Cost and Revenue Allocation in Universities’ Operational Budgeting

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Graduate School of Management and Economics, Sharif University of Technology

2 Industrial Engineering, Sharif University of Technology

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a strong push to establish operational budgeting to set clear goals for activities in government agencies. Thus, universities, as executive agencies in the governmental financial system, are obligated to implement operational budgeting. One of the main objectives for imposing operational budgeting is making the subunits responsible as well as a fair distribution of budget through cost and revenue allocation. A game theory approach is presented for a better allocation of budget to sub-sectors in a university. More precisely, budget allocation is modeled as a co-operative game with departments as the players where their benefits form the characteristic function. First, the core concept is applied for the allocation, so all players’ interests are saved to guarantee the continuation of their collaboration. Then, regarding the possibility of no-existence of the core, the nucleolus is applied to minimize the players’ dissatisfaction. Finally, the novel suggested method in the paper is applied in a university where the results are per experts’ expectations to a good amount

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Ashrafzadeh, S., Razmi, S., Lotfalipour, M., & Feizi, M. (2017). Investigation of profit-loss sharing and fixed-return contracts recovery rate using game theory approach. Applied Theories of Economics, 3(4), 1-20. (In Persian)
  2. Azar, A., Amini, M., & Ahmadi, P. (2014). Applying fuzzy goal programming in university budgeting. IRPHE, 20(2), 1-24. (In Persian)
  3.  Azar, A., Amini, M., & Ahmadi, P. (2013). Robust fuzzy performance based budgeting model an               approach to managing the budget allocation risk - case study: Tarbiat Modares University.                       Management Research in Iran, 6(4), 15-33. (In Persian)
  4. Azar, A., Dolatkhahi, K., & Godarzi, Gh. (2015). Performance based budgeting conceptual model. Public Administration Prespective, 17(4), 65-95. (In Persian)
  5. Dong, M., Lan, T., & Zhong, L. (2014). Rethink energy accounting with cooperative game theory. In the Proceedings of the 20th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking.
  6. Edward, A. (2012). Ranking games and gambling: when to quit when you're ahead. Operations Research, 60(5), 1229-1244.
  7. Engevall, S., & Gothe-Lundgren, M. (2004). The hetrogeneous vehicle-routing game. Transportation Science, 38(1), 71-85.
  8. Ezzati, M. (2008). Applying performance indicators on financial recourses allocations, i.e. performance budgeting, in higher education systems of some countries. The Journal of Planning and Budgeting, 13(1), 155-185. (In Persian)
  9. Ferreri, L., & Cowen, S. (1993). The university budget process: a case study. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 3(3), 299-311.
  10. Gallego, G., & Talebian, M. (2014). Ommissions and sales targets under competition. Management Science, 60(9), 2180-2197.
  11. Abdoli, Gh. (2017). Games theory and it's applications (incomplete information, evolutionary and cooperative games). Tehran: SAMT. (In Persian)
  12. Gholizadeh, M., & Kohanvarz, A. (2015). Operational budgeting requirements in Iran's higher education system. IRPHE, 21(1), 39-59. (In Persian)
  13. Heydari, A., Amiri, M., & Jamour, H. (2018). The role of internal organizational factors in implementing the budgeting system based on performance: an interpretative structural modeling approach (case: Tehran Municipality). Journal of Urban Economics and Management, 6(24), 117-133. (In Persian)
  14. Katok, E., & Wambach, A. (2008). Collusion in dynamic buyer-determined reverse auctions. Management Science, 1-27.
  15. Lemaire, J. (1984). An app ication of game theory: cost allocation. ASTIN Bulletin: The Journal of the IAA, 14(1), 61-81.
  16. Negintaji, Z., & Zamanzadeh, A. (2015). Optimal budget modeling for technical and vocational training organization. Economical Modeling,  9(29), 125-141. (In Persian)
  17. Netessine, S., & Shumsky, R. A. (2005). Revenue management games: horizontal and vertical competition. Management Science, 51(5), 813-831.
  18. Osborne, M. J. (2004). An introduction to game theory. (3 vol.), New York: Oxford university press.
  19. Pourali, M., & Kakavan, S. (2016). The feasibility of the establishment of performance budgeting in Babol University of Medical Sciences and Health Service. Management Accounting, 9(28), 97-118. (In Persian)
  20. Rezaei, m. (2016). Legal requirements of Performance budgeting in Iran. Public Law, 18(51), 55-81. (In Persian)
  21. Tijs, S. H., & Driessen, T. S. (1986). Game theory and cost allocation problems. Management Science, 32(8), 1015-1028.
  22. Valipour Khatir, M., Azar, A., & Amini, M. (2017). Developing performance based budgeting model: organizational excellence approach. Management Research in Iran, 21(2), 179-198. (In Persian)
  23. Volk, S., Thöni, C., & Ruigrok, W. (2012). Temporal stability and psychological foundations of cooperation preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 81(2), 664-676.
  24. Wang, D. (2019). Performance-based resource allocation for higher education institutions in China. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, (65), 66-75.
Quarterly Journal of Applied Theories of Economics
Volume 7, Issue 2 - Serial Number 25
September 2020
Pages 77-102

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics