Provide a decision-making model for medical university administrators in conditions of uncertainty Case study of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences

Document Type : Original Research Article


1 Ph.D Student, Educational Management, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Management, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran


Background and purpose: The purpose of this research is to provide a decision model for the directors of medical universities, which in terms of purpose, is practical and with a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods based on data theory (grounded theory).
Methods: In the qualitative part of the statistical population, including the managers of the Crisis Department and the faculty members of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, sampling by purposeful method and interviews were performed Semi-structured to theoretical saturation and analytical methods have been coding methods. In the quantitative section of the statistical population, including senior and middle managers of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, a simple random sampling method based on the sample size determined by Cochran's method, Data collection was made from a researcher-made questionnaire and analyzed for non parametric statistical experiments, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, SPSS software, SMARTPLS, Excel and structural equation modeling method with partial least squares approach.
Results: The path coefficient of each of the four dimensions extracted from the qualitative stage was effective and significant in explaining the decision in conditions of uncertainty. It was 0.137, which was an appropriate and acceptable value.
Conclusion: The implementation of this model is a change in decisions related to the health system in conditions of uncertainty and will increase the ability of medical university administrators and the resilience of the health system.


1-Instructions for Patient Care Centers 91 DIVOC Corona National Disease Management Headquarters 2020
2 Scientific, Analytical Journal, Kaveh 19, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Research Institute for Futurology in Health, 2020
3- Ostad taghizadeh, A, hamdaneyeh, L, Mashaallahe, AR , Webinar the United Nations Office of Disaster Risk Reduction
COVID 19 Opportunities for Resilient Rehabilitation" Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2020
4.Farsad, A, Tirandaz, H. Qualitative Characteristics of Financial Information and Its Role among Managers. Banking and Economy 2011; 114: 60-66 (Persian).
5.Malek Jafarian R. Theory of Decision Making and Strategy Selection. Journal of Social, Economic, Scientific and Cultural Work and Society. 2013; 162: 67-73 (Persian).
6.Rezaian, S. Kharrazi, SK. Jamali, E. Naderi, A. A Conceptual Model of Cognitive Decision Making. Advances in Cognitive Science. 2019; 21(1):1-20 (Persian).
7.Khalaj, F, Pasha, E, Tavakoli Moghadam, R, Khalaj, M, 1397. A Method for Solving Multi-Criteria Decision Making Problems with a New Definition of Belief Measures in Dumpster Schaffer Theory; New Research in Decision Making, Vol. 3, No. 1, Pp. 137-157.
8. Asadabadi MR. The stratified multi-criteria decision-making method. Knowledge-Based Systems. 2018 Dec 15;162:115-23
9.Toghyani, A, Rajabzadeh, A, Anvari Rostamy, A, 1395. Designing of Decision Making Model in Uncertainty Conditions. Modern Researches in Decision Making. Vol. 1, No. 1, Pp. 189-216.
 10..Fatemeh Mashhadi Haji Ali 1
  Mojtaba Rafiee 2
  11. Schätter F, Hansen O, Wiens M, Schultmann F. A decision support methodology for a disaster-caused business continuity management. Decision Support Systems. 2019 Mar 1;118:10-20.
12.. Akinci C, Sadler‐Smith E. Collective intuition: Implications for improved decision making and organizational learning. British Journal of Management. 2019 Jul;30(3):558-77.
13-Rikke, S, Platou, Arild Aspelund. (2019), Managerial rationales for investing and divesting under uncertainty,   cogent business&management. First published
14. Kwakkel JH, Haasnoot M, Walker WE. Comparing robust decision-making and dynamic adaptive policy pathways for model-based decision support under deep uncertainty. Environmental Modelling & Software. 2016 Dec 1;86:168-83
15.Fazel1 A, Kamalian AR, Rowshan SA. The Ientification of Effective Dimensions and Components on Academic Human Resources Empowerment, Emphasizing the Third and Fourth Generation of Universities with Fuzzy Delphi Approach: Presenting a Conceptual Model. 2017; 10(6): 455-468 (Persian).
16. Hooshisadast SA, Rahimian H, Abbaspour et all. Designing alean University Model for public Universtiies (Case Study Farhangian Teacher Education University (FTEU), Education Strategies in Medical Science. 2018; 11(3): 141-132 (Persian).
17. Falahati A, Delangizan S, Ansari M. Modeling and Strategic Analysis of Retirement Crisis in Iran with the Game Theory Approach. Management Improvement. 2016; 11 (1): 61- 92 (Persian).
18..Jamali Gh, Shahbandarzadeh H, Ahoopay E. Management, Economics, Implementation Analysis of Organizational Excellence Based EFQM. Accounting and Humanities at the Beginning of Third Millennium, Co-operation of Allameh Khoi Institute of Higher Education Zarghan University Research Branch, Available from:
COI: MEAHBTM03_031.  2016 (Persian).
19. Ivy JS, Capan M, Hicklin K, Nataraj N, Orgut IS, Reamer AC, Vila-Parrish A. To Be Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise: Using Decision Modeling to Personalize Policy in Health, Hunger Relief, and Education. InWomen in Industrial and Systems Engineering. 2020 (pp. 233-274). Springer, Cham.
20. Helou MA, DiazGranados D, Ryan MS, Cyrus JW. Uncertainty in Decision Making in Medicine: A Scoping Review and Thematic Analysis of Conceptual Models. Academic Medicine. 2020 Jan 1;95(1):157-65.
21. Miller KE, Singh H, Arnold R, Klein G. Clinical decision-making in complex healthcare delivery systems. In Clinical Engineering Handbook. 2020 Jan 1 (pp. 858-864). Academic Press.
22.Khastar H. Providing a method for calculating coding stage reliability in research interviews. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities Journal. 2009; 15(58): 161-174 (Persian).
23. Hosseini Z, Ghorbani Z, Ebn Ahmady A. Face and content validity and reliability assessment of change cycle questionnaire in smokers. Journal of Mashhad Dental School. 2015;39(2):147-54. (Persian).
24. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity 1. Personnel psychology. 1975 Dec;28(4):563-75.
25. Hajizadeh E, Asghari M. Statistical methods and analyses in health and biosciences a research methodological approach. Tehran: Jahade Daneshgahi Publications. 2011;395.
26. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research. 1981 Feb;18(1):39-50.