Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Yönetici sezgisi yerine algoritma: Algoritmik iş yükü dağıtım kararlarının bireysel performansa etkisi

Year 2023, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 31 - 44, 31.12.2023
https://doi.org/10.55044/meusbd.1369817

Abstract

İş yükünün çalışanlar arasında hakkaniyete uygun bir şekilde dağıtımı, örgütsel ve yönetsel adaletin önemli bir parçasıdır. Bu çalışmanın amacı iş yükü dağıtım kararlarında yönetici sezgisi yerine matematiksel bir algoritma kullanımının işgücü performansına etkisini incelemektir. Bu amaçla geliştirilen 0-1 tamsayılı programlama modeline göre iş yükü dağıtımının işgücü performansını artıracağı varsayılmaktadır. Bu varsayımı test etmek için tasarlanan randomize kontrollü bir deney büyük bir limanın konteyner terminalinde uygulanmıştır. Terminalde çalışan işçilerin yarısı (deney grubu) 0-1 tamsayılı programlama yöntemine göre diğer yarısı (kontrol grubu) ise yönetici sezgisine dayalı olarak bir ay boyunca üç görev arasında rotasyona tabi tutulup performansları izlenmiştir. Toplanan verilere uygulanan regresyon analizi, deney grubundaki çalışanların performansının kontrol grubunda olan çalışanların performansına göre önemli ölçüde yüksek olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu sonuç, organizasyonlarda verilen dağıtım kararlarında matematiksel bir algoritma kullanımının dağıtımsal adaleti veya adalet algısını etkileyeceğini göstermektedir.

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(5), 422-436.
  • Battarra, M., Fraboni, F., Thomasson, O., Erdoğan, G., Laporte, G., & Formentini, M. (2021). Algorithms for the Calzedonia workload allocation problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 72(9), 2004-2017.
  • Bertsimas, D., Lulli, G., & Odoni, A. (2011). An integer optimization approach to large-scale air traffic flow management. Operations Research, 59(1), 211-227.
  • Borba, L., & Ritt, M. (2014). A heuristic and a branch-and-bound algorithm for the assembly line worker assignment and balancing problem. Computers & Operations Research, 45, 87-96.
  • Cesaní, V. I., & Steudel, H. J. (2005). A study of labor assignment flexibility in cellular manufacturing systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 48(3), 571-591.
  • Claure, H., Kim, S., Kizilcec, R. F., & Jung, M. (2023). The social consequences of machine allocation behavior: Fairness, interpersonal perceptions and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 146, 107628.
  • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278-321.
  • Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of applied psychology, 86(3), 425.
  • Corominas, A., Ojeda, J., & Pastor, R. (2005). Multi-objective allocation of multi-function workers with lower bounded capacity. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56(6), 738-743.
  • Eiselt, H. A., & Marianov, V. (2008). Employee positioning and workload allocation. Computers & Operations Research, 35(2), 513-524.
  • Ernst, A. T., Jiang, H., Krishnamoorthy, M., & Sier, D. (2004). Staff scheduling and rostering: A review of applications, methods and models. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(1), 3-27.
  • Gökmoğol,M.R., (2021). Lojistik Kavramları Sözlüğü. GK Kitap Yayınları.
  • Güler, N. (2008). Konteyner Limanı Operasyon Yönetimi. M. Erdal (Ed.), Konteyner Deniz ve Liman İşletmeciliği. (s.165-181) içinde. Beta.
  • Hull, R. (2006). Workload allocation models and “collegiality” in academic departments. Journal of organizational change management, 19(1), 38-53.
  • Janssen, O. (2001). Fairness perceptions as a moderator in the curvilinear relationships between job demands, and job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 1039-1050.
  • Kim, M., Ford, E., Smith, W., Bowen, S. R., Geneser, S., & Meyer, J. (2021). A system for equitable workload distribution in clinical medical physics. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 22(12), 186-193.
  • O’Meara, K., Jaeger, A., Misra, J., Lennartz, C., & Kuvaeva, A. (2018). Undoing disparities in faculty workloads: A randomized trial experiment. PLoS One, 13(12), e0207316.
  • Pereira, J., & Ritt, M. (2023). Exact and heuristic methods for a workload allocation problem with chain precedence constraints. European Journal of Operational Research, 309(1), 387-398.
  • Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438.
  • Tümiş, O. (2008). Konteyner Limanı Operasyon Yönetimi. M. Erdal (Ed.), Konteyner Deniz ve Liman İşletmeciliği. (s.83-164) içinde. Beta.
  • Ye, Q. C., Zhang, Y., & Dekker, R. (2017). Fair task allocation in transportation. Omega, 68, 1-16.

Managerial intuition vs. algorithm: The effect of algorithmic workload allocation on labor performance

Year 2023, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 31 - 44, 31.12.2023
https://doi.org/10.55044/meusbd.1369817

Abstract

Equitable distribution of workload among employees is an important part of organizational and managerial justice. The aim of this study is to examine the effect of using a mathematical algorithm instead of manager intuition in workload distribution decisions on workforce performance. We argue that workload allocation according to the 0-1 integer programming model developed for this study would increase labor performance. A randomized controlled trial designed to test this argument was implemented in the container terminal of a large seaport. Half of the workers (treatment group) employed in the terminal were rotated between three tasks for a month based on the 0-1 integer programming method. The other half (control group) were also rotated between the same tasks based on manager intuition. We measured the performance of individual workers in both groups for all working days in a month. Regression analysis applied to the collected data shows that the performance of the individuals in the treatment group was significantly higher than the performance of the control group. This result shows that the use of a mathematical algorithm in distribution decisions made in organizations will affect distributive justice or the perception of justice.

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(5), 422-436.
  • Battarra, M., Fraboni, F., Thomasson, O., Erdoğan, G., Laporte, G., & Formentini, M. (2021). Algorithms for the Calzedonia workload allocation problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 72(9), 2004-2017.
  • Bertsimas, D., Lulli, G., & Odoni, A. (2011). An integer optimization approach to large-scale air traffic flow management. Operations Research, 59(1), 211-227.
  • Borba, L., & Ritt, M. (2014). A heuristic and a branch-and-bound algorithm for the assembly line worker assignment and balancing problem. Computers & Operations Research, 45, 87-96.
  • Cesaní, V. I., & Steudel, H. J. (2005). A study of labor assignment flexibility in cellular manufacturing systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 48(3), 571-591.
  • Claure, H., Kim, S., Kizilcec, R. F., & Jung, M. (2023). The social consequences of machine allocation behavior: Fairness, interpersonal perceptions and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 146, 107628.
  • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278-321.
  • Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of applied psychology, 86(3), 425.
  • Corominas, A., Ojeda, J., & Pastor, R. (2005). Multi-objective allocation of multi-function workers with lower bounded capacity. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56(6), 738-743.
  • Eiselt, H. A., & Marianov, V. (2008). Employee positioning and workload allocation. Computers & Operations Research, 35(2), 513-524.
  • Ernst, A. T., Jiang, H., Krishnamoorthy, M., & Sier, D. (2004). Staff scheduling and rostering: A review of applications, methods and models. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(1), 3-27.
  • Gökmoğol,M.R., (2021). Lojistik Kavramları Sözlüğü. GK Kitap Yayınları.
  • Güler, N. (2008). Konteyner Limanı Operasyon Yönetimi. M. Erdal (Ed.), Konteyner Deniz ve Liman İşletmeciliği. (s.165-181) içinde. Beta.
  • Hull, R. (2006). Workload allocation models and “collegiality” in academic departments. Journal of organizational change management, 19(1), 38-53.
  • Janssen, O. (2001). Fairness perceptions as a moderator in the curvilinear relationships between job demands, and job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 1039-1050.
  • Kim, M., Ford, E., Smith, W., Bowen, S. R., Geneser, S., & Meyer, J. (2021). A system for equitable workload distribution in clinical medical physics. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 22(12), 186-193.
  • O’Meara, K., Jaeger, A., Misra, J., Lennartz, C., & Kuvaeva, A. (2018). Undoing disparities in faculty workloads: A randomized trial experiment. PLoS One, 13(12), e0207316.
  • Pereira, J., & Ritt, M. (2023). Exact and heuristic methods for a workload allocation problem with chain precedence constraints. European Journal of Operational Research, 309(1), 387-398.
  • Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438.
  • Tümiş, O. (2008). Konteyner Limanı Operasyon Yönetimi. M. Erdal (Ed.), Konteyner Deniz ve Liman İşletmeciliği. (s.83-164) içinde. Beta.
  • Ye, Q. C., Zhang, Y., & Dekker, R. (2017). Fair task allocation in transportation. Omega, 68, 1-16.
There are 21 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Operation Strategy, Production and Operations Management, Maritime Transportation and Freight Services
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Ender Gürgen 0000-0002-1654-3005

Orhan Ozguven 0000-0003-0863-5185

Mehmet Nasih Tağ 0000-0002-8605-280X

Publication Date December 31, 2023
Submission Date October 2, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 7 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Gürgen, E., Ozguven, O., & Tağ, M. N. (2023). Yönetici sezgisi yerine algoritma: Algoritmik iş yükü dağıtım kararlarının bireysel performansa etkisi. Mersin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.55044/meusbd.1369817