﻲ ﺤﻘـل ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴـﺒﺔ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻘﻭل ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﺨﺘﺒﺭﻭﺍ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﺓ ﻤﺜ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺘــﻡ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل )‪ .( Newing , 1994:52‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻓـﻲ ﺤﻘـل ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓـﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﻗﺩ ﺍﺜﺒﺘﺕ ﻤﺭﻭﻨﺘﻬﺎ )‪ .( Mooraj&Oyon,1999:17‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻜــﺭﺓ ﺘـــــﻡ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻬـــﺎ ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ) ‪Hudson&et al.,‬‬
‫‪.( 2001: 21‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺠﺢ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺨﺘﻠـﻑ ﺍﻟﺤﻘـﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻴﻭﻀﺢ ﺍﻨﻪ ﺒﺎﻻﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺘﻭﺤﻴﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻌل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﻫﻲ ﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻌل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻴـﺩ‬
‫ﺫﻜﺭﻩ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻗﺒل ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺍﻥ ﻨﻅﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﻜﻲ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ‪:‬‬
‫)‪.( Atkinson & et al. , 1997: 532-533‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻟﻔﻬﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻭﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻤل ﻟﻤﺴﺒﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺠﺢ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴـﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﻌـﺭﺽ ﻜـل‬
‫ﻤـــــﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻤﻭﺠﻬﺎﺘﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﻭﺠﻪ ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻻﻜﺜـﺭ ﺍﻫﻤﻴـﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘـﺯﻭﺩ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘــــﺩﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤــــﺔ ﻷﻨﺠـــﺎﺯ ﻭﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻷﻨﻪ ﻭﻟﻌﺩﺓ ﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﺭﻜﺯﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺘـﺎﺌﺞ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﺎﻨﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﺤـﻭل ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤـﺎﻡ ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻫﻤل ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺼﺒﺢ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﺍﻴـﻀﹰﺎ ﺍﻻﻤـﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻭﺠﺩﺕ ﻤﻌﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﻗﺩ ﻨﺠﺤﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺭﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺘﻌﺭﻀﺕ ﻟﻠﺨﺴﺎﺭﺓ )‪ .( Atkinson&et al.,1995:455‬ﻭﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﻨﻭﺍﺤﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺭﺽ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻭﺍﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭﻩ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺍﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻕ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻓﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺘﻀﺢ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﺴـﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻀﻤﻨﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻜﺫﺍ ﻴﻼﺤﻅ ﺍﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻴﺘﻤﺘﻊ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻷﺤﺘﻭﺍﺌﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻁﻭﻴﻠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﺼﺒﺢ ﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻴﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻤﺘﻨﻭﻋﺔ ﻜل ﺒﻌﺩ ﻴﻘﻴﺱ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﻤـﻥ‬

‫‪74‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻬﻡ‪ ....‬ﺍﻭ ﺃﻱ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﺘﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﺤﺘﻴﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﻥ ﻭﺤﻤﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﺍﻟـﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﻤﺜـل ﺒﻘﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﻌﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺨﻔﻀﺔ ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻭﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﺨﻴﺭﹰﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺨﺩﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﺘﺘﻤﺘﻊ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻤﻴﺯﻫﺎ ﻋﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺃﻨﻬﺎ‪( Powell&McGure ,2000:1-3) :‬‬
‫• ﺘﺭﺘﺒﻁ ﻤﺒﺩﺌﻴﹰﺎ ﺒﺨﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺒﺭﺴﺎﻟﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫• ﺘﺭﻜﺯﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ‪.‬‬
‫• ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻬﺎ ﻗﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺭﺍﺠﻊ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﻘﺒﻭل ﺸﻬﺭﻴﹰﺎ ﺍﻭ ﻓﺼﻠﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬‬
‫• ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻬﺎ ﺘﺸﺘﻕ ﻋﻥ ﺨﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺨﻁـﻭﺍﺕ ﻤﺤـﺩﺩﺓ ﻟﻜﻴﻔﻴـﺔ ﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﻜﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻻﻋﻠﻰ – ﺍﻻﺩﻨـــﻰ ﺍﻭ ﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺘﻌﺎﻗﺒﻴـﺔ ﺒﻁﺭﻴـﻕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺤــــــﺎﻭل ﺼــــﺏ ﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴــــﻡ ﺍﻻﻫـــــــﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤــــــﺔ ﻓــــــــــﻲ ﻤﻘــﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻗﺎﺒﻠـــــﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴــــــﺎﺱ ) ‪Shymark‬‬
‫‪.( Corporation ,2001:29‬‬
‫ﺠـ‪ -‬ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺭﺘﺒﻁ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺹ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﻲ ‪ ، Environment Scanning‬ﻭﻴﺘﻡ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺨﻼل ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺭﺍﻤﻴﺘﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﺒﻤﺠﺎﻻﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻜل ﻤﺠﺎل ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺘﺤﻠل ﺍﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻓﺭﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻤﻴﺯ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﻻ ﺘﺼﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺠﺭ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﺘﻐﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨـﺔ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﻤﻨﻅﻤـــــﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻋﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻴﻤﻜـﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻬــــــﺎ‬
‫ﻜﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻤﻘـــﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟﻠﻨﺠﺎﺡ )‪ .( Ceoreview,2002:13‬ﻜﻤــــﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﺭﺘﺒﻁ ﻤﻌﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺴﻠﺴﻠـــﺔ ﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ ﺘـﺅﺜﺭ ﻓـﻲ ﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﺘﺅﺜﺭ ﻓــــﻲ ﻤﻘـــﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ )‪.(Cobbold&Lawrie,2002:5‬‬
‫ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺍﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﻘﻘﺘﻬﺎ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻻ ﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻡ‬
‫ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﺒـ‪( Akkermans & Vanorschot , 2002: 3-4 ) :‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﺤﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺴﻁﺔ ﺠﺩﹰﺍ )‪(Undireetional causality too simplistic‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻴﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻜﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﻷﻨﻬﺎ ﻻ ﺘﻠﺒﻲ ﻓﻜـﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤـل ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﻌﺘﻘﺩ ﻜل ﻤﻥ )‪ ( Warren&Langley,1999:50‬ﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻼﻗـﺔ‬
‫ﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﺤﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪-‬ﻋـﺩﻡ ﻓﺼﻠﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﺴـﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗـﺕ ﻨﻔﺴـﻪ ‪Does not separate cause and effect‬‬
‫‪in time‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻲ ﻟﻴﺱ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻷﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻴﻅﻬﺭ‬
‫ﺘﻠﻜﺅ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻭﻀﺢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻁﺎﻟﻤﺎ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ‪.‬‬

‫‪75‬‬
 ‫ﺠـ‪ -‬ﻟﻴﺴﺕ ﻫﻨﺎﻟﻙ ﺁﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺜﺒﺕ )‪(No mechanisms for validation‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـــﺔ ﻻ ﺘﻭﻓـــﺭ ﺁﻟﻴـــﺔ ﻟﻠﺤﻔــﺎﻅ ﻋﻠـــﻰ ﻤﻼﺌﻤــــﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘـــﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻜل ﻤـــــــﻥ ) ‪ ( Hudson & et al., 2001:2‬ﺍﻥ ﻤـﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻤـﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺕ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻘﺎﺱ ﺒل ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻲ ﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴل ﻗﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻴـﺯﺓ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺘﻤﺘﻊ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻓﺤﺹ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺘﺼﺒﺢ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﹰﺍ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻻ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﻋﺩﻡ ﻜﻔﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﻁ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫)‪(Insufficient Links between strategy and operations‬‬
‫ﺍﺜﺒﺕ )‪ ( Mooraj & Oyon , 1999: 49‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﻔﺸل ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻜﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺭﻜﺯ‬
‫ﻻ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻋﻠﻰ – ﺍﻻﺴﻔل‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻔﺘﻘﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﹰ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﺘﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨل ﺒﺸﻜل ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ) ‪(Too internally focused‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺘﻌﺭﻑ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻀﻴﻘﺔ ﺠﺩﹰﺍ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻴﻨﺎﻗﺵ ﺒﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﻻﺘﻤﺜل ﺴﻠـﺴﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻭﺴﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻴﺴﻠﻁ ﺍﻟﻀﻭﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﻬﺎﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﺩﻡ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻬﺯ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻻﺨﺭ ﻴﺫﻜﺭ ﺒﺎﻨﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺭ ﻗﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺤﺩ ﺍﻻﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﻟﻠﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﻤﺜل ﻤﺎﺫﺍ ﻴﻔﻌـل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓـﺴﻭﻥ ؟‬
‫ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﻨﻘﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻲ ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﻨﺒﻊ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟـﻀﻌﻴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺘﺒﻁﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺼﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻅﻬﺭ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﻤـﺎ ﺘﻜـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺒﺸﻜل ﺍﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺤﺫﻑ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺘﻐﻴﺭ ﻭﺼﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﻭﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺨﺘﻴـﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻀﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ) ‪.( Batler & et al., 1997:5‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﻏﻡ ﻤﻥ ﻜل ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺍﺕ ﻓﺎﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﺘﺭﻯ ﻤﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﺠﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻟﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻥ ﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺎﺜﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻴـــﻪ‬
‫ﻓــــﻲ ﻤﺤﻭﺭ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﻩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ ﻭﻫﻜﺫﺍ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨـﻲ ﻟﻬـﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻴﻤﻜـــﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﻋﻨﻪ ﺒﺎﻨﻪ ﺫﻭ ﺍﻤﺩ ﻁﻭﻴـل ﻭﻟـﻴﺱ ﻟﻸﻤـﺩ ﺍﻟﻘـﺼﻴﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﺜــــﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺒــﻪ ﻀﻤـــﻥ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﹰﺎ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻤـﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻌﻴﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻥ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺤﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﻀﻤــﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﻩ ﻟﻴﻼﺌﻡ ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ‬
‫ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﻻ ﻴﻭﺠﺩ ﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻤﺎ ﻫﻨﺎﻟﻙ ﻤـﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘﻼﺌـﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻜﻴﻴﻑ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻟﻸﻨـﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟـﺼﻨﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﻴـﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﻴـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺠـ‪ -‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻲ ﻻﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻫﻤﺎل ﺍﺜﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻫـــﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻻ ﻴﻬﻤـل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻻ ﺴﻴﻤﺎ ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺩﺍﺓ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟـــﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﺄﺜــﺭ ﺒﻌﻭﺍﻤــــل‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌــﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﺘﻬﺠﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﺫﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺨﺭﻯ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺨﻼﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ﻤﺎ ﺫﻜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺍﺕ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻜﻴﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺤـﺎﻭﺭ ﻭﺍﻟـﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﺘﻬﺠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻻ ﺴﻴﻤﺎ ﻭﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺤﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻤﺎ ﻴﻼﺌﻤﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﺭﻙ ﻤﺎ ﻻﻴﺼﻠﺢ ﻟﻬﺎ ﻭﻻ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻨﺸﻁﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻤــﻥ ﺍﻜﺜــﺭ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﺍﺌــﻕ ﺍﻟﺒﻨــﺎﺀﺓ ﻓــﻲ ﺘﺭﻜﻴــﺏ ﺍﺴــﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗــﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﺜــل‬

‫‪76‬‬
‫ﺒﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺘﻬــﺎ ﺍﻻﺭﺒﻌــﺔ ﻫــﻭ ﺘﺤﻠﻴــل"ﻨﻘــﺎﻁ ﻗــﻭﺓ ﻭﻀــﻌﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤــﺔ ﻭﻓﺭﺼــﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﻬﺩﻴــﺩﺍﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫)‪ (Strengths, Weaknesses,Opportunities&Threats‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻁﻠﻕ ﻋﻠﻴـﻪ ﺘﺤﻠﻴـل "‪"SWOT‬‬
‫ﻓﻌﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻘﻪ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻭﺒﻭﻀﻭﺡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻻﺸﻜﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻲ ﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل‬
‫ﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ‪ .‬ﻫﺫﺍ ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺒﺩ ﹰ‬
‫‪ SWOT‬ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺱ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠﻲ ﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ ﻋﺭﺽ ﺘﻔﺼﻴﻠﻲ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ‪Financial Perspective‬‬
‫ﺘﺤﺘﻔﻅ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﻤـﺔ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻠﺨﻴﺹ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺒﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻟﻸﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺯﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻭﻀﺢ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻴﺴﺎﻫﻡ ﺍﻡ ﻻ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺼﺒﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ )‪( Kaplan&Norton,1996:77‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺘﻤﻴل ﻷﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺒﺢ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌـﺩ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل‪ ،‬ﻨﻤـــــﻭ ﺤﺠﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌـــــﺎﺕ ﻤـــﻥ ﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺘﻭﻟﻴـــــﺩ ﺍﻻﻴـﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤــﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤـﻀﺎﻓـﺔ )‪Horngren &et ) (Goh,2000:2 ) ( Phadnis ,2002: 4‬‬
‫‪.(al., 2000: 465‬‬
‫ﻼ ﺘﺠﺭﺒـﺔ ﺸـﺭﻜﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺒﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﺩﺭﺠﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﺘﺄﺨـﺫ ﻤـﺜ ﹰ‬
‫)‪ (ECI)( Electronic Circuits Inc.‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﻤـﻥ ﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ‪.‬ﻭﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﻭﻀﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻫـﺩﺍﻓﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﺘﺘﻤﺜـل‬
‫ﺒـ‪):‬ﺍﻟﺒﻘﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﺯﺩﻫﺎﺭ( ﻭﺘﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺒﻘﺎﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺘﺩﻓﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل‬
‫ﻨﻤﻭﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﻓﺼﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻤﺎ ﺍﻻﺯﺩﻫﺎﺭ ﻓﺘﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺯﺍﻴﺩﺓ‪.‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل‬
‫ﻤﺅﺸﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺌﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻜﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﻫل ﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅـﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ؟ ﻭﻫل ﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻡ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻗﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﻜﺎﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ‪ :‬؟ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺘﺴﺎﺅل ﻴﻁﺭﺡ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ ﻭﻓﻲ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﺠﻌل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﺘﻁﻠﻌﹰﺎ ﻟﻸﻤﺎﻡ ﺠـﺎﺀ ﺘﺤﻠﻴـل ﻗﻴﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﺤﺎﻤﻠﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ) ‪ (SVA) ( shareholders Value Analysis‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻨﺒﺄ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺩﻓﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﻓﻘﺎﺕ ﺒﺨﺼﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﻤﻌﺩل ﺨﺼﻡ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﻭﻴﺫﻫﺏ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺎﺩ ﺒﻌﻴﺩﹰﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺄﻜﻴـﺩﻫﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﺫ ﻴﺭﻭﺍ ﺍﻥ ﻤﺼﻁﻠﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﺘﻐﻴﺭﺕ ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﻻ ﺘﺤﺴﻥ ﺭﻀـﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﻭﺍﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻭﻴﺩﻋﻤﻭﻥ ﻭﺠﻬـــﺔ ﻨﻅﺭﻫﻡ ﻫــﺫﻩ ﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻫـــــﻭ‬
‫ﻨﺘﻴﺠـــــــــــــــــــــﺔ ﺍﻻﻨـــــــــــــــــــﺸﻁــــﺔ‬
‫ـﺸﻁـــﺔ‬ ‫ـﺎﻡ ﺒﺎﻻﻨـ‬‫ــﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴـ‬ ‫ـﺼﻴﻠﺔ ﻤﻨﻁﻘﻴــ‬‫ــﻭ ﺤـ‬ ‫ــﻲ ﻫــــ‬ ‫ـﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟـــ‬‫ـﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺠـ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘـ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻴــــــــــــــــﺔ ﺒــــــــــــﺸﻜل ﺠﻴـــــــــــــــﺩ‬
‫)‪( Kaplan & Norton , 1992:77-79‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﺘﺫﻜﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺯﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﺘﻨﻔﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﺭﺠﻡ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﺤﺼﺔ ﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﻭ ﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﺒل ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤﺭ ﺒﻤﺜﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻜﻴﻑ ﺍﻥ ﻭﻗﺕ ﻁﺭﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﺴﻭﻕ ﻭﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﺴﺅﺩﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻰ ﺤﺼﺔ ﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻘﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻟﺘﺤﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻡ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻫﻭ ﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺼـﻨﻊ ﺍﺭﺘﺒﺎﻁـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺜﻴﻘﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻲ ﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﻤﺭ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺭﺒﻁ ﻜل ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻨﻅـﻭﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﺒﺎﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺒﻁ ﺒﺎﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻴﻭﻀـﺢ ﺍﻥ‬

‫‪77‬‬
‫ﻏﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻭﻴل‪ ،‬ﻫﻭ ﺘﻭﻟﻴﺩ ﻋﺎﺌﺩﺍﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺘﺜﻤﺭﻴﻥ ﻭﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ‪Customer Perspecive‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻟﻠﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻡ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻋﺎﻤﺔ ﺘﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻟﺘﺤﺘل ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺘﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻬﺎ ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﻫﻲ" ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻨﻤﻭﺫﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻋﻤﺎل" ﻭﺍﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺼﺒﺢ ﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻟﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺠﺎﺀﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﺘﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﺫ ﺘﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺠﺎل ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺴـﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺤﻭل ﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺒﺤﻘﻬﻡ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎﻤـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻘﺴﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﺼﻨﺎﻑ )‪:(Kaplan&Norton,1992:73-74‬‬
‫"ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ)‪ ،( Time‬ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ) ‪ ،( Quality‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ)‪ ،(Performance&Service‬ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ )‪"(Cost‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻟﺘﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺤﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﺒﺩﺀﹰﺍ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﻭﻗﺕ ﺘﺴﻠﻡ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺏ ﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﺍﻭ ﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﺡ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺒﺸﻜل ﻓﻌﻠﻲ‪ .‬ﺍﻤﺎ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻭﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺩﺭﻜﻬﺎ ﻭﻴﻘﻴﺴﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩ ﻭﺩﻗﺔ ﺘﻨﺒﺅﺍﺕ ﻭﺘﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻭ ﻁﺭﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘـﻭﺝ‪ .‬ﻭﻤـﺎ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﻓﺎﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺇﻴﺠـﺎﺩ ﻗﻴﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺤـﺴﺎﺴﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻫﺫﺍ ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻭ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺭﺠﻭﻉ ﻟﻠﻤﺜﺎل ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻕ ﻋﻥ ﺸﺭﻜﺔ )‪ (ECI‬ﻓﺎﻥ ﻤﺩﺭﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﺍﻋﺩﻭﺍ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻋﺎﻤﺔﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﺒـ ) ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺘﺴﻭﻴﻕ ﺴﺭﻴﻊ‪ ،‬ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻭﻴﻕ‪ ،‬ﺘﺯﻭﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﻠﻜﻴﻥ ﺒﺨﻴـﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻌﻀﻭﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﻬﻡ‪ ،‬ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﺒﺩﺍﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺤﺴﺏ ﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ (‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻭﻥ ﺒﺘﺭﺠﻤـﺔ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻔﻲ ﺴﺒﻴــل ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎل ﺘـﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ )‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺌﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ( ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻤﻤﺎ ﺘﺠﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻥ ﻤﻌﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻡ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻀﻊ ﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﺤﺎﺠـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻠﺏ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻴﺸﻜﻠﻪ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻜﺒﻴﺭﺓ ﺘﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺒﻘﺎﺌﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺴﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺴﻴﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻗﺩﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺴﻠﻊ ﻭﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺒﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﻌﺎﺭ ﻤﻌﻘﻭﻟﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺍﺨـﺫ‬
‫ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﺒﺎﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﺎﺌﺹ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻭﻜﻴﺩﻩ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﻴ‪‬ﻤﺜـل‬
‫ﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯﻫﺎ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺤﻭل‪(Kaplan&Atkinson,1998:370):‬‬
‫ﺃ – ﺭﻀﻰ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺏ – ﻜﺴﺏ ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺠﺩﺩ‬
‫ﺠـ‪ :‬ﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﻤﻨﻁﻘﺔ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ‬
‫ﺩ – ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺘﺘﺒﻊ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ )‪ ( Customer rofitability‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻭﻀﺤﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪:(18‬‬

‫ﻏﺎﻳﺎت ﻣﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬

‫ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔﺍﻟﻤﺌﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺭﺘﻴﺏ ﺤﺼﺹ‬

‫ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ‬ ‫ﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ‬
‫‪78‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔﻋﻠىﺎﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻴﺸﺨﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺯﺍﺀ ﺍﻟـﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﻴﻤﻜـﻥ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺘﺘﻨﺎﻓﺱ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﺤﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺠﺯﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﺩﻓﺔ‪ .‬ﻜﻤـﺎ ﺘـﺸﺘﻤل‬
‫ﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻻﺤﺘﻔﺎﻅ ﺒـﺎﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺠﺘـﺫﺍﺏ ﺯﺒـﺎﺌﻥ ﺠـﺩﺩ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺸﺘﻤل ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺴـﺘﻘﺩﻤﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺠﺯﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﺩﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺠﺯﺀ ﺍﻟـﺴﻭﻗﻲ ﻭﺍﻟـﺫﻱ‬
‫ﻴﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺘﺒﻁﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﺘﻤﺜل ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﻻﺤﺘﻴﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻠﺒﻲ ﺘﻭﻗﻌﺎﺕ ﺤﺎﻤﻠﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ ﺒﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻋﻭﺍﺌﺩ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻤﻤﺘﺎﺯﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻴﺘﻀﺢ ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻴﻔﺭﺽ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻴﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺤﺩﺩﻭﺍ ﻤﺎﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﻓﻴﻪ‬
‫ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺘﻬﻡ ؟ ﻭﻤﻥ ﻫﻡ ﻤﺴﺘﻬﺩﻓﻲ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺨﺩﻤﺎﺘﻬﺎ ؟ ﻜﺨﻁﻭﺓ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‪.‬‬
‫‪ – 3‬ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ‪Internal Process Perspective‬‬
‫ﻴﻜﺸﻑ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺍﺨﺘﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻤﺎ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻱ ﺫﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤـﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻭﻤﺩﺨل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻼﻑ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻭﻓـﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺘﻲ‪( Goh,2000:5) ،( Kaplan & Atkinson , 1998: 374 ) :‬‬
‫ﺃ – ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨل ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻴﺸﺘﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﻭﺘﺤﺴﻴﻨﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻤﺩﺨل‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﺘﻤﺎﻤﹰﺎ ﻴﺘﺤﺘﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻟﺘﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ – ﻨﻅﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﺘﺸﺘﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤــﺎ‬
‫ﻤﺩﺨل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻴﺸﺘﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﻴﺩﺨﻠﻬﺎ ﻓـــﻲ ﻤﻨﻅــﻭﺭ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤـــل ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻨﺘﻅﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼﻟﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﻴﺩ ﺘﺴﺘﺩﻋﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺨـﺩﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﺘﻤﺎﻤﺎﹰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻠﺒﻲ ﺤﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﻥ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﺸﺎﺭ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ) ‪ ( Phadnis,2002:3‬ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺘﻤﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ‪:‬‬

‫‪79‬‬
 ‫ﺃ‪ :‬ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺘﺠﺫﺏ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﻭﺘﺒﻘﻴﻬﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪:‬ﺍﺭﻀﺎﺀ ﺘﻭﻗﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﻴﻥ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﺌﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﻱ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺘﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﺍﻻﻜﺒﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﻀﻤﻴﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺘﻌﻁﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﻤﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺒﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻤـﺩ‬
‫ﻟﺫﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺤﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺴﻭﻕ ﻤﺘﻤﻴﺯﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻌﺯﺯ ﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﺨﺼﻴﺹ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻟﻜل‬
‫ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺭﺠﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺸﺭﻜﺔ )‪ (ECI‬ﻓﻠﻘﺩ ﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭﻭﻥ ﻀﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻤﻭﻗﻌﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺭﺭﻭﺍ ﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﻭﺘﺼﻨﻴﻌﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻨﻪ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺎﻤﺕ ﺍﻟﺸﺭﻜﺔ ﺒﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻜل ﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﺩﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻊ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﺓ ﻭﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ ﻫـﺩﻑ‬
‫ﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ‪ .‬ﺍﻤﺎ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻓﻘـﺩ ﺘـﻡ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ – 4‬ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ‪Innovation & Learning Perspective‬‬
‫ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺘﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺸﻜﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻟﺨﻠﻕ ﻨﻤﻭ ﻭﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺒﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‬
‫ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺩﺭﻙ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻻ ﺘﻠﺒﻲ ﻁﻤﻭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟـﺴﻭﻕ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻫـﻲ ﺍﻋﺘﻤـﺩﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﺒﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﻁ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻴﺄﺘﻴﺎﻥ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﺜﻼﺜﺔ ﻫﻲ‪( Goh,2000:2) :‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻻﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻤﺎ ﺘﺠﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺯﺒﺎﺌﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻋﺎﺩ ﹰﺓ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻜﺸﻑ ﻋﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻓﺠﻭﺍﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺒﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺤﺎﻟﻴﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻨﺎﺤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺎﻫﻭ ﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴــــﻕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺘﻤﻴـﺯ ﻤـــــﻥ ﻨﺎﺤﻴـﺔ ﺍﺨـﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻭﻤـــــﻥ‬
‫ــﺎ‬‫ـﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﻤﻬـــ‬ ‫ـﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـ‬ ‫ـﻴﺘﺤﺘﻡ ﻋﻠـ‬
‫ــﻭﺍﺕ ﺴـ‬ ‫ــﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﺠـــ‬ ‫ــﻕ ﻫـــ‬ ‫ــل ﻏﻠـــــ‬ ‫ﺍﺠـــ‬
‫ـﺸﺠﻴــﻊ‬ ‫ــﺭﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘـ‬ ‫ــﺩ ﻤﻬــﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﻓــــــ‬ ‫ــﻲ ﺘﺠﺩﻴـــ‬ ‫ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤــــﺎﺭ ﻓـــــــ‬
‫ﻨﻅــــﻡ ﻭﺘﻘﺎﻨـــﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻓــــــﻲ ﺩﺭﺍﺴــــــــﺔ ﻟﻤﺭﻜـــــﺯ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴــــــــــــﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـــــــــــــﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻤﺭﻴﻜــــــــــــﻲ‬
‫)‪ ( The Center for Information-Development Management‬ﺤﻭل ﺍﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻭﻀﺢ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﺒﺩﺍﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻡ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻜﻴﻑ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﺘﻬﻴﺌـﺔ ﺍﻟﻤـﻭﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﺴﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓﺭﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒل ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﺍ ﻴﺘﺤﺘﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺩﻋﻡ ﻭﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﻓﺭﺹ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺩﻱ ﻟﻸﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻟـ‪( Reprint,2001:3 ) :‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻴﺼﺒﺤﻭﺍ ﺨﺒﺭﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻴﺩﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺒﻨﺎﺀﺓ ﻭﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻗﺎﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل‪.‬‬
‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﻴﺼﺒﺤﻭﺍ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻤﺜل ﻫﻨﺩﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺭﻨﻴﺕ‪.‬‬

‫‪80‬‬
‫ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﺴﺘﻔﺘﺢ ﺍﺒﻭﺍﺒﹰﺎ ﻟﻔﺭﺹ ﺍﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﻸﺒﺩﺍﻉ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺼﺒﺢ ﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ‬
‫ﻴﺼﺒﺤﻭﺍ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺘﻬﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻁﻭﺭﻭﺍ ﺨﺒﺭﺍﺘﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻭﺒﺎﻓﻀل ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘـﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻜﻤـﺎ ﻭﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﻓﺭﺹ ﺍﺒﺩﺍﻋﻴﺔ ﻴﺤﻔﺯ ﺍﻻﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻘﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺘﻬﻡ ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﺘﺭﻜﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺭﺠﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺸﺭﻜﺔ )‪ (ECI‬ﺍﻻﻤﺭﻴﻜﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﻘﺩ ﺤﺩﺩ ﻤﺩﺭﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﹰﺎ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﹰﺎ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪( Kaplan & Norton , 1992: 76) :‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭل ) ‪(14‬‬
‫ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺸﺭﻜﺔ ‪ ECI‬ﺍﻻﻤﺭﻴﻜﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﻭﻗﺕ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻴل ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬ ‫ﺃ – ﻗﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺎ‬
‫ﺯﻤﻥ ﻨﻀﻭﺝ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺏ – ﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺌﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺝ – ﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﺩ – ﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻭﻴﻕ‬
‫‪Source: (Kaplan,R.,&Norton,D.The"Balanced Scorecard Measures that Drive‬‬
‫) ‪Performance",Harvard Business Review,(January- February),1992,p:76‬‬
‫ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻻﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻌﺩ‪‬ﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻲ‪ .‬ﺍﻻ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﺒﻘﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻤـﺴﺘﻤﺭﹰﺍ ﻴﺘﺤـﺘﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻬـﺎ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺘﺴﺘﻭﻋﺏ ﺃﻱ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﺴﺔ ﺘﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻋﻤل ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ ﻷﻋﻤﺎﻟﻬـﺎ ﻭﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺘﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻊ ﻗﺎﺒﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻤﻭﺴﻌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻤﻜـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻠﻐل ﺍﻜﺜﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﻭﺍﻕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻭﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﺌﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺤﺎﻤﻠﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﻬﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺫﹰﺍ ﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻴﺭﺘﺒﻁ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ ﻤﻊ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻜﺫﺍ ﻴﻼﺤﻅ ﺍﻥ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﺘﻤﺜﻠﺕ ﺒـ )ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟـﺫﻱ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﻗﻀﺎﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺩﻱ‪ ...‬ﺍﻟﺦ (‪) ،‬ﻭﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺸﺨﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﻭﺍﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﺩﻓﺔ ﻭﻭﺤﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻕ ﺒﺎﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻀﺎ ﻭﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻬﻠﻙ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺤﺼﻭل ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺯﺒـﺎﺌﻥ‬
‫ﺠﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺴﺘﺒﻘﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺤﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﻗﻴﺔ‪ ...‬ﺍﻟﺦ(‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ) ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﻟﺭﻀﺎ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﺫﺏ ﻭﺘﺴﺘﺒﻘﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺘﺭﻀﻲ ﺘﻭﻗﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﻴﻥ(‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺨﻴﺭﹰﺍ )ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺘﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻟﺨﻠﻕ ﻨﻤﻭ ﻭﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺒﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻟﻠﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ) ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻫـﻲ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋـﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺭﻜﺯﺓ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﻘﺔ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ (‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺎﻻﺒﺘﻌﺎﺩ ﻋﻥ ﻓﻜﺭﺓ ﺍﻥ ﻜـل‬
‫ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺤﻘل ﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻤﻠﻙ ﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﻤﻭﺠـﺏ ﻫـﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﻴـﺘﻡ ﺘﺭﺠﻤـﺔ ﺍﻻﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ) ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ – ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ – ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴـﺔ – ﺍﻟـﺘﻌﻠﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ ( ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺘﺼﻤﻡ ﻟﺘﺭﺼﻑ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻟـﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺒﺎﻜﻤﻠﻬـﺎ ﻭﺘﺘﻤﺜـل‬
‫ﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻜل ﻤﺠﺎل‪ .‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﺼﻭﺭ ﻫﻴﻜل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ (19‬ﺍﻻﺘﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ اﻷداء‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫هﻞ ﺗﻢ ﺗﻄﻮﻳﺮ اﻷداء اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬ ‫ﻣﺎهﻲ اﻻهﺪاف اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ؟‬

‫‪81‬‬
‫اﻟﺰﺑﻮن‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺅﻴﺔ‬
‫هﻞ ﻳﻌﻠﻢ اﻟﺰﺑﻮن ﺑﺎن اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﺔ ﺗﻘﺪم ﻟﻪ‬
‫ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ) ‪ (19‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺱ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻴـﺘﻡ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺨﻼل ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﺘﻤﺎﺴﻜﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴـﻤﺔ ﻭﻴﻠﻘـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﻭﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺭﺒﻁ ﻤﺎ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺒﺩﺍﻉ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﺎ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺴﻲ ﺒﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺒﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘـﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﻟﺘﺤـﺴﻴﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪:(20‬‬

‫ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻻهﺪاف‬

‫ﺗﺤﺴﻴﻦ اﻷداء‬ ‫اﻟﻘﻴﺎس ﺑﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎد‬

‫اﻟﺒﻄﺎﻗﺔ‬

‫اﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻔﻬﻢ‬

‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ )‪(20‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔﺗﺤﺴﻴﻦ اﻷداء وﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻻهﺪاف‬
‫اﻟﻤﺼﺪر‪ :‬اﻋﺪاد اﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﺔ‬
‫ﻴﻭﻀﺢ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل )‪ (20‬ﺍﻨﻪ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺴﺘـﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻌـﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻔﻬﻡ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﺘﻔﻬﻡ ﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﺒﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﺘﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺍﻥ ﺘﺤﺴﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻨﺩﺌﺫ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ‬

‫‪82‬‬
 ‫ﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﻨﻘل ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻜل ﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺴﻬﺎ ﺍﺫ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬
‫ﻭﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﻘﺎﺒل ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻫﺫﺍ ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺘﺤﺘﻭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻜل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺘﺭﺒﻁ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﻭﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -4‬ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻬﻡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -5‬ﺘﻅﻬﺭ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﻸﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻨﻌﻜﺎﺴﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺒﺸﻜل‬
‫ﻤﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁ‪.‬‬

‫‪83‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ‬

‫ﺃﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺭﻓﻊ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﻪ ﺒﺎﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﻪ‬

‫‪235‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺱ‬

‫ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﻋﺭﻀﹰﺎ ﻷﻫﻡ ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﺼﻠﺕ ﺍﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﺠـﺎﻨﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺭﻱ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻲ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﻋﺭﻀﹰﺎ ﻷﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺯﺯ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻭﺘﻔﻌﻴل ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘـﺭﺡ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺴﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﺩﻤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل‬
‫ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ‬

‫ﻴﻬﺩﻑ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻋﺭﺽ ﺨﻼﺼﺔ ﻷﻫﻡ ﻤﺎ ﺠﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟـﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﻤﺎ ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻋﺎﻡ ﻭﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤـﻪ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺨﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻠـﻙ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ‬
‫ﺃﺴﻔﺭﺕ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻗﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺃﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ‬

‫ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺏ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺹ ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺠﺭﺕ ﻤﺭﺍﺠﻌﺘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺼل ﺍﻷﻭل‪ ،‬ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺃﻫﻡ ﻤﻌﺎﻟﻡ ﺍﻻﻏﻨﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎل ﻭﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺴﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﻬﺎ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺘﺘﺎﺒﻊ ﻭﺒﻤـﺎ ﻴﻨـﺴﺠﻡ ﻤـﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﺴل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻁﻘﻲ ﻟﺨﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻓﻲ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻱ ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‬

‫ﺍﻥ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺨﻼﺼﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﻻﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺴﻌﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﻻﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﻗﺩ ﻗﺩﻤﺕ ﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎل‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻡ ﺇﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺍﺴـﺘﻨﺒﻁﺕ ﻤـﻥ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻭﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﻏﻡ ﻤﻥ ﻁﺭﺡ ﺒﻌﺽ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻓﺎﺌﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺇﻻ ﺍﻨﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﺓ ﺠﺩﹰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻭﻻ ﺘﻐﻁﻲ ﺇﻻ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﹰﺍ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺘﻐﻁﻴﺘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎل ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻁﺎﺒﻊ ﻨﻅﺭﻱ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻗﺎﺒل ﻓﻲ ﻤﻌﻅﻤﻪ ﻟﻠﺘﻜﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﺭﺓ‪.‬‬

‫‪236‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﺼﺭﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻗﺎﻤﺕ ﺒﻤﺴﺢ ﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩ ﺠﺩﹰﺍ ﻟﻠﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺎﻤﺕ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺴﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻲ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻜﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻜﻨﻅـﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺘﺭﺒﻭﻱ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤل‪ ،‬ﺒل ﺭﻜﺯﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻭ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻤﻨﻪ ﻜﺎﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺼﻴل‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻲ ﻓﻘﻁ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺴﺘﺒﺎﻨﺔ ﺃﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺤﻭل ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼـﺭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗـﺔ ﺒـﺄﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤـﻌﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﻏﻴﺎﺏ ﺍﻹﻁﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻱ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺎﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻜﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻭﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ‪....‬‬

‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﻋﻜﺴﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒـﺸﻜل ﻋـﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺨﺎﺹ ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺘﻤﺜل ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﺘﺭﺠﻡ‬
‫ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﻜﻴﻔﻴـﺔ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﻌﻤﺎل‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻭﻻ ﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻷﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻭﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺘﻪ ﻓﻜﺎﻨـﺕ ﺠﻤﻴﻌﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻻﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻴﺔ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻵﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻟﻠﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬

‫ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻪ‬

‫‪ .1‬ﻟﻡ ﺘﻅﻬﺭ ﺃﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﺕ ﻤﻭﻀـﻭﻉ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻤـﹰﺎ‬
‫ﻤﺤﺩﺩﹰﺍ ﻭﺩﻗﻴﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﻪ ﺒﺎﻟﺸﻜل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻤﻴﺯﻩ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺒﻤﺜﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺁﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﺒﻌﻴﺩﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻤﺜﻠﻪ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻭﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻤﺸﺘﻘﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻭﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺒـﺎﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻷﻨـﺸﻁﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺃﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻻﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻫﻭ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻤﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﻟـﻴﺱ ﻜﺎﻓﻴـﹰﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺴﺎﺱ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨـﺔ ﺘﻘـﺩﻡ ﻗـﺼﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﺭﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﺩ ﺒﺎﻷﻋﻤﺎل ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﺤﻘﻴـﻕ ﺍﻷﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .4‬ﻴﻤﺜل ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻉ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺴﺎﻟﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺴﺎﺭﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﻭ ﺒﻤﺜﺎﺒﺔ ﺠﻬﺎﺯ ﻟﻠﺴﻴﻁﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻴﻤﺩ‬

‫‪237‬‬
‫ﻤﺘﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﻴﻠﺔ ﺒﺎﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻷﺤﻴﺎﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﻟﻜﺸﻑ ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻭﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺃﻴﻀﺎ ﻤﺴﺒﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﻠل ﻭﺍﻹﺨﻔﺎﻕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ‪.‬‬

‫ﻼ ﻤﻴﻜﺎﻨﻴﻜﻴﹰﺎ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺒﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺁﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻻ ﻫﻭ ﺨﺎﻀﻊ ﻟﺘـﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻗـﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻻ ﻴﻘﺒـل‬

‫‪ .5‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻋﻤ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺱ ﺒـﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﻨﻤﺎ ﻫﻭ ﻋﻤل ﻋﻘﻠﻲ ﻴﻘﺘﻀﻲ ﺩﺍﺌﻤﹰﺎ ﺘﺠﺩﻴﺩﹰﺍ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﹰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﺤﺘـﺎﺝ ﺍﻟـﻰ ﻤﻭﺍﺠﻬـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﻗﻑ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﺒﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺘﻨﺎﺴﺒﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻻ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻤﺒﺩﺃ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻲ ﻻﺒﺩ ﻭﺍﻥ ﺘﻔﻘﺩ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .6‬ﻴﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﻻﻟﺘﺯﺍﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﺨﻼﻗﻴﺔ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻴﺘﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺃﺴﺎﺴﹰﺎ ﺤﻭل ﻤﻌﻘﻭﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺼﺩﺍﻗﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﻋﺩﺍﻟﺔ ﺍﺴـﻠﻭﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻌﻤل‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻔﻬﻡ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﺍﻤﻜﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻤﺤﻴﻁﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‬

‫ﻼ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻤل ﺍﺫ ﻴﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ‬

‫‪ .1‬ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺘﻤﺜل ﻨﻅﺎﻤﹰﺎ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤ ﹰ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺃﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺭﺒﻁﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻭﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺘﻌﺩ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺒﺴﺒﺏ ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﻴﺔ ﻷﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﺫ ﻻ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻲ ﻤﺜﻠﻤﺎ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩﻩ ﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻌﻤﻠﺔ ﺤﺎﻟﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﺘﻤﺜل ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺘﻨﺎﻀل ﻤﻥ ﺍﺠل ﺭﺒﻁ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻸﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻀﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻊ ﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒل ﺒﺘﻭﺤﻴﺩ ﺃﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻓـﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻨـﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻴﺴﺘﻜﻤل ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻭﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ ﻭﺘﻭﺤﻴـﺩ ﻭﻨﻘـل ﻜـﻼ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻭﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺨﻠﻕ ﻨﻅﺭﺓ ﻜﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺤﻭل ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .4‬ﻴﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺨﻠﻕ ﺘﻭﻟﻴﻔﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﻭﻏﻴـﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ‬
‫)ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ( ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻨﺎﻏﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺯﺯ ﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻵﺨﺭ ﻭﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﻋل ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻓﻴﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺒﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻷﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﺼـﻭل ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺍﻷﻫـﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .5‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻷﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻟﻘﺒﻭﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺴﻊ ﻴﺒﺭﺯ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺘﻬـﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻤﻴـﺔ ﻭﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯﻫـﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺎﺒﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻨﻅـﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅـﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻭﻅﻴﻔﻴـﺔ‬

‫‪238‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻊ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺎﺯﺍﻟﺕ ﺘﻌﺎﻨﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻭﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺩ ﻤﻨﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺘﺼﺎﻍ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻗﻴﺎﺴﻲ ﻭﺸﻤﻭﻟﻲ ﻭﺘﺴﺎﻫﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺼـﻴﺎﻏﺘﻬﺎ ﺠﻤﻴـﻊ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺤﺼﻭل ﺍﻹﺠﻤﺎﻉ ﻓﻲ ﺼﻴﺎﻏﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .6‬ﻟﻴﺱ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺼﺎﺭﻡ ﺤﻭل ﺘﺴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﺘﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻀﻴﻑ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻭﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺫﻟـﻙ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘـﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺘـﺭﺍﺒﻁ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻫﻭ ﻤﺩﺨل ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪.‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‬

‫‪ .1‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻻ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎﺀ ﻓﻘﻁ ﻭﻻ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺩ ﻭﺤﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﻨﻤﺎ ﻫﻭ ﻓﺤﺹ ﺩﻗﻴـﻕ ﻟﻭﺍﻗـﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎل ﻴﺒﻴﻥ ﻟﻠﻤﻬﺘﻤﻴﻥ ﺒﻪ ﺃﻴﻥ ﺃﺠﺎﺩﺕ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻤﺎﺫﺍ ؟ ﻭﺃﻴﻥ ﺃﺨﻔﻘﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻜﻴﻑ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌـﻼﺝ‬
‫؟‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻭﺍﻹﺨﻔﺎﻕ ﻟﻴﺴﺎ ﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺠﻬﺩ ﺃﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻓﻘﻁ ﺍﻭ ﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻗﻠﺔ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﻨﻌﺩﺍﻤﻪ ﻭﺇﻨﻤﺎ ﻫﻭ‬
‫ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻴﻘﻭﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﻤﺘﻌﺩﺩﺓ ﺘﻘﻭﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺤﺎل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﻗﺕ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻭﻴﺘﺄﺜﺭ ﺒﻪ ﺃﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻜﺜﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻴﺅﺨﺫ ﺫﻟﻙ‬
‫ﻜﻠﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﻓﻬﻡ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺠﻪ ﻓﻬﻤﹰﺎ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﹰﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺍﻟـﺴﺒل ﺍﻟﻤﺜﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﻭﺩﻴﻥ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ ﺘﺘﻡ ﻟﻤﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ ﻭﺘﻨﺘﻬﻲ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﻫﻭ ﻨـﺸﺎﻁ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻤﺘﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﺘﺘﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻭﻨﺔ )ﺍﻟـﺴﺎﻨﺩﺓ(‬
‫ﻜﺎﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﻤﺭﺍﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻭﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺩﺍﺌﻤﺔ ﺘﺭﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﺠﻨﺏ ﺘـﺭﺍﻜﻡ ﺍﻷﺨﻁـﺎﺀ ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺍﻗﺹ ﺤﺘﻰ ﻴﺴﺘﺤﻴل ﻋﻼﺠﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﻋل ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺒـﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺎﻋـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻜﻠﻬﺎ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﺘﺒﻠﻎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻜﻠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻼﺌﻕ ﺒﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .4‬ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻴﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﻻﺴﻴﻤﺎ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻤﺜل ﺠﺩﻭﻯ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺒﻌﺽ ﺒﺭﺍﻤﺠﻬﺎ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﺫ ﻴﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﻗﻭﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﻀﻌﻔﻬﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﺤﺘﻴﺎﺠﺎﺘﻬـﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺘﻁﻠﻌﺎﺘﻬـﺎ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .5‬ﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻨﺘﺠﻪ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺇﺤﺩﺍﺙ ﺃﻱ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻭ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻜـﻥ ﻟـﺩﻴﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻴﻥ ﻨﻘﻑ ؟ ﻭﻤﺎﺫﺍ ﻨﺭﻴﺩ ﺍﻥ ﻨﻁﻭﺭ ﺍﻭ ﻨﻐﻴﺭ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻭﻜل ﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺎﻟﻁﺒﻊ ﻻ‬
‫ﻴﺄﺘﻲ ﺍﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪.‬‬

‫‪239‬‬
‫‪ .6‬ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺼﻌﻭﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻭﻀﻊ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻭ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻟﻠﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨـﺔ ﻤـﻊ‬
‫ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻨﺘﺼﻭﺭ ﺒﻌـﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻜﻔل ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﻭﺃﻫـﺩﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺃﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺒﻨﻰ ﺃﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻭﺃﺴﻭﺍﻕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل‪.‬‬

‫‪ .7‬ﺍﻥ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺼﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺴﻠـﺴﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻨﺘﻅﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﺭﺠﻡ ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻋﻤـل‬
‫ﺤﺭﻜﻲ ﺸﺎﻤل ﻭﻤﺘﻤﺎﺴﻙ ﻭﻗﺎﺒل ﻟﻼﺘﺼﺎل ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﻷﺤﺩﻫﻡ ﺍﻵﺨﺭ‪.‬‬

‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ‬

‫ﺘﻀﻡ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‬

‫‪ .1‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺘﻪ‬

‫ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺘﻪ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺴﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﻬﺎ ﻭﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ ﻴﺘﻤﺜل )ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻠﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻲ ﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺎﺕ(‪،‬‬
‫ﻻ ﻭﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤـﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻭﻱ ﺒﻤﺠﻤﻠـﻪ ﺍﻭ ﹰ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺄﺸﻴﺭ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺜﺎﻟﺜﹰﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨﻼﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺸﻜل ﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻷﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﻟﻡ ﺘﺠﺭ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻻﺕ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ‪ 1993/1992‬ﺍﻻ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ‪2000/1999‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻡ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺤﺘﻰ ﻴﻭﻤﻨﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺸﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺸﻲﺀ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﻴﺸﻴﺭ ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻘﺔ ﺍﻷﻜﺜﺭ ﻀﻌﻔﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺘﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻭﻴﺸﻴﺭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻋـﺩﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻭﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺍﺀ ﻭﺫﻭﻱ ﺍﻹﻁﻼﻉ ﺒﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺘﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻨﺕ ﺃﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻘﺩ ﺃﺸﺎﺭﺕ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩﻫﻡ ﺒﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﻀﻌﻑ ﻋﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺫ ﺍﺘﻔﻘﺕ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻜﺒﻴﺭﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺒﻌﺽ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺘﻪ ﻭﻻﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩﻫﻡ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﻌـﺩﻡ ﺇﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻋﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻜﺒﻴﺭﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﺃﻜﺩﻭﺍ ﺍﻥ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻻ‬
‫ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺩﻗﻴﻕ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﺸﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺨﻠل ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺃﻭﺯﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻭ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭﻩ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺜﺔ ) ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺨﻼﺕ ‪ ,‬ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ‪ ,‬ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺭﺠـﺎﺕ (‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻓﺘﻘـﺎﺭﻩ ﻟﻠﻤﻌـﺩﻻﺕ ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘـﺴﻬﻡ ﻓـﻲ‬

‫‪240‬‬
‫ﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺨﺼﻭﺼﹰﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺤﺴﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻭ ﻜﻔـﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻓﺘﻘﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻔﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﻌل ﻤﻥ ﺯﺒﺎﺌﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺘﺸﺎﺭﻙ‬
‫ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴـﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﻴﺨﻠﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﻘﻴﺎﺱ‪:‬‬

‫‪ .1‬ﻨﺴﺏ ﺘﻭﺍﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁﻁﺔ‪ :‬ﻓﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻭﻑ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻤﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﻭﻀـﻌﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺘﺨﻀﻊ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﺴﻠﺒﹰﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻐﻁﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺨﻁﻁﺕ ﻟﻬﺎ ﻤﺴﺒﻘﹰﺎ ﺘﻠـﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﺒﺎﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻤﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺩﻤﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪ :‬ﺍﺫﺍ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺠﺩ ﺍﻥ ﻟـﻡ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻫﺎ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁﻁ ﻟﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻹﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻟﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .4‬ﻨﺴﺏ ﺘﺤﺼﻴل ﺍﻹﻴﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻨﻤﻭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺩﺓ ﻷﺨﺭﻯ ﺍﺫ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘـ ‪‬ﻭﻡ‬
‫ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺨﻠﻕ ﺍﻹﻴﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺫﺍﺘﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻨﺸﻁﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴـﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻨﻤﻴـﺔ ﺍﻹﻴـﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﻤﻥ ﺇﻟﻘﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﺏﺀ ﺍﻷﻜﺒﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟـﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴـﺔ ﻭﻁﻠـﺏ ﺯﻴـﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺒـﺎﻟﻎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﻋﺩﻡ ﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺘﻬﻡ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴـﺅﺜﺭ ﺫﻟـﻙ‬
‫ﺴﻠﺒﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﻭﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﻋﺩﻡ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺠﻬﺔ ﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﺔ ﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﻭﺘﻘـﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺒﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻴﻘﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺎﺘﻘﻬﺎ ﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻗـﺴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟـﺸﻌﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺯ‪ -‬ﺘﻔﺘﻘﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺡ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻐﻴﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻤل ﻓﻜﺭﹰﺍ ﻭﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﻟﻤﺒﺩﺃ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﻲ ﻟﻠﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﻻ ﻴﻌﺭﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﺭﻜﻭﻥ ﻭﺃﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﺔ ﻋـﻥ ﺇﻋـﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟـﺸﺭﺍﺌﺢ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻟﻘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻭﻟﻠﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻗﺎﻁﺒﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻭﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬

‫‪241‬‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻴﺅﻜﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﻟﺘﻌﻘﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻭﺤﻴـﺩﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤل‪ ،‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻤﻜﻨﺘﻨﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺒــ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻤﺤـﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤـﺎﻟﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺯﺒـﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻓﻬﻲ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻀﻴﻑ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻉ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺎ ﻫﻭ ﻤﻬـﻡ ﻭﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭﻫـﺎ‬
‫ﺒﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﻭﺼﻔﹰﺎ ﻟﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﻔﺼﻠﺔ ﻤـﻊ ﺘﺄﺸـﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨـﺏ ﺍﻻﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﺩﻗﻴﻕ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﺩﺍﻭل ﻭﺍﻷﺸﻜﺎل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻌﺭﻀﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻲﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻟﻴﺴﺕ ﺍﺴﺘﻬﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻓﻘﻁ ﺒـل ﺍﻷﻫـﻡ ﺍﺴـﻠﻭﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤـل‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﻋل ﻤﻌﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬

‫ﻼ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ ﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﺫ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺠﻤﻴـﻊ ﺍﻷﺒﻌـﺎﺩ ﺒـﺸﻜل‬

‫‪ -3‬ﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻤﺩﺨ ﹰ‬
‫ﻼ ﺁﺨﺭ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺠﺯﺌﻲ ﻓﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺇﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﻤﺩﺨ ﹰ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻨﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﻨﻅﻡ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻘﺎﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌـﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻲ ﻟﻠﻁﻠﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ‪ ،‬ﺴﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪...‬‬

‫‪ -4‬ﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﻤﺘﻌﺩﺩﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ .‬ﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴـﺘﻨﻔﺎﺫ ﺘﺨﺼﻴـﺼﺎﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ .‬ﻨﺴﺏ ﺘﻭﺍﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁﻁﺔ ﻟﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻔﻴﺽ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺼل‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁﻁﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﻩ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻜﻔـﺎﺀﺓ‬
‫ﻼ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻟـﺴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﻓﻌ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ .‬ﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺨﺘﺹ ﺒﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﻤﻌـﻴﻥ ﺒـﻴﻥ ﻋـﺎﻤﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻤﺘﺘﺎﻟﻴﻴﻥ ﻭﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴﹰﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻤﻭﺠﺒﺔ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺴﺎﻟﺒﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩ‪ .‬ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺘﺤﺼﻴل ﺍﻹﻴﺭﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﻭﻨﻤﻭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻓـﻲ ﺘﻤﻭﻴـل‬
‫ﻨﺸﺎﻁﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺫﺍﺘﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻹﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻟﺏ‪.‬‬

‫‪242‬‬
‫‪ -5‬ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺨﺎل ﺃﻱ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺒﺈﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺤـﺫﻑ‬
‫ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﺃﻱ ﺒﺎﻻﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺜﻪ ﻭﺒﺎﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﺤﺴﺏ ﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﻗﺩﺭﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻷﻱ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -6‬ﺘﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺒﺴﻌﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﻤﺭﻭﻨﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﻭﺸـﻤﻭﻟﻬﺎ ﺠﻤﻴـﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻜﻴﻴﻔﻬﺎ ﻹﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﻤﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -7‬ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﻴﺔ ﻷﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻭﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺘﻪ ﻻﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ ﻁﺭﻴﻘـﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﺭﺘﻜﺯﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﻭﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺒﺩ ﹰ‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻭﺏ‬

‫‪ .1‬ﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻭﺏ ﺠﻌﻠﺕ ﺒﺎﻻﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺍﻓﺫ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﺴﻡ‬
‫ﺒﻘﺎﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﻤﻴﺯﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺒﻁ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻓﺭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺴﺤﺏ ﻤﺤﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻭﻋﺭﻀﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺸﺔ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺇﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺙ ﺍﻭ ﺤﺫﻑ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﺴﻬل ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺇﺩﺨﺎل ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﻴﻘﻠل ﻤﻥ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺄ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻹﺩﺨﺎل‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺘﻡ ﺒﺭﻤﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺠل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﻤﻜﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﻓﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﻟﻜﺘﺭﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺤﻔﻅ‬
‫ﻭﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﺘﺴﻬﻴل ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﺎﺭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ‬
‫ﻴﺤﻘﻘﻬﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻜﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺴﻬل ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻌﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﻜﺎﻓﻪ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‪:‬‬

‫ﺘﻘﻠﻴل ﺍﻷﻜﺩﺍﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﺭﻗﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺃ‪-‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺴﺭﻋﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ‬ ‫ﺏ‪-‬‬

‫ﺤﻔﻅ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﺴﻬﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺠﻭﻉ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﺇﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺜﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺝ‪-‬‬

‫ﺴﻬﻭﻟﺔ ﺇﺩﺨﺎل ﻭﺇﺨﺭﺍﺝ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺒﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺠﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﺩ‪-‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻹﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ‬

‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻥ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﺜﺒﺕ ﺇﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﺒـﺴﻬﻭﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺒﺴﺭﻋﺔ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﺃﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫‪243‬‬
‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺒﻴﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺭﻗﻡ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻭﺒﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻸﺩﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﺜل ﺨﻼﺼﺔ ﻟﺠﻤﻴـﻊ ﺍﻟﻨـﺴﺏ ﻭﻤﻨﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺘﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﻭﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻷﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻭﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﻟﻜل ﻤﺅﺸﺭ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻲ ﺍﻭ ﻓﺭﻋـﻲ ﺒـﺴﻬﻭﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻭ ﺘﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻻﻤﻜﻥ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺎﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻜـﻥ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺤﻴﺤﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪.‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﺭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻭﻓﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺴﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﻭﺘﺴﻬل ﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺩﺓ ﺯﻤﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻭﻟﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺓ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺩﻟﺕ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻟﻠﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻨﻪ ﻴﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺒﺎﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺭﻋﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓـﻀﻼ‬
‫ﻋﻥ ﺇﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺘﻪ ﻟﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺃﻨﻭﺍﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺜﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﺃﻅﻬﺭﺕ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺍﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺩ )ﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻨﺩﺓ( ﻜﺎﻥ ﻤﺭﺘﻔﻌﹰﺎ ﺃﻤﺎ ﺃﺩﺍﺅﻫﺎ ﻟﻸﺒﻌﺎﺩ )ﺠـﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴـﺔ(‪،‬‬
‫)ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ( ﻓﻘﺩ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﺍﻻ ﺍﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﻡ ﻴﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺒﻌﺩ )ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ( ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻤﺭﻀﻴﺔ ﻭﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻔﺯﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﺘﺎﺯﺓ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﺘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﻊ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺭﺍﻀﻲ ﻟﻘﺒﻭل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟـﺭﻏﻡ ﻤـﻥ ﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﺎ ﺯﺍﻟﺕ ﺘﻌﺎﻨﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺍﻗﺹ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺩ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﻌـﻀﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻤﺘﺄﺜﺭﹰﺍ ﺒﺎﻟﻅﺭﻭﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻤﺭ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻗﻁﺭﻨﺎ‪ .‬ﺍﻻ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﻘﻘﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻫﻭ ﺩﻟﻴل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺤـﺴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺘﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﻓﺭﺓ ﻭﺒﺎﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺴﻭﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -3‬ﺃﻅﻬﺭﺕ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﻜل ﺒﻌﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬
‫ﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻷﻭل‪ :‬ﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺃ‪-‬‬

‫ﺍﻥ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺘﻤﻜﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﻋﺘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻟﻘﺒﻭل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺒـﺭﺯﺕ ﺇﺨﻔﺎﻗـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺼﻐﺭ ﺤﺠﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﹰﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻋﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻨﺎﺘﺞ ﻋﻥ ﺍﺭﺘﻔـﺎﻉ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﻤﻌﺩل ﻋﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺤﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﻁﺎﺭﻴﺢ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺯﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺘﻔﺎﻉ ﻨـﺴﺒﺔ ﻏﻴﺎﺒـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﺩﻡ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺍﻷﺩﻟﺔ ﺍﻹﺭﺸﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﻗﺴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻀـﻌﻑ ﺇﻗﺒـﺎل ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒـﺔ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﻏﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻋﺩﺍﺩﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻤﺘﻭﺴﻁ ﺍﻟﻠﻘﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻼﻜﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻲ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺒﺎﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻷﻟﻘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ )ﺃﺴﺘﺎﺫ‪ ،‬ﺃﺴﺘﺎﺫ ﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩ( ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﻀﻌﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻹﻀﺎﻓﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺴﺭﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻭﻴﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﺍﺫ ﺘﺸﻜل ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺴﺭﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺫﻭﻱ ﺍﻷﻟﻘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻹﻀﺎﻓﺎﺕ ﻤﻤﻥ ﻫﻡ ﺒﻤﺭﺘﺒﺔ )ﻤﺩﺭﺱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺩﺭﺱ ﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩ(‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﺍﻷﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﻌـﺩﻡ ﺍﺠﺘﻴـﺎﺯ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺔ‬

‫‪244‬‬
‫ﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺒﻭل ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺇﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺴﺘﺜﻤﺭ ﻤﺨﺘﺒﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺜﻲ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺇﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺭﻜـﺯﺕ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﺨﺩﺍﻤﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﺨﺘﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻤﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﻀﺎﻓﻴﺔ )ﺍﻟﻌـﺏﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻲ( ﻜﺎﻥ ﻤﺭﺘﻔﻌﹰﺎ ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﺨﺎﺹ ﻟﺫﻭﻱ ﺍﻷﻟﻘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﺍﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻭﻯ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻀﻌﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻟﻠﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻔﺎﻗﻡ ﺃﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻔﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴـﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻲ ﻟﻠﻁﻠﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺴﹰﺎ ﻷﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﻨﺠﺩ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺒل ﺘﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﺭﻀﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻤﻨﻬـﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﻐﻼل‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤﺜل ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻲ ﻟﻠﻁﻠﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﺒﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﹰﺎ ﻷﻋﺩﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺍﻴﻼﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﻨﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺌﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻘﻁﺎﺒﻬﺎ ﻟﻌﻨﺎﻭﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﺃﺴﻠﻭﺏ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻀﻭ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ‪ ،‬ﺘﻨﻭﻉ ﺍﻷﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺒﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺒﻁﺭﺍﺌـﻕ ﺍﻟﺘـﺩﺭﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻌﻜﺴﻪ ﺍﻤﺘﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺹ ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﻤﻊ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﻤﺘﻌﺩﺩﺓ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﻭﺇﻗﺎﻤﺔ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺃﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻻﻨﻀﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻤﻊ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺴﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻟﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺠل ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺒﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻭل ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺤﻭﺍﻓﺯ ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻨﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﺏ‪-‬‬

‫ﺍﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻤﺭﻀﻴﹰﺎ ﺠﺩﹰﺍ ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺤﻘﻘﺕ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺃﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻥ ﻋﺘﺒﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻁﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﺒﻜﺜﻴﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻜﺎﻥ ﺇﺨﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻼﻜﻬـﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴـﺴﻲ ﻴﺘﻤﻴـﺯ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻷﻟﻘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﺩﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻗﺒﻭل ﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁـﻁ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻘﺒﻭل‪ ،‬ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﻫل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻼﻜﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﻴﺔ ﺒﺴﺒﺏ ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻨـﺴﺒﺔ‬
‫ﺤﻤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﺭﺘﻔﺎﻉ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺼﻠﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﻬﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻹﻋﺩﺍﺩﻴﺔ ﻓﻤﺎ ﺩﻭﻥ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﺒﺭﺯ ﺍﻹﺨﻔﺎﻗﺎﺕ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﻑ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺤﺩ ﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻀﻌ ٍ‬
‫ﻤﻌﺎﻨﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺼﻐﺭ ﺤﺠﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺎﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﻴﺎﻀﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺭﺸﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ ﻤﻊ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻜﻔﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﻭﺍﺴﻴﺏ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻤـﻊ ﺇﻋـﺩﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻥ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻹﺨﻔﺎﻗﺎﺕ ﺁﻨﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺫﻜﺭ ﻻ ﺘﻤﻨﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤـﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ل ﺍﺫ ﺍﺴﺘﻁﺎﻋﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒﻭل ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻭﺒﺘﻭﺍﻓﺭ ﻋﺎ ٍ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁﻁ ﻟﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻗﻴﺎﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺇﺴﻜﺎﻥ ﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅـﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻘل ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺴﻬﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻤﺘﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺠﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻭﺃﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻤﺘﻼﻜﻬﺎ ﻷﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺨﺼﺼﺕ ﻟﻸﻏﺭﺍﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻫﻲ ﻤﻭﺍﺌﻤﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺤﺩ ﻤﺎ ﻜﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺘﺭﺒﻭﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺭﻏﻡ ﺼﻐﺭ ﺤﺠﻡ ﻗﺎﻋﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺼﻔﻭﻓﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪245‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﺘﻀﺢ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺘﻤﺘﻌﺕ ﺒﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ ﻭﻤﻨﺎﺥ ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻲ ﺠﻴﺩ ﻴﺒﺭﺯ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺴـﻴﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻁﻘﻭﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺒﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺯﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﺒﻘﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻭﺍﻀﺢ ﻭﺩﻗﻴﻕ ﻟﻸﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻤﻼﺀﻤﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‬
‫ل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺯﺍﻡ ﻋﺎ ٍ‬
‫ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬

‫ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﺝ‪-‬‬

‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺘﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﻋﺘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﻩ ﻟﻘﺒﻭل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻹﺨﻔﺎﻗﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺒﺭﺯ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻀـﻌﻑ ﻨﻤـﻭ ﻁﻠﺒـﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻴـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴـﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﻻ ﺃﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﹰﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﺼﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺭﻴﺠﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻭﺏ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎ ًﹰ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﺭﺘﻔﺎﻉ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻋﻤل ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﺒﺴﺒﺏ ﻫﺠﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﻟﻠﻌﻤل ﺒﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺨـﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻠﺩ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﻨﺠﺩ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺒل ﺘﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﺭﻀﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻤﺘﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺒـ‪ :‬ﻗـﺩﺭﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺤﻭﺍﺴﻴﺏ ﻭﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﻨﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺯﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﺭﺒﻭﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻜﺘﺒﻴﺔ ﺠﻴﺩﺓ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻭﻟﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﺒﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻟﻠﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻨﻔﺫﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺘﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺯﺯ ﺃﻭﺍﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﺒـﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺨﺭﻯ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺒﻊ‪ :‬ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬ ‫ﺩ‪-‬‬

‫ﺃﺨﻔﻘﺕ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺭﺍﻀﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺒﻭل ﺒـﺴﺒﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ)*(‪ ،‬ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼﻭل )ﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ(‪) ،‬ﺼﻴﺎﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍﺕ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭﻴﻠﻴﺔ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ(‪ .‬ﻓـﻲ ﺤـﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻭﻓﺔ ﻋـﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤـﺩﺓ ﻟﺤـﺴﺎﺏ )ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﻴـﺔ(‪،‬‬
‫)ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﻴﺔ(‪ ) ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺴﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ( ﻫﺫﺍ ﻭﺍﻥ ﻋﻜﺱ ﺸﻲﺀ ﻓﺎﻨﻪ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻀﻌﻑ ﻓﻲ ﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻜﻤـﺎ ﻭﺍﻥ ﻫﻨـﺎﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻓﻲ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺘﻭﺍﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁﻁ ﻟﻪ ﻟﺤﺴﺎﺏ )ﺍﻟﺒﺤـﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﺠﻤـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘـﺄﻟﻴﻑ(‪،‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻓﻲ ﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﺨﻁﻁ‬
‫)ﻤﺨﺼﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻼﻤﻴﺫ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺭﺴﻴﺔ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻟﺭﻭﺍﺘﺏ( ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫)ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺄﻟﻴﻑ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺭﺴﻴﺔ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻟﺭﻭﺍﺘﺏ(‪) ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴـﺔ(‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺒـل ﺘﻤﻜﻨـﺕ‬

‫)*( ﻻﺣﻈﺖ اﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﺔ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد اﻷﺳﺎس اﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪي )اﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﻲ( ﻓﻲ ﺗﺨﻄﻴﻂ وإﻋﺪاد اﻟﻤﻮازﻧﺔ‪ ،‬اذ ﻳﺘﻢ اﻷﺧﺬ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺤﺴﺒﺎن اﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ اﻟﻔﻌﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻤﻮازﻧﺔ اﻟﺴﻨﺔ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ وﻳﻘﻮم اﻟﻘﺴﻢ اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺑﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ إﻋﺪاد اﻟﻤﻮازﻧﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﻖ ﻣﻊ اﻟﻮﺣﺪات اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎت‬
‫وﺗﺪرس ﻗﺒﻞ رﻓﻌﻬﺎ اﻟﻰ وزارة اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻢ‪ ،‬وﻳﻘﻮم اﻟﻘﺴﻢ ﺑﻌﻘﺪ اﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﺎت ﺧﻼل اﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﻟﻠﻮﻗﻮف ﻋﻠﻰ اﺗﺠﺎهﺎت اﻹﻧﻔﺎق اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎت وإﺟﺮاء اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﻼت ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻷرﺻﺪة‪ ،‬أي ﺗﺠﺮي ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﻠﺔ ﻷرﺻﺪة هﺬﻩ اﻟﺤﺴﺎﺑﺎت ﻣﻦ اﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎت اﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻟﺪﻳﻬﺎ ﺗﺨﺼﻴﺺ ﻣﺎﻟﻲ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻨﻔﺬ اﻟﻰ اﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ هﻲ ﺑﺤﺎﺟﺔ إﻟﻴﻬﺎ‪ .‬ان ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﻠﺔ هﺬﻩ ﻳﺘﻢ إﺗﺒﺎﻋﻬﺎ ﻟﻐﺮض ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ‬
‫ﻻ ﻣﻦ إﺑﻄﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻧﺘﻬﺎء اﻟﺴﻨﺔ‪.‬‬
‫أﻗﺼﻰ اﺳﺘﻔﺎدة ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎت اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻓﺮة ﺑﺪ ً‬

‫‪246‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺭﺍﻀﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺒﻭل ﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺒﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘـﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴـﺫ ﺍﻟﻤـﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻭﻴﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺘﻭﺍﻓﻕ ﺠﻴﺩ ﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ )ﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴـﺔ( ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨـﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻁﻁﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺠﻴﺩ ﻟﺤﺴﺎﺏ )ﻤﺨﺼﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻼﻤﻴﺫ(‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﻜﻠﻔـﺔ‬
‫ﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﻟﻺﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻁﺎﻟﺏ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺭﻴﺞ‪ ،‬ﻭﻜﻠﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻫﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻤﺭﺘﻔﻌﺔ ﺩل ﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺭﺘﻔﺎﻉ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻭﻜﻔﺎﺀﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﻐﻼل ﺘﺨﺼﻴـﺼﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﺒﻤـﺎ‬
‫ﻴﻀﻤﻥ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﻫـ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻤﺱ‪ :‬ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‬

‫ﺤﻘﻘﺕ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﻴﺩ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﺫ ﺍﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺅﻫﺎ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻤﺘﻤﻴﺯﹰﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺩﺨل ﻓﻲ ﺼﻠﺏ ﻭﻅﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﻤﺭﺘﻔﻌـﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤـﺎ ﻭﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﺒﺒﺤﻭﺜﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﻓﻭﺯ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﺒﺠﻭﺍﺌﺯ ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺘﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺩﻭﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻗﻨﻪ ﻗﻴﻭﺩﻫﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺘﻔـﺎﻉ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﻟﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﻌﺔ ﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻨﺠﺯ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻭﺍﺴـﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﻤﻊ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻨﺸﺎﻁﺎﺕ ﺇﻋﻼﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻜﺒﻴﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺇﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﺭﻜﺔ ﻤﻊ ﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻗﺎﻤﺕ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﻴـﺔ ﻟﻤﺅﺴـﺴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺤﺼل ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺒﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺭﺍﻉ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻤﻜﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺘﺄﻫﻴل ﻋﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﺤﺼﻭل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﻬﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺩﻜﺘﻭﺭﺍﻩ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤـﻨﺢ ﺍﻟﻌـﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴـﺭ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻨﺸﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤـﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺤـﻭﺙ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺸﻬﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﻜﺘﻭﺭﺍﻩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺒﻠﻭﻡ ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﻭﺤﺼﻭل ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﻭﺍﺌﺯ ﻋﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﻜﺱ ﺴﻤﻌﺔ ﺃﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻥ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﻴﺩ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺩ ﻻ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺨﻠﻭ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺨﻔﺎﻗﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫ ﻜـﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻭﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻲ ﻟﻠﺨﺭﻴﺠﻴﻥ ﺍﻗل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﻓﻨﺠﺩ ﺍﻥ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺨﺭﺠﻴﻥ ﺒﺘﻘﺩﻴﺭ ﻤﻘﺒﻭل ﻭﻤﺘﻭﺴﻁ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺴﻭﺏ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻭﺍﺩ ﻤﺭﺘﻔﻌـﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺇﺠﻤﺎﻟـﻲ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺴﺒﻴـﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻓﻲ ﻨﺴـﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻴﻨﻴـﻥ‬
‫‪ /‬ﺍﻟﺨﺭﻴﺠﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻓﻲ ﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻗﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﺤﺎل ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤـﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠـﺯﺓ‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻥ ﻀﻌﻑ ﻓﺭﺹ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺭﻍ ﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺨﺼﻭﺼﹰﺎ ﺍﻟﺭﺼﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ﹰ‬

‫‪247‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬

‫ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬

‫ﺍﻨﺘﻬﺠﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﺴﻠﻭﺏ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻜـﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤـﺼﻤﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘـﺭﺡ ﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻻ ﻟﻤﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﺍﻹﻁﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻱ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟـﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﺤﺩ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻜﻤﺎ ﹰ‬
‫ﻭﻤﺎ ﺃﻅﻬﺭﺘﻪ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺎﻗـﺔ ﺍﻟـﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨـﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻐـﺭﺽ‬
‫ﻼ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺨﺼﺹ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﻟﻌﺭﺽ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼل‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒ ﹰ‬
‫ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﺄﻤل ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﺍﻨﻬﺎ ﺴﺘﺴﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻭل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺭﺍﻫﺎ ﻤﻨﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﻭﻤﻨﺴﺠﻤﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻅﺭﻭﻑ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺠل ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻰ ﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺃﻓﻀل ﺘﺒﺭﺯ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻤﻜﺎﻨﺔ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﺜل ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﻤﺭﺸـﺩﹰﺍ‬
‫ﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﻴﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻨﺎﻭل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﻓﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﺍﻭ ﹰﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‬

‫‪ -1‬ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺭ ﻟﺸﻤﻭﻟﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋـﺔ ﺸـﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻤـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻀﻤﻨﺔ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺅﺸـﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘـﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺸﻜل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﻁﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﺒﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟـﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﻭﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﻴﻌﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻤـل ﻟﻠﻤﻘـﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺤـﺩﺩﺓ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺒﻜل ﺇﺒﻌﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﻭﻤﺠﺎﻻﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﻔﺎﺼﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺎﻹﻁﻼﻉ ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺎﺕ ﺨﺎﺼـﺔ ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﻤﺤﺎﻀﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﺸﺭﺡ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻭ ﻨﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻭﺹ ﻭﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺼﺒﺢ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻷﺒﻌـﺎﺩ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻴﻴﺱ ﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴﻡ ﻤﺸﺘﺭﻜﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺇﺴﻨﺎﺩ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻟﻠﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻼﺕ ﻟﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺎﺒﻕ ﻤﻊ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻷﺠﻬﺯﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺩﺍﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻭﺍﺴﻴﺏ ﻭﺒﺭﺍﻤﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﻬل ﻤﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺘـﺸﻐﻴل‬ ‫ﻫـ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺒﻴﺴﺭ ﻭﺴﺭﻋﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﻟﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﻜﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـﺎﺕ ﻭﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﻻﻨﺤﺭﺍﻓﺎﺕ‪.‬‬

‫‪248‬‬
‫ﺯ‪ -‬ﺇﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﻗﺴﻡ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺹ ﻓﻲ ﻜل ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻭﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺒﻤﺜﺎﺒﺔ )‪ (Database‬ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺒﻴﺎﻨـﺎﺕ ﻴﺘـﻭﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﻕ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺌﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺨﺭﻯ ﺒﻬـﺩﻑ ﺘـﻭﻓﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -3‬ﺘﺘﻭﻟﻰ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻭﺒﻜﺎﺩﺭ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺹ ﺒﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻔﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻅـﺎﻡ ﻭﺒـﺸﻜل ﻤﺒﺎﺸـﺭ‬
‫ﻭﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺒﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻴﺱ ﻜل ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -4‬ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﻓﺭﺹ ﺃﻓﻀل ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻜـﺸﻑ ﻋـﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻁﺭﺃ ﺴﻠﺒﹰﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ‬
‫ﻜﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -5‬ﺍﻹﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼل ﺍﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﻫﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -6‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﺤﺎﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺒﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ ﻤﺒـﺩﺃ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺭﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﺴﺭﻴﺔ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻓﺘﺢ ﻗﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﺤﻭﺍﺭ ﺘـﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﻻ‬
‫ﺘﺩﻋﻴﻡ ﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺒﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻀﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺼـﻭ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻰ ﺇﻗﻨﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻤﻜﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯﻫﺎ ﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒ ﹰ‬
‫ﻼ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻰ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻌـﺭﻑ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺨﻼل ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﺇﻁﻼﻉ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺘﺨﺭﺠﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺩﺍﺌﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺸﻙ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺘـﺅﺩﻱ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺭﻗﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻠـﻕ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﺩﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻫﻭ ﺇﻅﻬﺎﺭ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺓ ﻭﺍﻟـﻀﻌﻑ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﻩ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻷﻓﻀل ﻭﻟﻴﺱ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺠل ﺍﻟﻭﻗﻭﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻨﻭﺼﻲ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻜـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻤﻌﻠﻨﺔ ﻤﻊ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺘﻘﺩﻴﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻹﻁﻼﻉ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﻭﺠﻴﻬﻬﺎ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻬﺎ ﻭﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﻀﻌﻔﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -7‬ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻟﻼﻋﺘﺭﺍﺽ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﻨﻘﻠﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟـﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟـﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -8‬ﻭﻀﻊ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺤﻭﺍﻓﺯ ﻴﺭﺘﺒﻁ ﺒﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺘﺸﺠﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﻴـﺯ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻴﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﻭﻋﻼﺝ ﻨﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻑ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -9‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﻜﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘﻭ‪‬ﻡ ﻜل ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ )ﺫﺍﺘﻴﹰﺎ( ﻭﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﻨﻭﺼﻲ ﺒﺈﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﺠﻬﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﻜل ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺘﺘﻭﻟﻰ ﻤﺴﺅﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻬـﺎ ﻭﺒـﺸﻜل‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻤﻊ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻼﻙ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺜﺎﺒﺕ ﻴﺘﻭﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺒﻜل ﺩﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺩﻋﻤـﻪ ﻤﺎﺩﻴـﹰﺎ‬
‫ﻭﻤﻌﻨﻭﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‬

‫‪249‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻭﺼل ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺔ ﺒﻐـﺩﺍﺩ ﻟﻠﻌـﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴـﻲ‬
‫‪ 2001/2000‬ﻻ ﺴﻴﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺕ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺘﺨﻁﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻷﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﻟﻌﺘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﻊ ﻟﻘﺒﻭل ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻨﻭﺼـﻲ‬
‫ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫‪ -1‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺃﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺼﻑ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﻀﻤﻥ ﻨﺠﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﺇﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻭﺤﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺭﺸﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻭﻴﺔ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻟﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺫﻭﻱ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺨﻔـﻀﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻐﻴﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭﺓ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -3‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺴﺘﻐﻼل ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺤﺎﺕ ﻹﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﻗﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻌﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺭﺴﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻜﻠﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -4‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﻓﻲ )ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ( ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻤﺎﺸـﻰ ﻤـﻊ ﺍﻷﻟﻘـﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻻ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻻ ﻴﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺏﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻲ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -5‬ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻭﺘﻭﺯﻴﻌﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺒﺩﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻲ ﻤﻊ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺼل ﻓﻲ ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -6‬ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺒﻤﻜﺘﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻜﺎﻟﻤﻌﺘﻜﻔﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻓﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺠﻬﺯﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﻭﺏ ﻭﺍﻷﻗﺭﺍﺹ ﺍﻟﻠﻴﺯﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﺨﺯﻥ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺭﺠﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘـﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻜﺘـﺏ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﻭﺘﻭﺴﻴﻊ ﺩﺍﺌﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻁﻠﺒﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -7‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﺒﺘﻨﺸﻴﻁ ﺤﺭﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﺘﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺃﻓﻀل ﻟﻤﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -8‬ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻨﻭﻴﻊ ﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻟﺘﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺤﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -9‬ﺘﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻭﻋﺎﻟﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻤﺤﻭﺭﹰﺍ ﺃﺴﺎﺴﻴﺎ ﻭﻴﺤﻅﻰ ﺒﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﺒـﺴﺒﺏ ﺍﺭﺘﺒـﺎﻁ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺜﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﺘﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﺤﺘﻴﺎﺠـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺴﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻭﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺘﻪ ﻭﻨﻭﺼﻲ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻵﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻵﺘﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻴﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ ﻜﺎﻓﺔ ﻜل ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﻤﻊ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺠـﺭﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺴﻨﻭﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﻔﻌﻴل ﺩﻭﺭ ﺤﻘل ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺇﺸﺭﺍﻙ ﻤﻤﺜﻠﻴﻬﻡ ﺒﺎﻻﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻨﺎﻗـﺸﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﻭﺇﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻔﺭﺩﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺇﺸﺭﺍﻙ ﻤﻤﺜﻠﻲ ﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺤﺴﺏ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -10‬ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻋﻀﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ‪.‬‬

‫‪250‬‬
‫‪ -11‬ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﻷﻏﺭﺍﺽ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺼل ﺍﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻋﻤل ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﻻﻁﺎﺭﻴﺢ ﻭﺭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﻜﺘﻭﺭﺍﻩ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺍﻻﺨﺘـﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻰ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﻴﻡ ﻤﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﻤﻥ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺭ ﻭﺨﺎﺭﺠﻪ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -12‬ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﺭﺍﻜﺯ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻤﺭﺍﻜﺯ ﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻭﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺒﺎﺩل ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -13‬ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﻁﻼﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺘـﻭﺍﻓﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -14‬ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺴﻊ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﻲ ﻟﻌﻀﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺘﻁـﻭﻴﺭ ﺒـﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻁﺭﺍﺌﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -15‬ﻗﻴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺈﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ ﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔـﺔ ﻤﻨﻬـﺎ ﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺎﺕ ﺘـﺴﺭﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﻁﺎﺭﻴﺢ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺯﺓ‪ ،‬ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ ﻜﻔـﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﺨـﺭﻴﺠﻴﻥ ﻭﺘﻘـﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﺘـﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ...‬ﻭﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -16‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﻤﺜل ﻟﻠﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﺼل ﺍﻷﺴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴـﺎﺕ ﻜـل‬
‫ﺤﺴﺏ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻪ ﻭﺍﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴﺎﺘﻪ ﻭﺘﻘﻠﻴﺹ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻔﻴﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﺴﹰﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -17‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﻤﻜﺎﻨﺔ ﺍﻷﺴﺘﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻥ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓـﺫ ﻟﻤﻨـﻊ‬
‫ﻅﺎﻫﺭﺓ ﻫﺠﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺍﺕ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -18‬ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﻨﺢ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻔﻭﻗﻴﻥ ﻤﻜﺎﻓﺂﺕ ﻤﺠﺯﻴﺔ ﻟﻴﻜﻭﻨﻭﺍ ﻗﺩﻭﺓ ﻷﻗﺭﺍﻨﻬﻡ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -19‬ﺍﻥ ﻴﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻗﺒﻭل ﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻻﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﻤـﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺨـﺎﻡ ﻟﻠﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻫﻡ ﻴﺸﻜﻠﻭﻥ ﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺩﺨﻼﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻥ ﻗﺒﻭل ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺒﺄﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻴﻌﺎﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻘﺒﻭﻟﻬﻡ‬
‫ﻴﻨﺴﺤﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺨﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -20‬ﻨﻅﺭﹰﺍ ﻻﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻤﻤﻥ ﻫﻡ ﺒﻤﺭﺘﺒﺔ ﺃﺴﺘﺎﺫ‪ ،‬ﺃﺴﺘﺎﺫ ﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﻨﺔ ﺒﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﻏﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻤﻠﺔ ﺍﻷﻟﻘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﺩﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﻭﺍﻹﺸﺭﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﻤﻊ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -21‬ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻓﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﻴﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺭﻤﻴﻤﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -22‬ﺘﺒﺎﺩل ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﺠﻨﺒﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻋﻘﺩ ﺍﻻﺘﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺍﺜﻘﺎﻓﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -23‬ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﻔﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻔﻴﺩﺓ‪.‬‬

‫‪251‬‬
‫‪ -24‬ﺒﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺨﻔﺽ ﺍﻹﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻪ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺤﺘﻤﹰﺎ‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﻭﺼـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﺒﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻺﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻨـﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴـﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻷﻨﺸﻁﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -25‬ﺒﻨﺎ ‪‬ﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺴﺒﻕ ﺫﻜﺭﻩ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺎﺴﻠﻭﺏ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻭﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻘﺼﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﻠﻭﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﺘـﺼﺭﻑ ﺒﺘﺨﺼﻴـﺼﺎﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺸﻜل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﺭﺍﻩ ﻤﻨﺎﺴﺒﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺴﻴﺭ ﻨﺸﺎﻁﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻴﻔـﻀل ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ ﻋﻠـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺴﺎﻟﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺍﻷﺴﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺜﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴـﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺤﺘﻴﺎﺠﺎﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺘﻔﺼﻴل ﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﻭﺍﻷﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺤﺼﺭ ﻜﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻘﺴﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻭﻅﺎﺌﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘـﺴﻡ ﺍﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺘﻘﺴﻡ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﻴﻠﺔ ﺒﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻫﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﻭﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺴﻬل ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺘﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻜل ﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ ﺃﺴﺎﺱ ﻋﻠﻤـﻲ ﺴـﻠﻴﻡ‬
‫ﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -26‬ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺘﻤﺘﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﻘﻼﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﻸﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻟﻐﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻜﻔـﻭﺀﺓ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺒﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -27‬ﻤﻨﺢ ﺭﺅﻭﺴﺎﺀ ﺍﻷﻗﺴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺤﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻤﻜﻨﻬﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺹ ﺒﺄﻗـﺴﺎﻤﻬﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﺸﺠﻊ ﺍﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺴﻡ ﻟﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -28‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺭﻙ ﺍﻷﺴﺎﺱ ﻟﻜل ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﺍ ﻴﺼﺒﺢ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﻴﹰﺎ ﺨﻠﻕ ﺒﻴﺌـﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺤﺜﻴﺔ ﺴﻠﻴﻤﺔ ﻴﺘﺠﻠﻰ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻕ ﻭﺍﻹﺒﺩﺍﻉ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺨﻠﻕ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﻤﺔ ﺒﺤﺙ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﻤﺭﻨﺔ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻴـﺘﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻌﻁﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺜﺔ ﻭﺘﺸﺠﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔـﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺭ ﻭﺨﺎﺭﺠﻪ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -29‬ﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﻬﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺭﻗﻴﺘﻬﻡ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -30‬ﺘﺸﺠﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺄﻟﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺯﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﻓـﺄﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻭﺘﺴﻬﻴل ﺍﻷﻤﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -31‬ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺭﻓﻊ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺨﺼﺼﻴﺔ ﻟﻌﻀﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻔﺭﻍ ﻟﻔﺘﺭﺍﺕ ﺯﻤﻨﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺤﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺨﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺭ ﻟﻠﺒﺤﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -32‬ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺜﻴﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺠﺯﺀ ﺃﺴﺎﺴﻲ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻀﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪252‬‬
‫‪ -33‬ﺘﻭﺴﻴﻊ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺒﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻁﻼﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻤﻨﺢ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺨﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻗﻴﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺴﻌﺔ ﻭﺘﺤﻔﺯ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﺯ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -34‬ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺘﺘﺒﻌﻴﺔ ﻟﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺭﻴﺠﻴﻥ ﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﺒﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺘﺨﺼﺼﺎﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻨﺎ ﺘﻭﺼﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﺔ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺈﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﺸﻌﺒﺔ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻟﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌـﺔ ﺍﻟﺨـﺭﻴﺠﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﻤﺩﻯ ﻗﺩﺭﺘﻬﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ‪.‬‬

‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺭﻓﻊ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‬

‫‪ -1‬ﺩﻋﻡ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻤﻴﻥ ﺒﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﺨﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺠﻨﺒﻴﺔ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺘﺠﺎﺭﺏ ﺒﻼﺩﻫﺎ ﻭﺜﻤـﺭﺍﺕ ﻫـﺫﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺏ‪ ،‬ﻟﻨﺴﺘﻔﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻴﺭ ﻤﺎ ﻋﻨﺩﻫﻡ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻀﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﻤﻥ ﺃﻨﻰ ﻭﺠﺩﻫﺎ ﻓﻬﻭ ﺃﺤﻕ ﺍﻟﻨـﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺒـﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻹﻋﻼﻥ ﻋﻥ ﺠﺎﺌﺯﺓ ﻷﻓﻀل ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻜﻠﻴﺔ )ﺤﺴﺏ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ( ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺒـﺎﻟﻁﺒﻊ ﻴﺘﻁﻠـﺏ ﻭﻀـﻊ‬
‫ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻓﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺴﺎﺴﻬﺎ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -3‬ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﻟﻘﺎﺀ ﺴﻨﻭﻱ ﻴﻀﻡ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻜل ﺘﺨﺼﺹ ﻤﺘﻨﺎﻅﺭ ﺍﺫ ﺘﻨﺎﻗﺵ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻜﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻘـﻀﺎﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘـﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺤﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﻜل ﻤﺎ ﻫﻭ ﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻭﺤﺴﺏ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺴﺘﻠﺯﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻅﺭﻭﻑ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -4‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺭﺘﻜﺯ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻵﺘﻴﺔ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺠﻌل ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻫﻡ ﻤﺤﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﻡ ﻨﻘﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﺔ ﻭﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﻟﻬﻡ ﻴﺠـﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻥ ﺘﺤﻅﻰ ﺒﺄﻭﻟﻭﻴﺔ ﻜﺒﻴﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺯ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ ﻤـﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺼـل‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻗﺴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻨﺎﻅﺭﺓ ﻟﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺭﻴﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴﺙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ‪.‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻹﺤﺴﺎﺱ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻓﻨﺤﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺸﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻟﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻋﺭﺍﻗﻲ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﺒﻤـﺎ‬
‫ﻴﺸﺠﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﻭﺘﺨﻁﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻭﺍﺠﺯ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺘﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺭﻴﺠﻴﻥ ﺘﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﺒﻜﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﻭﺒﻤـﺎ ﻴﺨـﺩﻡ‬
‫ﻤﺠﺘﻤﻌﻬﻡ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -5‬ﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻤﺎ ﺴﺒﻕ ﺒﺸﻜل ﺃﻓﻀل ﻓﻲ ﻅل ﺠﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻨﺎﻅﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻤﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل‪:‬‬

‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﺘﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎﺕ ﺜﻨﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ‪.‬‬

‫‪253‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺘﺭﺍﺒﻁ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﻴﺠﻤﻊ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺄﺨﺫ ﺼﻭﺭ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﺸﻤﻭﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺤﻴﺙ‬
‫ﻴﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﺤﺕ ﻤﻅﻠﺔ ﻤﺅﺴﺴﺔ ﻋﺭﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﺭﺍﺌﺩﺓ ﺍﺴﻭﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴـﺔ ﻴﻜـﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬

‫• ﺘﻭﺜﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺘﺒﺎﺩل ﺍﻟﺯﻴﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﻠﻁﻼﺏ ﻭﺍﻷﺴﺎﺘﺫﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﺒﺭﻨﺎﻤﺞ ﺘﺒﺎﺩﻟﻲ‪.‬‬

‫• ﺘﻔﻌﻴل ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺒﺤـﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤـﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺒﺎﺩل ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻭﺃﻤﻭﺭ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪.‬‬

‫ﻤﻊ ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺔ ﺒﺈﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﺠﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﻟﻜل ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻟﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌـﺭﻑ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺘﻌﺩ ﻜﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻤﺭﺠﻌﻴﺔ ‪ benchMark‬ﻟﻠﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﺩﻭﺭﻱ ﻜﺠـﺯﺀ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺘﻭﺴﻴﻊ ﺍﻓﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻲ ﻭﻻﺴﻴﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩ‪ -‬ﺘﺒﺎﺩل ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﻭﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﻕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻟﻴﻑ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻼﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﻴﺎﺕ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫـ‪-‬‬

‫‪ -6‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻡ ﺤﺎﻟﻴﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺴﺒﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻭﻗﺩ ﺃﺼﺒﺤﻨﺎ ﺍﻵﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺭﻨﻴﺕ ﻭﻨﻅـﻡ ﻤـﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺩﻴﻭ ﺍﻟﺸﺒﻜﻴﺔ )‪ ( Net worked Video Conference‬ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻤﺜل ﺍﺘﺼﺎل ﺒﺎﻟﺼﻭﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﻭﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺭﻜﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﺒﺘﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻋﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﺒﻜﺎﺕ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻨﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺇﻟـﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﺇﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺹ ﻓﻲ " ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺸﺒﻜﻴﺔ " ﻓﻲ ﺤﺭﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﺤﻴـﺙ ﻴـﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ‬ ‫ﺃ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼﻟﻪ ﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻤﺭﺍﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻵﻟﻴـﺔ ﺒﺎﻷﻗـﺴﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺒﺎﻟﻔﻴﺩﻴﻭ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺼﻭﺕ‪.‬‬

‫ﺤﺙ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓـل‬ ‫ﺏ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﻟﻌﺭﻀﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﺒﻜﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻋﻥ ﺒﻌﺩ ﻭﺇﺭﺴﺎﻟﻬﻡ ﺇﻟـﻰ‬ ‫ﺝ‪-‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﻬﺩﻑ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺒﻜﺎﺕ ﻭﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻜﻭﺍﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻗﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺘﺠﻬﻴﺯ ﺒﻌﺽ ﻗﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻀﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺒﺄﺠﻬﺯﺓ ﺤﺩﻴﺜﺔ ﻭﺸﺒﻜﺎﺕ ﻨﻘل‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩ‪-‬‬

‫ﺘﻴﺴﻴﺭ ﺍﻗﺘﻨﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺒﺔ ﻷﺠﻬﺯﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﺒﻴﻭﺘﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎﻻﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻩ‪-‬‬

‫‪254‬‬
‫ﺇﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﻤﻜﺘﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺠﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺩﻴﻭ ﻜﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻜﺘﺒﺔ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴـﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ‪-‬‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﻤﻬﺎﻤﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺘﺴﺠﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺩﻴﻭ ﺤﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﻁﻠﺏ ﻨﻅﻴﺭ ﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﻼ ﻋﻤﺎ ﻟﺩﻴﻬﺎ ﻤـﻥ ﻗﺎﺌﻤـﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﺴﺠﻠﺔ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﺴﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻴﺯﺍﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﻤﺢ ﺒﺎﻟﺴﻔﺭ ﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﻤـﺅﺘﻤﺭ‬
‫ﺨﺎﺭﺠﻲ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻟﻌﻀﻭ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﻓﻘﻁ ﻤﺭﺓ ﻜل ﻜﺫﺍ ﺴﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﻴﺘﻴﺢ ﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺘﺎﺒﻌﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺩﻴﻭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟـﺔ ﺭﺍﺌـﺩﺓ ﺍﺘـﺼﺎل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ ﺒﻌﺎﻟﻡ ﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺩﻴﻭ‪.‬‬

‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ‬

‫‪ -1‬ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺩﻟﻴل ﺇﺭﺸﺎﺩﻱ ﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺨﻴﺹ ﻭﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻟﻤﺅﺴـﺴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻭﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺒﻭل ﺒﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻤـﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﻤﺠﺘﻤـﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻭﺜﻕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺭﺴﻤﻴﹰﺎ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﺘﻐﻁﻲ ﻜل ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴـﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴـﺔ ﺴـﻭﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒـ )ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺩﻯ ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺒـﺭﺍﻤﺞ‪،‬‬
‫ﻤﺩﻯ ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺩﻯ ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺍﻷﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻨﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺩﻯ‬
‫ﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻁﻼﺒﻴﺔ(‪ ،‬ﻭﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -3‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺤﺩﺙ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺩﻟﻴل ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺸﻬﺩﻫﺎ ﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻋﺭﺒﻴﹰﺎ ﻭﺩﻭﻟﻴﹰﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -4‬ﺇﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺘﺴﻤﻰ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻲ ﺘﻤﻠـﻙ ﺤـﻕ ﺇﺼـﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟـﺩﻟﻴل ﻭﺘﻤـﻨﺢ ﺍﻟﺘـﺭﺍﺨﻴﺹ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﻭﻓﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﺨﻁﻭﺍﺕ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻨﻁﻠﻕ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺘﺴﻤﻴﺔ )ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻲ( ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺘﺎﺒﻌﺔ ﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪.‬‬

‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ‬

‫‪ -1‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﺜﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﻭﺨﺼﻭﺼﹰﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺔ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻓـﻲ ﺘـﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴـﺫ ﺃﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -2‬ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻗﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴـل ﺍﻻﺴـﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ ﻤـﺼﻔﻭﻓﺔ‬
‫)‪(SWOT‬‬

‫‪ -3‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺨـﻼل ﺍﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ ﻨﻤـﺎﺫﺝ ﺘﺤﻠﻴـل ﻤﺤﻔﻅـﺔ ﺍﻷﻋﻤـﺎل ) ‪Business‬‬
‫‪.(Protfolio‬‬

‫‪255‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻻ‪ :‬ﻭﺜﺎﺌﻕ ﻭﺘﻘﺎﺭﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﺘﺤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻤﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺏ‪ ،‬ﺍﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺅﺴـﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌـﺎﻟﻲ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟـﻭﻁﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪،‬ﻭﺭﻗﺔ ﻋﻤل ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﻭل ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻨﻅﻤﺘﻪ ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻨﺴﻜﻭ‪ ،‬ﺒﺎﺭﻴﺱ‪1998 ،‬‬
‫‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺔ‪ " ،‬ﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺩﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻨﺩﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻨﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺔ ﺤﻭل ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻹﻨﺘﺎﺠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ "‪. 1983 ،‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻭﺜﺎﺌﻕ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻻﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻭﺍﺠﺒﺎﺕ ﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ " ‪. 2002 ،‬‬
‫‪ -4‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻭﺜﺎﺌﻕ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﺠﺫﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻴﺨﻴﺔ ﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﺤﺘﻰ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪ ،"2000‬ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻭﺜﺎﺌﻕ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪. 1999 ،‬‬
‫‪ -5‬ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻻﻓﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ"‪ ،‬ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ ‪. 1987 ،‬‬
‫‪ -6‬ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‪. 2001 ،‬‬
‫‪ -7‬ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺭﺍﺀ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻻﺤﺼﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﻋﻭﺍﻡ ‪ ،" 1994-88‬ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -8‬ﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻭﺤﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ " ،‬ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺭﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻋﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺒﻴﺭﻭﺕ‪. 1989 ،‬‬
‫‪ -9‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ‪ " :‬ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺴﻴﺎﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻗﻲ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‪. 1988 ،‬‬
‫‪ -10‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ " ،‬ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﻭﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻗﻁﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻁﺭ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟـﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ‬
‫‪ ،" 1985-1981‬ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪. 1981 ،‬‬
‫‪ -11‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ " ،‬ﻨﺩﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻭﺽ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤـﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤـﻲ "‪22 ،‬‬
‫ﺤﺯﻴﺭﺍﻥ‪. 1992 ،‬‬
‫‪ -12‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪. " 2001 ،2000‬‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻴﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼﺡ ﺤﺴﻥ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ‪ /‬ﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺩﺍﺨﻠﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺘﻬـﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺼـﺭﺓ "‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪ :‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﻭﺍﺌل ﻟﻠﻁﺒﺎﻋﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺸﺭ‪. 2000 ،‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺩﻴﻨﻜﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﻴﺘﺸﻴل‪ " ،‬ﻤﻌﺠﻡ ﻋﻠﻡ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ "‪ ،‬ﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ ﺍﺤﺴﺎﻥ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‪. 1980 ،‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺍﻟﺸﻤﺎﻉ‪ ،‬ﺨﻠﻴل ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺤﺴﻥ ﻭﺤﻤﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺨﻀﻴﺭ ﻜﺎﻅﻡ‪ " ،‬ﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﻭﺩﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﻴـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪. 1991 ،‬‬
‫‪ -4‬ﺍﻟﻁﺤﻼﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺭﺠﺎﺌﻲ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒل " ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭﻴـﺔ ﻤـﺼﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﻁﺒﻌﺔ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﺴﻴﻭﻁ‪. 1998 ،‬‬
‫‪ -5‬ﺍﻟﻌﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﺭﺤﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻴﻭﺴﻑ‪ " ،‬ﺍﺴﺎﺴﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻟﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫"‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻻﻭﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﻭﻴﺕ‪ :‬ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺴل ﻟﻠﻁﺒﺎﻋﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺸﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺯﻴﻊ‪. 1990 ،‬‬

‫‪250‬‬
‫‪ -6‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺼﺭ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻴﺩ ﺤﻤﺯﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﺯﻭﻙ‪ ،‬ﻋﺼﺭﻴﺔ ﺭﺩﺍﻡ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ " ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﻤﻁﺒﻌـﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺼل‪. 1989 ،‬‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﻁﺎﺭﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺘﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺴﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺴﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ‪ " ،‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ‪ BSC‬ﺒﺎﺴﺘﺨﺩﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﺒﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻨﻅﺎﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻟﻴﻑ ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﻨﺸﻁﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﻤـﺼﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻻﺭﺩﻨﻴـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻁﺭﻭﺤﺔ ﺩﻜﺘﻭﺭﺍﻩ )ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﻩ(‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺼﺭﻴﺔ‪. 2001 ،‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺤﻤﺎﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻴﻭﺴﻑ ﺘﻭﻤﺎ‪ " ،‬ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻜﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﺜﺭﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﻜﻔﺎﺀﺘﻬﺎ "‪ ،‬ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ ) ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ(‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐـﺩﺍﺩ‪،‬‬
‫‪. 1976‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺍﻟﺨﻔﺎﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺤﻤﺩ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺸﻬﻴﺩ‪ " ،‬ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻻﻫﻠـﻲ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻌـﺭﺍﻕ "‪ ،‬ﺭﺴـﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ)ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﻩ(‪،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻩ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪. 1994 ،‬‬
‫‪ -4‬ﺍﻟﺩﻟﻴﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺒﺘﺴﺎﻡ ﺤﺎﺘﻡ ﻋﻠﻭﺍﻥ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ – ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ "‪،‬‬
‫ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ‪ )،‬ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ(‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺼﺩﺍﻡ‪. 2002 ،‬‬
‫‪ -5‬ﺴﻠﻁﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼﺡ ﻋﻠﻲ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﺜﺭﻩ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﺭﻜﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ " ‪ /‬ﻨﻴﻨﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ )ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ(‪،‬‬
‫ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺼل‪. 1996 ،‬‬
‫‪ -6‬ﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻋﻼﺀ ﺠﺎﺴﻡ‪ " ،‬ﺩﻭﺭ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺸﺭﻜﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺭﻭﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﺯﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻁﺭﻭﺤﺔ ﺩﻜﺘﻭﺭﺍﻩ‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪،‬‬
‫‪. 2003‬‬
‫‪ -7‬ﺍﻟﻌﺒﻴﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻏﺎﻨﻡ ﺴﻌﻴﺩ ﺸﺭﻴﻑ‪ " ،‬ﺘﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻟﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻗﻲ ﻭﺍﺜﺭﻫﺎ ﻓـﻲ ﻜﻔﺎﻴﺘـﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻁﺭﻭﺤﺔ ﺩﻜﺘﻭﺭﺍﻩ‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻋﻴﻥ ﺸﻤﺱ ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -8‬ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺯﻱ‪ ،‬ﺴﻌﺩ ﺤﻤﻭﺩ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺜﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺯﻨﺎﺕ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻁﺭﻭﺤﺔ ﺩﻜﺘﻭﺭﺍﻩ‪) ،‬ﻏﻴـﺭ‬
‫ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ(‪،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻩ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪. 1990 ،‬‬
‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻨﻁﻭﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺭﺤﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺘﺄﻤﻼﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻘﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﺍﺠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌـﺎﻟﻲ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻤـﺸﺭﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﻗﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ "‪ ،‬ﻤﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻨﺴﻜﻭ ﺍﻻﻗﻠﻴﻤﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻭل ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ‬
‫)‪ ،(54‬ﻜﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻻﻭل‪1992 ،‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻨﻴﺱ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻅﻴﻡ‪ " ،‬ﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﻟﺘﺤﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻤـﺼﺭ‬
‫ﻭﺘﺤﺩﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﻥ ‪ ،" 21‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻭﻓﻴﺔ‪.1996 ،‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺭﻴﺘﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺴﻤﺎﻋﻴل ﻴﺤﻴﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺠﺒﻭﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻨﺼﻴﻑ ﺠﺎﺴﻡ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺩ )‪ ،(8‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ )‪،(25‬‬
‫‪.2001‬‬

‫‪251‬‬
‫‪ -4‬ﺘﻭﻕ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺭﺓ ﻭﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﻫﺎ ‪" ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺭﺴـﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻠـﻴﺞ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ"‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ )‪ ،(15‬ﺍﻟﺭﻴﺎﺽ‪.1985 ،‬‬
‫‪ -5‬ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺏ‪ ،‬ﺍﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺩﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺩﺍﺌل ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺠﻠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﺘﺤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ )‪.1992 ،(27‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟـﻭﻁﻥ‬
‫‪ -6‬ﺩﺍﻏﺭ‪ ،‬ﻤﻨﻘﺫ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ‪ "،‬ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ‪ :‬ﻤﺩﺨ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ "‪ ،‬ﻟﻤﻨﺘﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻱ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺼﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻟﻠﻤـﺩﺓ ﻤـﻥ ‪ 26-25‬ﻨﻴـﺴﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺼل‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﺒﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪. 2001 ،‬‬
‫‪ -7‬ﺍﻟﺩﺒﺎﻍ‪ ،‬ﺭﻴﺎﺽ ﺤﺎﻤﺩ‪ " ،‬ﺃﺴﺱ ﻭﻤﻌﺎﻴﻴﺭ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻭﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ "‪ ،‬ﻭﺭﻗﺔ ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻱ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺼﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﻤﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ‪ 26-25‬ﻨﻴﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺼل‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺩﺒﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪. 2001 ،‬‬
‫‪ -8‬ﺩﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﺒﺭﺍﻫﻴﻡ‪ " ،‬ﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ :‬ﻓﻜﺭﹰﺍ ﻭﻭﺍﻗﻌـﹰﺎ "‪ ،‬ﻭﺭﻗـﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻨﺩﻭﺓ ﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﻅﻤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﻔﻜـﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒـﻲ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﻤﻊ ﺭﺍﺒﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪. 1998 ،‬‬
‫‪ -9‬ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻤﺭﺍﺌﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﻬﺩﻱ ﺼﺎﻟﺢ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺴﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻭل ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻴﺞ "‪ ،‬ﺒﺤﺙ ﻤﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻨﺩﻭﺓ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻀﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﺩﻭل ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻴﺞ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺭﻴﺎﺽ ‪1987‬‬
‫‪ -10‬ﺴﻼﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺭﻤﺯﻱ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺘﻴﺴﻴﺭ‪ " ،‬ﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌـﺎﻟﻲ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬـﻭﻡ ﻭﺍﻟـﺩﻭﺍﻋﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﻟﻴﺎﺕ "‪ ،‬ﻭﺭﻗﺔ ﻗﺩﻤﺕ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﻟﻠﺩﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺜﻴﻥ ﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﺘﺤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺼﻨﻌﺎﺀ‪. 1997/3/3 – 1 ،‬‬
‫‪ -11‬ﺼﻘﺭ‪ ،‬ﻫﺩﻯ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﻭﺭﺍﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺫﻫﻨﻲ "‪ ،‬ﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻓﺔ ﺍﻟـﺸﺎﻤﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺤﻘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪ 20-18 ،‬ﻓﺒﺭﺍﻴﺭ ‪.2003‬‬
‫‪ -12‬ﺼﻘﺭ‪ ،‬ﻫﺩﻯ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺘﻜﻨﻠﻭﺠﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤـﻲ ﺍﻟـﺴﺎﺒﻊ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺸﺭﻭﻥ ﻟﻼﺤﺼﺎﺀ ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺴﺏ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻴﺜـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﺒﺭﻴل ‪2002‬‬
‫‪ -13‬ﻋﺎﺒﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻨﻘﺩﻴﺔ ‪" ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺎﺕ ﺘﺭﺒﻭﻴـﺔ"‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ)‪ ،(44‬ﻤﺠﻠﺩ )‪ ،(7‬ﻋﺎﻟﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﺔ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.1998 ،‬‬
‫‪ -14‬ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺜﺎﻤﺭ ﻤﺤﻤﻭﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺼﺎﻟﺢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺴﺘﺨﺩﺍﻡ ﺍﺴﻠﻭﺏ ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﻤـﺴﺎﺭ ﻓـﻲ ﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻭﺍﻤل ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺜﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺹ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻻﻗﺘـﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻴـﺔ "‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺩ )‪ ،(2‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ )‪1995 ،(3‬‬
‫‪ -15‬ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻐﻔﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻡ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻟﻕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺘﺠﺭﺒﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺍﻕ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﻓﺩﻴﻥ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺩ )‪ ،(24/2‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ )‪ ،(68‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺼل‪.2002 ،‬‬
‫‪ -16‬ﺍﻟﻌﺒﻴﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺎﻫﺭ ﻤﻭﺴﻰ‪ "،‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻘﻼﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﺍﻟﺭﺴﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤـﺩﻴﺙ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ "‪ ،‬ﺒﺤﺙ ﻤﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴـــــﺘﻨﺼﺭﻴﺔ‪29-27 ،‬‬
‫ﺍﺫﺍﺭ‪. 1989 ،‬‬

‫‪252‬‬
‫‪ -17‬ﺍﻟﻌﺒﻴﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺎﻫﺭ ﻤﻭﺴﻰ ﻭﺁﺨﺭﻭﻥ‪ " ،‬ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻋﻘﺩ ﺍﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻲ ﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ "‪،‬‬
‫ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ – ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ‪1992 ،‬‬
‫‪ -18‬ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺴﻌﺩ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺍﺤﻠﻬﺎ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌﻠﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻻﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻲ "‪،‬‬
‫ﺒﺤﺙ ﻤﻘﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭﻱ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺼﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﻤﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ‪ 26-25‬ﻨﻴـﺴﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺼل‪ ،‬ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﺒﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪. 2001 ،‬‬
‫‪ -19‬ﺍﻟﻌﺯﺍﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻭﻫﺎﺏ‪ " ،‬ﺘﻜﻨﻠﻭﺠﻴﺎ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ ﻭﺍﺴـﺘﺨﺩﺍﻤﻬﺎ ﻓـﻲ ﺒﻨـﺎﺀ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺘﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﺍﻟـﺴﻨﻭﻱ ‪ /‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌـﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﻴﺘﻭﻨـﺔ‪،‬‬
‫‪.2002‬‬
‫‪ -20‬ﺍﻟﻌﺯﺍﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻭﻫﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻭﻓﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﻭﺍﺼﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴـﺔ‬
‫)‪ " ،(ISO 9000 – 2000‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻤﺱ‪.2002 ،‬‬
‫‪ -21‬ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺯﻱ‪ ،‬ﺴﻌﺩ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺤﻤﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺜﺭ ﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻋﻤﺎل‪ :‬ﺍﻁﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴﻬﻲ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺼﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ )‪ ،(36‬ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻴﻠﻭل ‪.2001‬‬
‫‪ -22‬ﻓﺭﺠﺎﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻨﺎﺩﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ‪" ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ"‪،‬‬
‫‪.1991‬‬
‫‪ -23‬ﺍﻟﻘﺭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺒﻥ ﺴﻌﺩ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻻﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺠﻠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ "‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺭﻴﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﺠﻤﺔ‪ :‬ﺩﻤﺸﻕ‪.1995 ،‬‬
‫‪ -24‬ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻫﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﻭﺴﻰ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﻕ‪ "،‬ﻨﺤﻭ ﺭﺅﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺼﻼﺡ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﻜـﺎﺩﻴﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﻱ ‪ /‬ﻤـﻨﻬﺞ ﻨﻘـﺩﻱ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻁﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ "‪ ،‬ﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﻭﺍﻭﺭﺍﻕ ﻋﻤل ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺘﻘﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﺀ ﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺤﻠﺏ‪ ،‬ﺴﻭﺭﻴﺎ‪. 2003 ،‬‬
‫‪ -25‬ﻤﻘﺩﺍﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻓﺨﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺘﺤﻠﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴـﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﻤﺭﺤﻠـﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺎﺴﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺭﺩﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺤﻭﻅ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﻗﻊ ‪" ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ"‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺩ )‪ ،(24‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ )‪،(1‬‬
‫‪.1997‬‬
‫‪ -26‬ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻗﻴﺱ‪ " ،‬ﺍﻻﻨﺜﺭﺒﻭﻟﻭﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ "‪ ،‬ﺒﻴﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪1990 ،‬‬
‫‪ -27‬ﻴﻭﺴﻑ‪ ،‬ﺸـﺎﻫﻨﺎﺯ ﻤـﺼﻁﻔﻰ ﻭ ﻋﺒـﺩ ﺍﻟﻠﻁﻴـﻑ‪ ،‬ﻨـﺸﻭﻯ ﻋﺒـﺩ ﺍﻟﺒـﺎﻗﻲ‪ " ،‬ﺤـﻭل ﺍﻤﻜﺎﻨﻴـﺔ‬
‫ـﺴﺘﻘﺒل "‪،‬‬‫ـﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤـــ‬ ‫ـﻲ ﺠﺎﻤﻌـــ‬ ‫ـﺩﻴﻭ ﻓـــ‬ ‫ـﺅﺘﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻴـــ‬‫ـﺎﻡ ﻤـــ‬ ‫ـﺎل ﻨﻅـــ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺨـــ‬
‫‪Http:// umbra.Nascom.Nasa.gov/Spartan/video conferences.html..2002‬‬
‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﻨﺘﺭﻨﻴﺕ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺯﻴﺩﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺍﺩ ﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﻤﺭﺍﺩ‪ " ،‬ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺠـﺎﻤﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻤـﺼﺭﻱ "‪،2001 ،‬‬
‫‪www.cairoeun.eg‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺸﺭﻜﺔ ﺍﻻﺘﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻭﺩﻴﺔ‪ " ،‬ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺒﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻻﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻓـﻲ ﺸـﺭﻜﺔ ﺍﻻﺘـﺼﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻭﺩﻴﺔ "‪www.saudi management.org ،2002 ،‬‬

‫‪253‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻷﺠﻨﺒﻴﺔ‬
st
1 -Researches & Reports:
1- Brancato , C.K. , " Newcorporate Performance Measures " , New york :
The Conference Board , 1995 .
2- Goh , Eddie , " A Guide on How to Use the Balanced Scorecard to
Improve Corporate Performance " , Case Study .
3- Johnson , R & Seymour , D. , " The Baldrige As An Award and
Assessment Instrument for Higher Education , in D.Seymour , (ed.) , High
Performing Colleges I: Theory and Concepts " , Maryville , Mo: Prescott ,
1996 .
4- Mohdi Isa , Zailan , " The Development of Performance Measurement
Framework in The Management of Public Office Building " , 9th European
Real Estate Society (ERES) / Cutting Edge Conference , 4-7 June ,
Glasgow , United Kingdom , 2002 , Available from www.tlog.Ith.se/
documents.
5- Powell , Rick and McGuire , Sharon , "The Measurement and
Measurement of Performance in Distance Education" , Institutional
Research , Athbasca University , 2002 .
6- United Nation Developing Program (UNDP) , Human Development
Report , N. Y. Oxford University press , 1999 .
7- United Nation Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization , World
Science Report , Paris , 1993 .
8- United Nation Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization , World
Science Report , Paris , 1993 .
9- United Nation Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization , World
Science Report , Paris , 1993 .
2nd Thesis
1- Thompson , Deborah S. , " The Perceived Appropriateness of The
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Education Dilot Criteria for
Assessing Quality in Georgia's Technical Institute " , Unpublished Ph:D
thesis , U.S.A: the Geogia State University , 1996.
rd
3 Books
1- Amaratunga , D. , " Performance Measurement of Higher Education
Facilities: The Balanced Scorecard Approach " (Research Foundation
Paper Series) , 2000 .
2- Arcaro , Jerome S. , " Quality in Education / An Implementation Hand
book " , Published by Vanity books International , New Delh: 1997 .
3- Atkinson , Anthonu A. , Banker , Rajiv D. , Kaplan , ndRebert S. , & Mark
Young , " Management Accounting " , Prentice Hall , 2 ed. , 1997 .
4- Atkinson , Anthony , et.al , " Management Accounting " , Prentice-Han ,
New Jersy , 1995 .
5- Bonstingl , John Jay , Schools of Quality . " An Introduction to Total
Quality Management " , Alexandria , VA , Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development , 1992 .
6- Bontis , Nick , " Managing Organizational Knowledge by Diagnosing
Intellectual Capital: Framing and Advancing the State of Field " , Indea
Group Publishing , 2001 .
7- Borg , W. & Gall , M. , " Educational Research: An Introduction " .
Longman Inc. , New York , 1979 .

254
8- Brinker , Barry J. , "Performance Measurement" , WG & L/R/A Group ,
Boston , 1996.
9- Brown, D.M & Laverick, S., "Measuring Corporate Performance , Long
Range Planning" , 1994.
10- Caillods , Francoise , " The Prospect for Educational Planning " ,
UNESCO: International Institute for Educational Planning , Paris , 1989 .
11- Clinton , Bill , " Business Process Re engineering Fundamentals " ,
Democratic Presidential Nominee Gov. , 1992 .
12- Czepile , John A., "Competitive Marketing Strategy", Prentic Hall
Englewood CL.FFS , 1992.
13- Daft, "Organization Theory & Design", 4th ed., South West, 2001.
14- Daft, Richard L., "Organization Theory and Design, 7th ed.", South –
Western College, U.S.A. , 2001.
15- Davis , Stam & Albaright , Tom , " The Balanced Scorecard " , In "
Guide to Cost Managet " , Brinker , Barryj , John Wiley & Sons , Inc. ,
2000 .
16- Drury , Colin , " Management and Cost Accounting " , 5th ed. , Business
Press Thomsen Learning , 2000 .
17- Evans , J.R. , " Productional Operations Management " , 5th ed. , U.S.A.
, West Publishing Company , 1997 .
18- Ewell , P. , " Developing Statewide Performance Indicators for Higher
Education " , In S.S. Ruppert (ed.) , Charting Higher Education
Accountability: A Sourcebook on State – level Performance Indicators ,
Denver: Education Commission of the State , 1994 .
19- Ford , R.C. , Armandi , B.K. , & Heaton , C.P. , " Organizational Theory
and Integration Approach " , Harper & Row Publishers , New York , 1988.
20- Gerloff , E.A. , " Organizational Theory and Design: A Strategic
Approach for Management " , Mc Grow – Hill Book Co. , Singapore ,
1985 .
21- Gord , J.R. , Mondy , R.W. , Sharplin , A. , & Premeaux , " Management
and Organizational Behavior " , Allan & Bacon Inc. , U.S.A. , 1990 .
22- Gordon , G.G. & Cummins , " Managing Management Climate " , D.C.
Heath Company , U.S.A. , 1979 .
23- Gralnik David B. , " Webster New World Dictionary " , Second College
Edition , New York , 1984 .
24- Hansen , G.A. , " Automating Business Process Reengineering " , 2nd
ed., Prentice Hall PTR , U.S.A. , 1997 .
25- Hellriegll , D. , Slocum , J. , " Management " , New York , 1991 .
26- Hexter , E.S. , " Case Studies in Strategic Performance Measurement " ,
New York: Conference Board , 1997 .
27- Hill , Jon , and Pullen , John , " Implementation A Strategic
Performance Management system . Measuring Strategic Performance " ,
Part three , Mercor Media , Inc. , 2001 .
28- Horngren , Charles , T. , Foster , George & Srikant M. Dater , " Cost
Accounting: A managerial Emphsis " , 10th , Prentice Hall of India , New
Dalhi , 1996 .
29- Hunger, David & Wheelem, Thomas,L.,"Strategic Management",
Addison Wesley Longman, 2000.
30- Innes , J. , Mitchell , F. & Yoshikawa , T. , " Activity Costing for
Engineers " , John Wiley and Sons , Inc. , 1994 .
31- Ivancevich , John M. , " Human Resource Management " , Irwin / Mc
Grow – Hill Co. , Inc. , New York , 1998 .
32- Jackson , Jonsth H. , & Mathis , Robert L. , " Human Resources
Management " , 7 ed. , U.S.A.: West Publishing Co. , 1994 .

255
33- Johnston , James , N. , " Indicators of Education System , Kogan ,
London , 1981 .
34- Jones , Gareth R. & George , Jennifer M. , " Organizational Behavior:
Understanding and Managing " , Addison – Wesley publishing Co. ,
Tokyo, 1996 .
35- Kanter , Jerome , " Managing with Information " , 4th ed. , India:
Prentice – Hall of India , 1996 .
36- Kaplan & Atikinson , " Advanced Management Accounting " , 3rd ed. ,
Prentice Hall , 1998 .
37- Kaplan , R.S. , and Norton , D.P., "The Strategy Focussed
Organization", HBS Press, Boston, USA, 2000.
38- Krajewski th, L.J. & Ritzman L.P. , " Operation Management Strategy &
Analysis " , 4 ed. , Addison – Wesly , U.S.A. , 1996 .
39- Lawrence , R. and William , F. , " Strategic Management and Business
Policy " , 3rd ed. , Mc Grow – Hill Co. , 1989 .
40- Likert , Rensis , " The Human Orgnization " , Mc Grow Hill , Inc. ,
Tokyo , 1967 .
41- Marr , B. , Neely , A. & Thomas , G. , " Balanced Scorecard and
Strategy Maps: How Intangibles Drive Corporate Performance at Shell
International " , London , Uk. , 2002 .
42- Mehrens , W.A. , & Lehman , rdI.J. , " Measurement and Evaluation in
Education and Psychology " , 3 ed. , New York: Holt Rinehart and
Winston , 1994 .
43- Morgan , Colinrd & Murgatroyd , " Total Quality Management in The
Public Sector " , 3 ed. , U.S.A. , Bankingham , 1997 .
44- Obrein , B. , " Information Management Decisions , Briefings & Critical
Thinking , Pitman Pub , 1995 .
45- O'Brien , James A. , " Management Information System , A managerial
End User Perspective " , IRWIN Richard , D. , Inc. , 1990 .
46- Pitts , R. , & Lei , D. , " Strategic Management " , Building & Sustaining
Competitive Advantage " , West Pub , U.S.A. , 1996 .
47- Post , Gerald V. , & Anderson , Daivid L. , " Management Information
Systems / Solving Business Problems with Information Technology " , 2nd
ed. , Mc Grow – Hill Co. , Inc. , 2000 .
48- Post , Gerald V. , & Anderson , David L. , " Management Information
Systems
nd
/ Solving Business Inc. Problem with Information Technology " ,
2 .ed. , Mc Grow – Hill Co. , 2000 .
49- Psacharopoulus , George , " Economics of Education Research and
Studies " , New York: Pergamon Press , 1987 .
50- Rice , A.K. , " The Modern University: A model Organization " ,
Tavistock Publication , 1970 .
51- Rinehart , Gray , " Quality Education ASQs " Quality Press . United
States of America , 1993 .
52- Samuel , C. , Certo & Perter , Paul , " Strategic Management Concepts
& Application " , 3rd ed. , Richard Irwin , Inc. , 1994 .
53- Schermerhorn , J.R. , Hunt , J.G. & Osborn , R.N. , " Managing
Organization Behavior " , 5th ed. , John Wiley & Sons , Inc. , New York ,
1994 .
54- Simones , R. , " Performance Measurement and Control System for
Implementing Strategy " , Prentice Hall , 2000 .
55- Stewart , T.A. , " Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations
" , New York: Doubleday / Currency , 1997 .
56- Stewart A.C. & Carpenter , Hubin , " The Balanced Scorecard: Beyond
Reports and Ranking Planning for Higher Education " , 2001 .

256
57- Swamy , Ramesh , " Strategic Performance Measurement in the New
Millennium " , 2002 .
58- Torey , Philip , " Quality Assurance in Continuing Professional
Education: An Analysis " , London and New York: Routledge , 1994 .
59- UNESCO , " Higher Education in The Twenty first Century Vision and
Action – Working Document " , Paris , 1998 .
60- UNESCO, "Statistical Year Book 1998", U.S.A. UNESCO Publishing
Bernan Press, 1998.
61- UNESCO, "Statistical Year Book", U.S.A., UNESCO Publishing
Bernan Press, 1993.
62- United Nation Educational , " Scientific and Cultural Organization
Statistical " , Year books , 1998 , U.S.A , UNESCO Publishing Bcrnan
Press , 1998 .
63- Vasu,M.L.,Steward D.W.,&Garson,G.D., “Organizational Behavioral
and Public Management,3rd. ed., U.S.A. Marcel Dekker.1988.
64- Waller , D.L. , " Operation Management: A Supply Chain Approach "
Thompson Business Press , London , 1999 .
65- Weston , J.F. , " Evaluation Company Performance in Maynard " , H.B. ,
Hand book of Business Administration , New York , Mc Grow Hill Book
Co. , 1970 .
66- William , Little , H.W. Fowler and Jessie Coulson , " The Shorter
Oxford English Dictionary " , Charendon Press , Oxford , U.S.A. , 1974 . nd
67- Wite , B.D. & Neyer R. , " Strategic Process Content " , Context , 2 .
ed. , Thompson Business Press , 1998 .
68- Wright , P. , Kroll , M. , & Paruell , J. , " Strategic Management:
Concepts " , Printice – Hall , 1998 .
69- Zommuta , R.F. , " Assessing Organizational Effectiveness: Systems
Change Adoption and Strategy " , Suny – Albany Press , Albany , Ny ,
1982 .
4th Periodicals
1- Akkermans , Henk & Van Oorschot , Kim , Developing A Balanced
Scorecard with System Dynamics , " Journal of The Operational Research
Society " , May , 2002 .
2- Andersen , MAJ Dave , Balanced Scorecard – Balanced Life , " Army
Pharmacy " , Vol. 2 , No. 2 , May , 2001 .
3- Ansari, Mahfooz A., & Baumgartel Sullivan George, The Personnel
Orientation Organization Climate Fit and Managerial Success , "Human
Relations" , Vol. 35, No. 12, 1985.
4- Brewer , P.C. & Speh , T.W. , Adapting The Balanced Scorecard to
Supply Chain Management " Sup Chain Management Review " , 5 (2) .
2001 .
5- Bryan , Valeric C. , Diagnostic and Prescriptive Instrument of Quality
Indicators , in Quality in Higher Education , U.S.A. Vol. 4 , 1998 .
6- Burton , Richard , Lauridsen , Jorgen & Obel , Borge , " Tension and
Resistance to Change in Organizational Climate: Managerial Implication
for A fast Paced world , " Journal of Human Resources " , September , 22 ,
1999 .
7- Butler , A. , Letza ,S. R. and Neale , B. , Linking The Balanced Scorecard
to Strategy , Long Rang Planning Vol. 30 , No. 2 , 1997 .
8- Carlson , W. , & Mc Nurlin , B. , Basic Principles for Measuring It Value
, " I/S Analyzer " , 30 (10) , 1992 .
9- Connon Patrik E. , Total Quality Management: A Selective Commentary
on Its Human Dimensions , " Public Administration Review " , Vol. 57 ,
No. 6 , November / December , 1997 .

257
10- Cooper R. & Kaplan R.S., Measure Costs Right: Make the Right
Decisions , " Harvard Business Review " , Sept / Oct , Vol. (66) , No. (5) ,
1988 .
11- Cox , T.H. , Lobel , S.A. & Mcleod , P.L. , Effects of Ethnic Group
Cultural Deference on Cooperative Behavior on Group Task " , Academy
of Management Journal , Vol. 34 , No. 4 , 1991 .
12- Crump, Donald W., About those Quality Control Programs , " Planning
for Higher Education " , Vol. 22 , No. 1 , 1993 .
13- Curry Adrienne & Brysland Alexandria , Innovation and Integration in
Public Service Manage , " Total Quality Management or Reengineering or
Constraints " , May , 1999 .
14- Davenport, Thomas H., Process Innovation Reengineering Work
through Information Technology, "Harvard Business School", Press, U.K.,
1993.
15- Doyle , P. , Setting Business Objectives and Measuring Performance , "
Jounal of General Management " , Vol. (20) , No. (2) , 1994 .
16- Figg , J. , Balanced Scorecard Receive High Marks , " Internal Auditor",
Vol. 57 , No. 2 , Database – Academic Search Elite , 2000 .
17- Forehand , G.A. & B.H. Gilmer , Environment Variation in Studies of
Organization Behavior , " Psychological Bulletin " , Vol. 62 , 1964 .
18- Frazer , Malcolm , " Quality Assurance in Higher Education
Proceedings of An International Conference " , London: The Falmer Press ,
1992 .
19- Frigo , Mark L. , Pustorino , Paul G. and Krull Jr. George W. , The
Balanced Scorecard for Community Banks: Translating Strategy into
Action , " Bank Accounting and Finance " , Vol. 13 , No. 3 , Database –
Academic Search Elite , 2000 .
20- Hanlon , J. & Mortensen , Making Teacher Evaluation Work , Ohio
State University Press " , " Journal of Higher Education " , Vol. 51 , No. 6 ,
Nov / Dec , 1980 .
21- House , E.R. Alternative Education Strategies in Higher Education , "
Designing Academic Program Review "" , No. 37 , Sanfrancesco Jossey –
Bass , March , 1982 .
22- Hundson , M. , Smart , A. & Bourne , M. , Theory and Practice in SME
Performance Measurement Systems , " International Journal of operations
and Production Management " , 21 , 2001 .
23- Kaplan , R. & Norton , D. , The Balanced Scorecard Measures that
Drive Performance , " Harvard Business Review " , (January – February) ,
1992 .
24- Kaplan , R. & Norton , D. , The Balanced Scorecard Trans Strategy into
Action , Harvard Business Review Press , 1996 .
25- Kaplan , R.S. , and Norton , D.P. , Putting The Balanced Scorecard to
Work , " Harvard Business Review " , Sep. / Oct. , 1993 .
26- Kaplan, R.S., Analog Devices: The half – life Metric, "Harvard Business
School", Case 9, 1990.
27- Kathleen , Corak , Organizing for Quality , in " Planning for Higher
Education " , U.S.A. Vol. 21 , No. 4 , 1993 .
28- Levine , M. & Wright , P. Testing Transferability of A self – Developed
Teaching Effectiveness Measure , Across Colleges of Business , " Journal
of Higher Education " , Vol. 58 , No. 1 , January / February , 1987 .
29- Lorsch , J.W. , Managing Culture: The Invisible Barrier to Strategic
Change , " California Management Review " , XXVIII , 2 , Winter , 1986.

258
30- Lysons, Art & Paul, Ryder, An Application of Jones and Jame's
Perceived Climat Questionnaire in Australian Higher Educational
Institutions, "Higher Education", Vol. 18, 1989.
31- Marsh , H.W. , & Roche , L. , The Use of Students Evaluations and
Individually Structured Intervention to Enhance University Teaching
Effectiveness , " American Educational Research Journal " , Vol. 30, No.1,
1993, Spring 1993.
32- Massy , William F. , Wilger , Andreak , & Colbeck , Carol ,
Overcoming Hollow Collegiality , Change , July – August , 1994 .
33- Millerk , D. & Bromiley , P. , Strategic Risk Corporate Performance: An
Analysis of Alternative Risk Measures , " Academy of Management " ,
Vol. 4 , 1990 .
34- Molamin , R. , Alearning Organization: Machine or Human?
"University of Jyvarula" , Seminaarinr , 15 , Finland , Dec: Vol. 63 – 04c
of Dissertation , Obstracts , International , 2001 .
35- Mooraj , S. , Dyon , D. , & Hostettler , D. , The Balanced Scorecard: A
necessary Good or An Unnecessary Evil , " European Management
Journal" , 17 , 1999 .
36- Neal , Andrew , West , Michael & Patterson , Malcolm , An
Examination of Interaction between Organizational Climate and Human
Resource Management Practices in Manufacturing Organization , " Aston
Business School Research Institute Papers , Birmingham " , 2000 .
37- Neely , A. , etal. , Performance Measurement System Design: A
literature Review Research Agenda , " International Journal of Operations
and Production Management " , 15 (4) , 1995.
38- Newing , R. , Benfits of A balanced Scorecard , " Accountancy " ,
November , 1994 .
39- O'reilly II. , C.A. , Chatman , J. & Caldwell , D.F. , People and
Organizational Culture: A profile Composition Approach to Assessing
Person – Organization fit , " Academy of Management " , Vol. 34 , No. 3 ,
1991 .
40- Paris , Katleen A. , Excellence in Higher Education , " Service for
Planning and Improvement Journal " , January / February , Vol. 4 , No. 1 ,
2000 . Available from http://www.wisc.edu/improve .
41- Phadnis , Shree , The Balanced Scorecard , " Quality & Productivity
Journal " , March 2 , 2002 .
42- Porter , M. E. , Capital Disadvantage: America's Failing Capital
Investment System , " Harvard Business Review " , Sep. – Oct. , 1993.
43- Rogers, E. D., W.G. Miles & W.D. Biggs, "The Factor Replicability of
The Litwin and Stringer Organizational Climate Questionnaire: An Inter
Organizational Assessment, "Journal of Management", Vol. 6, No. 1, 1980.
44- Rowe , W.G. , Morrow , J.L. & Finch , J.F. , Accounting , Market , and
Subjective Measures of Firm Performance: Three Siedes of the Sam Coin ?
" Academy of Management Meeting " , Vancouver , Canada , 1995 .
45- Senyshen , Mechael , ABM: The Next Step – Part 2 " CGA Magazine " ,
Canada , 1997 .
46- Swamy , Ramesh , Strategic Performance Measurement in The New
Millennium "CMA Management" , May , 2002 , (Ramesh . Swamy @
DMA Water Com) .
47- Thacker & Associates , " Focused Improvement System " , Paper About
Focused Improvement Systems A development of TQM and Kaizen ,2002.
48- The Center for Information – Development Management , Making A
Business Case for Single Sourcing , " Best Practices " , Vol. 3 , No. 2 ,
April 2001.

259
49- Towle , G. , The Balanced Scorecard: Not Just An Other Fad ,
"Executive Journal " , 40 (1) , 2000 .
50- Tribus , M. , TQM in Min Education: The Theory and How to put It to
Work , in Quality Goes to School: Reading on Quality Management in
Education , " American Association of School " , Vol. 61 , No. 5 , 1986 .
51- Twigg , Carol A. , Improving Productivity in Higher Education The
Need for A paradigm Shift , CAUSE / EFFECT , Summer , 1992 .
52- Venkatraman , N. , & Ramanuja , V. , Management of Business
Performance in Strategy Research: Comparison of Approaches ,
"Management Review " , Vol. (11) , No. (4) , 1986 .
53- Victor , B. , & Cullen , J.B. , The Organization Bases of Ethical Work
Climates , " Administrative Science Quality " , 33 , 1 ,18 , 1988 .
54- Vught , Frans van , The New Context for Academic Quality in
Emerging Patterns of Social Demand & University Reform Through
a Glass Darkly , Pergamon / AU press , 1995 .
55- Warren , K. , Langley , P. , The Effective Communication of System
Dynamics to Improve Insight and Learning in Management Education , "
Journal of the Operational Research Society " , 50 ,1999 .
56- Wu , B & Petrshiuses , S. , The Halo Effect in Store Image
Management, " Academy of Marketing Science Journal " , Vol. 15 , N. 3 ,
1987.
57- Young , David , Economic Value added: A primer for European
Managers , " European Management Journal " , Vol. 15 , No. 4 , 1997 .
5th Internet & E-mail
1- " If You Can't Measure It , You Can't Manage It , The Balanced Scorecard
(BS) " , 1999 , Available from www.successprofiles.com .
2- " Strategic Performance Retreats " , Technology Development Center ,
Available from www.sbtdc.org.
3- "Performance Measurement Systems" , Available from
www.opm.gov/perform/articles .
4- CEO Review . Com . Balanced Scorecard: " Translating Strategy into
Action " , CEO Review.com. , 2002 , Available from
www.cerreview.com/books/scorecard.htm.
5- Co bbold , T.M. and Lawrie G.J.G. , " The Development of The Balanced
Scorecard As A Strategic Management Tool " , Boston MA; U.S.A. , July
2002 , Available from www.ZGC.Co.UK.
e-mail: [email protected]
6- Cobbold I.M. and Lawrie G.J.G , " Classification of Balanced Scorecard
Based On Their Effectiveness as Strategic Control or Management
Control Tools “Boston M A.,U.S.A.,2000 available from
www.2GC.CO.UK.
7- Glunke , Ursula & Wilderom , Celestep. M. , " Organizational
Effectiveness: Corporate Performance , Why and How Two Research
Traditions Need to Be Merged ? " , 2000 ,Available Form www.sbtdc.org.
8- Hillwatch Co. , " A Balanced Scorecard Approach to Measuring and
Improving Your Return on Web Investments " , 2001 , Available from
www.hillwatch.com.
9- Lindgren , Niclas & Lappalainen , Anneli , Balanced Scorecard for
University " , 2000 , e-mail: [email protected].
10- Malhotra , Yogesh , " Measuring Knowledge Assets of A Nortion:
Knowledge Systems for Development " , Research Paper Prepared for the
Invited Keynote Presentation Delivered at The United Nations Advisory
Meeting of The Dep. Of Economic and Social Affairs , New York , 4 – 5
Sep. , 2003.

260
11- Markham , Reed , " University Strategic Planning Application of The
Balanced Scorecard to International Public Relations / Communication
Programs " , 1998 , Available from www.csupomona.edu.
12- Mohd Isa , Zailan , "The Development of Performance Measurement
Framework in " the Management of Public Office Buildings" , 2002 ,
Available from www.tlog.ith.se/Decuments
13- Rawlings , K.M. , Parker , W.J. & Shadbolt , N.M. , " The Applicability
and Use of The Balanced Scorecard for The Farm Manager " , Australian
Argi – Food 2000 Research Forum Melbourne August , 7 , 2001 ,
Available from http://www.agribusiness.asn.au.
14- Relyea , Vice & Hafner , Kristine , " The Balanced Scorecard in Higher
Education " , CSU Quality Improvement S. Ympsium , 1998 , available
from www.ucop.edu.
15- Rimar , Stephen , Morahan , Page S. , & Richman , Rosalyn C. , " The
Balanced Scorecard: Strategy and Performance for Academic Health
Centers " , April 2000 , Available from www.mcphu.edu.
16- Robinson , Timothy , " What Is The Balanced Scorecard Method Z.
Why Does It Require Specialise " , June 2002 , Available from
www.Hccs.NETAU.
17- Ruben , Brent D. , "Toward A Balanced Scorecard for Higher
Education: Rethinking the College and University Excellence Indicators
Framework", QCI. The Center for Organizational Development and
Leadership, New Jersey, 1999, Available from http://www.qci.rutgers.edu.
18- Ruben , Brent D., Lehr J. , De Angelis J. , " The Value of The Baldrige
Framework for Self . Assessment and Improvement in Education: the
Rutgers Excellence in Higher Education Program " , Center for
Organizational Development and Leadership New Jersey , 2000 ,
Available from http://www.qci.rutgers.edu.
19- Ryan , James H. , " Using the Balanced Scorecard in Higher Education",
2001 , Available from www.psu.edu.
20- Sedera , Darshana , Gable Guy , and Rosemann Michael , " A Balanced
Scorecard Approach to Enterprise Systems Performance Measurement " ,
Australia , in Proceedings of The Twelfth Australasian , Conference on
Information Systems , 2001 .
21- Shulver , Michael , " Aprocess for Developing Strategically Relevant
Measures of Intellectual Capital " , UK. 2000 , Available from
www.ZGC.Co.UK.
22- Skymark Corporation , " Balanced Scorecard , Skymark Corporation " ,
2001 Available from
www.Skymark.com/resources/medoths/balancedScorecard.asp.
23- Walsh , Paul , " The Balanced Scorecard: The Australian Experience " ,
Australia , Available from http://www.cpaonline.Com.au.

261