Accepted Manuscript

Sustainable development in technological and vocational higher education: Balanced

scorecard measures with uncertainty

Mei-Hui Lin, (Ph.D), Assistant Professor, Jiayao Hu, Ph.D Candidate, Ming-Lang
Tseng, (Ph.D), Professor, Anthony SF. Chiu, (Ph.D), Professor, Mr. Chunyi Lin,
Graduate Student
PII: S0959-6526(15)01878-8
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.054
Reference: JCLP 6526

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 9 May 2014

Revised Date: 3 December 2015
Accepted Date: 15 December 2015

Please cite this article as: Lin M-H, Hu J, Tseng M-L, Chiu AS, Lin C, Sustainable development in
technological and vocational higher education: Balanced scorecard measures with uncertainty, Journal
of Cleaner Production (2016), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.054.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Author Information

First Author
Mei-Hui Lin (Ph.D)
Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, MingDao University,
Taiwan

PT
Second Author

RI
Jiayao Hu
Ph.D Candidate, Nottingham Business School, University of Nottingham, United
Kingdom

SC
Third Author & Corresponding Author

U
Ming-Lang Tseng (Ph.D)
Professor, Department of Business Administration, Lunghwa University of Science
AN
and Technology, Taiwan
E-Mail: tsengminglang@gmail.com
M

Fourth Auhtor
Anthony SF Chiu (Ph.D)
D

Professor, Department of Industrial Engineering, De La Salle University, Manila,

Philippines
TE
EP

Fifth Author
Mr. Chunyi Lin
Graduate Student, Department of Business Administration, Lunghwa University of
C

Science and Technology, Taiwan

AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Sustainable development in technological and vocational higher education:
Balanced scorecard measure s with uncertainty

Abstract
Technological and vocational education plays an important, long-term role in the industrial
development of Taiwan. This study benchmarks the sustainable development

PT
competencies required by the future technological and vocational higher education and
provided details how sustainability issues can be integrated into a modified balanced
scorecard model for industrial-academic cooperation. This study aims to integrate

RI
performance and importance levels using quantitative and qualitative information with a
modified balanced scorecard model, which incorporates expert perceptions by applying the

SC
fuzzy Delphi method, a fuzzy performance score and an analytical network process to
evaluate the interdependent relations within a closed-loop hierarchical structure. The
findings of the study provide an insight into the attributes of the modified model.

U
Specifically, industrial leadership, student acquisition and the cost of service quality
AN
comparisons provide knowledge related to those institutions and indicate that the strategic
plan for sustainable development is particularly helpful for enhancing the stakeholder
relationship and developing a shared understanding of the inter-stakeholders.
M

Keywords: balanced scorecard, closed-loop analytical network process, fuzzy Delphi method,
D

fuzzy set theory, sustainable development, technological and vocational higher education
TE
C EP
AC

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Sustainable development in technological and vocational higher education:
Balanced scorecard measures with uncertainty

1. Introduction
Technological and vocational education (TVE) has served an important role in the long-term
progress and industrial development of Taiwan. This educational development is
significantly intertwined with the direction of industries and human resource needs for the

PT
industries. To satisfy the industry demands, TVE has produced numerous professionals at
the fundamental and intermediate levels of technical knowledge and research and
development (R&D). In recent years, the government has begun to promote TVE to induce

RI
R&D innovation, increase the value of industries and strengthen the competiveness of
industries (MOE, 2011). TVE cultivates practical professionals according to their aptitudes

SC
and capabilities, thereby contributing to industry development (Inayat et al., 2013).
Meanwhile, the technological and vocational higher education (TVHE) focuses on
industrial-academic cooperation, which provides students internships to practice their skills.

U
TVHE institutions have noted that achieving sustainable development (SD) requires
AN
changes in industrial-academic cooperation, which has an aim to reach social,
environmental and economic goals.
Additionally, in TVHE programmes, environmental regulations and mandatory
M

programs have been implemented; the SD pressures to protect the environment have also
come from other external stakeholders in recent years (Karatas and El-Rayes, 2014).
D

Institutions have started to embed environmental programmes into their curricula (Lidgren
et al., 2006). TVHE institutions and the industry sector are focusing on SD. In other words,
TE

SD participants in both academia and the industry sector are trying to be environmentally
friendly and perform green activities to ensure that all industrial-academic cooperation
EP

processes and operational activities adequately address environmental concerns while

maintaining economic benefits and social satisfaction (Tseng et al., 2010; Saeidi et al., 2015).
Hence, institutions must enhance their industrial-academic cooperation not only in student
C

internships but also in long-term SD. This study evaluates how to design aspects and
attributes that benefit industrial-academic cooperation and how well TVHE institutions
AC

perform in SD. This study also identifies the missing attributes in industrial-academic
cooperation in TVHE institutions. SD should include stakeholder and sustainability aspects
for the measurement approach. Still, the existing literature lacks of a set of SD measures
that include those two aspects (Seuring and Muller, 2008; Tseng, 2013; Tseng et al., 2013;
Zailani et al., 2012). Moreover, stakeholders and sustainability measures are primarily
addressed with qualitative information.
Thus, an efficient and accurate model that serves as a tool to control the internal

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
operations, monitor learning and growth and improve sustainability and stakeholder
related is needed. A modified balanced scorecard (BSC) model is used to assess the TVHE
measures using qualitative and quantitative information (Kaplan and Norton 1992; 1996,
p4; Nikolaou and Tsalis, 2013). The quantitative information is expressed numerically, and
qualitative information is presented in the form of data, which are typically verbal
descriptions. Human beings usually make decisions based on verbal descriptions of their
preferences, which are typically subject to uncertainties. Decision makers may be reluctant

PT
or unable to assign exact numerical values to compare their judgments because the aspects
and attributes are subjective and qualitative (Dong et al., 2008; Tseng et al., 2009a; Tseng,
2013). In this situation, a fuzzy assessment should be applied. Fuzzy set theory resembles

RI
human reasoning in its use of approximate information and uncertainty to generate
decisions. Nonetheless, the interdependent relations among aspects and attributes exist in

SC
the closed-loop hierarchical structure of an organisation, and these issues remain unsolved
in the SD literature (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008; Barth et al., 2011; Carter and
Rogers, 2008; Crossley and Sprague, 2014; Grindsted, 2011; Lidgren, 2006; Seuring and
Muller, 2008).
U
AN
The aim of this study is to integrate SD assessment into a modified BSC model using
qualitative and quantitative information. SD has a long-term strategic role in achieving
social, environmental and economic performance. This study presents and organises the
M

modified BSC model with stakeholder considerations and environmental concerns to assess
TVHE institutions in Taiwan. The paper is organised as follows. Section two provides an
D

assessment of the role of the BSC model in SD and a review of the existing literature on
aspects and attributes. Section three presents the methods and proposed analytical steps.
TE

This study utilises data from an expert linguistic preference questionnaire survey in
Taiwanese TVHE. Data were analysed using the fuzzy Delphi method (FDM) to confirm the
EP

expert validity and correctness of the attributes, the fuzzy performance score (FPS) to
integrate the importance and performance levels and the closed-loop analytical network
process (ANP) to address the closed-loop hierarchal structure. The results are discussed in
C

section four, primarily addressing the modified BSC model with uncertainty. The
implications are discussed in section five. The last section presents the conclusions,
AC

discussion, contributions and limitations.

2. Literature Review
This section discusses SD in academia, the modified BSC model and the proposed
method as follows.

2.1 Sustainable development in academia

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Based on the definition by Kaplan and Norton (1992), sustainability formulates a
relationship between dynamic human economic systems and slower changing ecological
systems, in which human life can continue indefinitely, human individuals can flourish, and
human cultures can develop, while diversity, complexity, and function of the ecological life
support system are protected. In addition, Ahi and Searcy (2013) stated that the SD
principle requires significant political engagement due to the constant need to seek
equilibrium among economic, environmental and social concerns.

PT
For instance, Tseng et al. (2008) presented the application of a sustainable production
framework for assessing the relative performance of attributes development in
environmental operations and management activities, which is useful for reviewing and

RI
improving sustainable and strategic development. The role of academia in promoting SD is
significant. Academia typically engages in the design, development and successful

SC
integration of industrial-academic cooperation strategies for SD and helps establish human
capital that possesses adequate training and knowledge in this specific field. SD highlights
the promotion of values and behaviours that are consistent with principles and involves

U
teaching and learning about the concept of SD and stakeholders (i.e., employees, faculty,
AN
community, and policymakers), which includes industrial requirements (Tseng et al., 2009a;
Milutinovi and Nikoli, 2014). It also requires the consideration of an extensive and
integrated set of objectives while monitoring the outcome of development activities with a
M

wide range of indicators. SD recognised that although challenging and insightful theoretical
analyses exist, supportive rhetoric can also be observed in governmental policies and
D

aspirations, multilateral agencies and private sector statements (Crossley and Sprague,
2014; Tseng et al., 2008).
TE

In addition, SD requires a more efficient and accurate performance measurement

model. Numerous prior studies have focused on higher-level SD education. However, the
EP

performance approach remains absent in the current literature. For example, Hubbard
(2009) showed that corporate sustainability measurement systems have presented a lack
of a connection between economic and environmental-social components of sustainability,
C

a lack of empirical verification of theoretical normative works, the absence of quantitative

data for measuring the BSC and limited sustainability information to effectively address the
AC

stakeholders needs. Grindsted (2011) discussed the contributions to the emerging

consensus on the role and function of the university in relation to SD. Universities are now
increasingly institutionalising sustainability practices within their curricula, research,
operations, outreach, and assessment (Lidgren et al., 2006; Lozano, 2010; Nejati and Nejati,
2013; Nikolaou and Tsalis, 2013). Crossley and Sprague (2014) explored how education can
contribute to SD in small state contexts despite the challenges of climate change and the
economic recession. Nejati and Nejati (2013) noted that there is a lack of sufficient studies

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
that investigate the perceptions of major stakeholders within the university setting on the
universitys role in sustainability.
Nonetheless, universities worldwide are changing their mission, vision, and
educational practices to better cope with growing concerns about social and
environmental issues and to respond to growing public demand for a sustainable society
(Nejati and Nejati, 2013). Milutinovi and Nikoli (2014) debated the need to accelerate
efforts regarding the internal integration of universities and assessed current

PT
developments in the theory and practice of higher education for SD and potential
implications for higher education. Previous studies have provided for an increasing focus
on the incorporation of the concepts into research and operations by higher education

RI
institutions (Fien, 2002; Lozano, 2010; Karatzoglou, 2013; Sedlacek, 2013). This study
should give precedence to SD attributes, such as critical thinking and personal choices,

SC
through proper content and interdisciplinary actions. However, the existing SD approach in
education lacks a systematic framework for evaluating performance.

2.2 Modified BSC model

U
AN
The BSC presents performance measurement approaches for management control by
evaluating stakeholders on a scoreboard (Kaplan et al., 1992). Financial indicators that use
performance measures have been criticised as inadequate in rapidly changing
M

environments, particularly when sustainability issues are the primary source of

organisations competitive edge (Tseng, 2013). These attributes include stakeholder
D

satisfaction, internal process integration, social expectations and reputations. To overcome

the limitations of traditional financial-based measures and nonfinancial measures for SD,
TE

this study considers the traditional leading indicators of financial performance.

However, the traditional BSC model is typically focused on business performance. The
EP

model needs to be modified to address both stakeholders and sustainability aspects

simultaneously. This modified model contains qualitative and quantitative information,
which needs to be transformed into comparable scales. The existing literature does not
C

address these issues. Kaplan and Norton (1996) argued that a cause-and-effect
relationship exists between the financial and nonfinancial aspects of a BSC programme.
AC

The BSC combines important practices and concepts from various disciplines and theories
into a single performance measurement framework to help improve performance in four
ways. Cebeci (2009) proposed a decision support system integrated with strategic
management using the BSC model of enterprise resource planning (ERP) selection. The
traditional BSC seeks critical attributes between financial and nonfinancial measures.
Wang et al. (2010) presented a hierarchical BSC model to address the degree of
interaction between performance perspectives and corresponding performance indicators.

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Tseng (2010) proposed a fuzzy network hierarchical BSC model to address the interactive
and interdependence among the aspects and attributes of SD to obtain the weights of
different measures. This study intends to propose a modified BSC model that is
appropriate for this SD assessment. The modified model includes sustainability,
stakeholders, internal business processes and learning and growth aspects.
In terms of sustainability, an organisation must have a binding fiduciary duty to satisfy
environmental and economic sustainability while increasing its market value. The value

PT
network suggests the involvement of other parties (Laplume et al., 2008), where even
competitors are considered stakeholders (Freeman, 1984; Friedman and Miles, 2002;
Karatas and El-Rayes, 2014). Carter and Rogers (2008) and Sedlacek (2013) presented SD

RI
as the strategic integration and achievement of an organisations social, environmental
and economic goals in the systemic coordination of internal business processes for

SC
improving long-term performance and stakeholders. The majority of these organisations
realise that performance assessments are critical to achieving efficient and effective SD
(Tseng et al., 2009b; Tseng, 2013).

U
These approaches typically inhibit the model in many ways. First, these techniques do
AN
not consider how the attributes are maintained in the modified BSC model. Second, the
integrated degree of performance and importance levels of the various measures cannot be
simultaneously determined with the proper analytical method. Last, the traditional BSC
M

model is inadequate because it does not involve additional stakeholders and does not
combine corresponding SD quantitative and qualitative attributes. Therefore, a modified
D

BSC model is proposed in this study.

TE

2.3 Proposed analytical methods

Traditionally, statistical deviation has frequently been used to provide an
EP

understanding of the consensus. However, the associated statistical assumptions do not

accurately reflect fuzzy human judgment compared with random human judgment. Tseng
(2010) demonstrated that the arithmetic average ignores the fuzziness in the grading
C

process and provides less informational content. Experts generally choose a

decision-making setting from a predefined range of numbers to grade the perceptions
AC

based on their own observations (Wu et al., 2010). Subsequently, the collective opinion of
the group is established by aggregating the scores of the individual group members.
Generally, the perceptions are difficult to measure in exact values. As a result, the
perceptions must be estimated using approximate values instead of exact values. This lack
of precision and certainty can be appropriately modelled using a fuzzy set. The obtained
values of a fuzzy matrix are dependent on specific methods or ranking functions (Li and
Hong, 2012; Lin et al., 2013).

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Slack (1994) suggested that the utility of the strategic framework derives from its
ability to simultaneously examine the judgment of the importance of attributes and their
perceptions of the performance of each attribute. However, the traditional approach
presents gaps in importance and performance perceptions, and few studies have integrated
the perceptions into a robust value simultaneously. Although measures of importance and
performance can independently provide useful management information, the combined
measures of importance and performance can effectively identify better competitiveness

PT
drivers, which would yield better marketing and management insights for decision making
(Tarrant and Smith, 2002; Wade and Eagle, 2003; Wu et al., 2010). Therefore, the FPS is
proposed to integrate importance and performance measures.

RI
In addition, a closed-loop hierarchical structure needs to be addressed when the
integrated weights are obtained. Previous studies have disregarded this closed-loop

SC
hierarchical structure with uncertainty (Tseng, 2010; Dias and Diniz, 2013). However, in a
recent study, Tseng et al. (2014) indicated that the closed-loop hierarchical structure
resembles existing applications more accurately. This study proposes a closed-loop ANP

U
method to present the hierarchical structure in the modified BSC model. The emergence of
AN
sustainability, economic benefits and social effects are beneficial for addressing new
challenges in the context of economic, social and environmental disruption (Lewin et al.,
2012; Tseng et al., 2015).
M

This proposed analytical method adequately overcomes the ambiguity of concepts that
are associated with a human beings subjective judgments. These two types of scales must
D

be converted to comparable scales. To construct the modified BSC model, the FDM is
applied to verify the assessment attributes (Hsu et al., 2011). An FPS is determined to
TE

resolve the importance and performance levels in a complex environment (Lin et al., 2013;
Tseng et al., 2013). The decision-making structure always has closed-loop hierarchical
EP

structure and is characterised by interdependent relations in nature. This study proposes

closed-loop ANP to address those issues due to the character of the BSC model. Thus, the
analytical method is proposed in this study.
C

2.4 Modified BSC measures

AC

In a traditional BSC model, financial performance can be improved by focusing on

learning and growth, internal processes and customer aspects. In addition, SD involves
strategic integration for increasing effectiveness and realising organisational goals to
enhance competitiveness (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008; Nejati and Nejati, 2013).
According to Lambert et al. (2006, p2), financial performance can be improved through
the integration of key business processes from end-user through original suppliers that
provide products, services, and information that add value for customers and other

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
stakeholders. Stakeholders have binding fiduciary duties to increase the value for the
organisation. Employees, customers, suppliers and other related groups are involved. To
expand the concept of the stakeholder (Friedman and Miles, 2002; Inayat et al., 2013), this
study proposes a BSC model of learning and growth, internal operations, stakeholders and
sustainability, which are four aspects of the SD concept.
In addition, SD requires a strategic plan, integration, a friendly environment and the
achievement of an organisations social, environmental and economic goals in the systemic

PT
coordination of internal processes for improving long-term performance (Alshuwaikhat and
Abubakar, 2008). Tang and Zhou (2012) observed that environmental aspects included the
consumption of natural resources and the emission of waste and pollution, whereas

RI
stakeholder aspects are related to customers and employees. Assessing the sustainability
dimensions of a BSC (e.g., which metrics appropriately represent sustainability factors and

SC
which attributes are considered in a holistic performance framework) enables the
integration of holistic measures and resulting performance effects.
The sustainability aspect can help an organisation working toward profit maximisation

U
within the gambit of laws and ethics while remaining socially responsibility for and
AN
responsive to society (Saeidi et al., 2015; Tseng et al., 2008; Tseng, 2010). However,
profitability is not a significant advantage of sustainability. For instance, implementing SD
(i.e., corporate social responsibility) activities creates a favourable reputation and enhances
M

employees commitment, morale, and productivity in internal business processes (Barth et

al., 2011; Saeidi, 2015). Additionally, managerial support for the environment always
D

includes the monitoring of collaborative planning, forecasting and the replenishment of

multiple stakeholders (Laplume et al., 2008; Tseng et al., 2009). The competitive advantage
TE

can be improved by proactive SD. In this context, firms have to integrate sustainable
practices into the management of stakeholders.
EP

In internal operations, TVHE focuses on learning-by-doing and practical learning

principles as an important pre-condition for better adjustment to industrial needs. This
aspect refers to the knowledge of operational performance and whether its products and
C

services conform to customers requirements. The customer aspect emphasises a friendly

approach, a shortened process time, an investment in the structure and the infrastructure
AC

and an one-stop-shop spirit to satisfy customers (Tseng et al., 2009b). The current
management philosophy has shown an increased realisation of the importance of a
customer focus and customer satisfaction in a business. An organisations ability to provide
a safe environment for workers involves several attributes, including reducing lost
workdays due to work-related injuries and illnesses, increasing the rate of
employee-suggested improvements in innovation, social, environmental, health and safety
performance, improving employees training on SD, and increasing employees well-being

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
and job satisfaction (Clarke and Kouri, 2009; Lidgren et al., 2006; Wals and Jickling, 2002).
The learning and growth aspect is an important intangible component of the BSC
model. It is related to internal operations, stakeholders and sustainability. This aspect
serves as a basis for management (Inayat et al., 2013; Weenen, 2000). Management is
challenged to produce an effective performance that improves the performance of people
and internal operations. The majority of firms have agreed that employee/faculty/customer
satisfaction is a precondition for success. Methods exist to improve employees satisfaction,

PT
retention and productivity (Tseng et al., 2013; Wright, 2002). Learning and growth facilitate
the alignment of employees, information systems and organisations in SD (Haake and
Seuring, 2009; Nejati and Nejati, 2013). The proposed modified BSC model is constructed

RI
based on prior studies. The activities, components, and characteristics that are associated
with this evaluation framework are proposed as modified BSC model attributes. Figure 1

SC
presents the analytical model of this study.

INSERT Figure 1 here Figure 1. Proposed analytical flow

U
AN
3. Method
To create the assessment in the BSC model, the aspects and attributes have a
closed-loop hierarchical structure with qualitative and quantitative information. The
M

transformation of the quantitative data, the fuzzy Delphi method, the closed-loop ANP and
the proposed analytical steps are described in this section.
D

3.1 Transformation of the quantitative data

TE

The numerical values from the measures are characterised by various units. The
various units cannot be directly compared. The crisp values must be normalised to obtain
EP

unit-free values, which are comparable. The normalised crisp values of Cij are calculated
using Equation 1 (Chen and Lin, 2002; Tseng et al., 2009b):

 = 

min 

  

min 

  0,1;  = 1,2, 
C

(1)

where max
 = max  ,  , .  $ and min
 = min  ,  , . .  $
AC

! "  ! " 

3.2 Fuzzy Delphi method

The FDM was proposed by Ishikawa et al. (1993) and derived from the traditional
Delphi technique and fuzzy set theory. Noorderhaben (1995) presented the FDM with
group decisions to solve the fuzziness of the common understanding of expert perceptions.
The efficiency and quality of questionnaires can be improved. The triangular fuzzy number

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
(TFN) is based on a three-value judgment: the minimum possible value l, the mean
possible value m and the maximum possible value u. The attribute values are dependent

given by an amount i of experts is % = & ,  , ' , i=1,2,3,.n; j=1,2,3,.m, the

on linguistic preferences. Assuming that the value of the significance of the no. j element

weighting % of the no. j element is % = & ,  , '  , where  = ( & $ , ) =
+!   ,  =  ' $. Table 1 displays the linguistic scales and the TFNs for the
!/+

intangible linguistic scales in which the terms are defined (Tseng, 2010).

PT
INSERT Table 1 here Table 1. Linguistic scales

RI
Using the convex combination method, H is expressed as follows:

H = . ' , &  = [' + 1 & ]

SC
' = ' 4'  
3
& = & 4  & 
(2)

U
AN
pessimistic for specific objects. Eq. (3) can be used to acquire the definite value 56 :
The -method is the finite set [0,1] that represents the range from optimistic to

56 = 7[' + 1 & ]

M

(3)
D

Suitable attributes can be screened from numerous attributes by setting the threshold

accepted. If 56 9, the no. j criterion is accepted for evaluation attributes; if 56 < 9,
value . The following rules are applied to attributes regardless of whether they are
TE

then the attribute is not accepted.

EP

A fuzzy set ;< in a universe of discourse X is characterised by the membership

3.3 Fuzzy set theory

function =>6 x, which assigns each element x in X a real number on the interval [0, 1]. The
C

numerical value =>6 x represents the grade of membership of x in ;< (Braae and
AC

Rutherford, 1978; Wu et al., 2010; Tseng et al., 2015). Table 1 presents the corresponding
interval-valued TFNs with linguistic preferences.

Definition. A TFN % is defined by a triangular % = &, , ' with a membership function

described by:

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

0,  < &
 & &,  &
=>6 x = ?
' '  ,  '
(4)
0, ABDEF(GD

Let M be the importance weighted value of perspective i and criterion j. The
membership function of TFN is M I. Let J be the performance value of perspective i
and criterion j. The membership function of TFN is J K.

PT
L
+
= F&
+
, F 
+
, F'
+
, M I, FDED 0 F& F  F' 1
J+ = N& , N  , N' , M K, FDED 0 N& N  N' 1
(5)
+ + +

RI
(6)

where L denotes the values of the respondents for perspective i and criterion j and the

SC
expert weights in the evaluation. The output of the fuzzy system is a fuzzy set; the
defuzzing procedure is used to convert the fuzzy results into clear values. The

U
centre-of-area yields better results than the mean or maximum and is a simple and
AN
practical method for calculating the best non-fuzzy performance (BNP) values (Lin et al.,
2013). Eqs. (7) and (8) determine the BNP values of the fuzzy weights:

OJP = ['
+
&
+
 +  
+
&
+
]3 + &
+
, 
M

OJ = [' &  +   & ]3 + & , 

S
(7)
+ + + + +
(8)
D

The final performance score (FPS) is calculated with Eqs. (7) and (8), where n is the number
TE

of aspects or attributes.

TJI =  OJP OJS 

EP

(9)

3.4 Closed-loop hierarchical structure

C

Saaty (1996) developed an ANP method that simultaneously considers the

relationships between feedbacks and interdependencies. This study assumed
AC

interdependence relations and a closed-loop decision-making model. The consistency ratio

(C.R.) of C.I. to the mean random consistency index (C.I.) is expressed as C.R. (less than 0.1).
Subsequently, the limited weighted supermatrix M*, which is based on Eq. (10), is
determined and enables the gradual convergence of the interdependent relations to obtain
the accurate relative weights among the aspects and attributes.

L = limY[ LY (10)

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3.5 Proposed analytic steps

This study applies the FDM, FPS and ANP to the evaluation of aspects and attributes in
SD. The objective of the study is to analyse how the proposed hybrid method can be used
to rank the aspects and attributes in a modified BSC model. An expert group employed the
following four-step approach:
1 The modified BSC aspects and attributes must be identified. This assessment is

PT
necessary to form an expert team to achieve the study objective. The modified BSC
model composes qualitative and quantitative information from the aspects and
attributes. This step transforms the numerical data and qualitative information into a

RI
comparable scale using Eq. (1).
2 Four aspects and several attributes are obtained from an expert team, which is

SC
composed of experts from universities in the fields of science and technology. The FDM
is employed to eliminate part of the attributes based on the expert opinions and using
Eqs. (2) and (3). The threshold value is computed for expert validity. In addition, the

U
experts are assisted to perform the correctness of the measures.
AN
3 Eq. (4) is then used to justify the membership function of the TFN, and Eqs. (5)-(8) are
applied to compute the performance and importance weighting scores. This approach
employs the FPS using Eq. (9) to integrate the perceptions on the performance and
M

importance levels.
4 The modified BSC model is a closed-loop hierarchical structure. Several FPS values are
D

applied to acquire the weights. This study integrates weights to compose the
supermatrix according to the closed-loop BSC hierarchical structure. The ANP is applied
TE

for this approach using Eq. (10).

EP

4. Results
This study analyses data from TVHE institutions to present the proposed analytical
steps in the SD-BSC analysis. This section is divided into two subsections: the TVHE
C

background in Taiwan and the analytical results.

AC

4.1 TVHE background in Taiwan

TVHE serves an important role in Taiwans industrial development and SD. These TVHE
institutions cultivate numerous professional and technical workforces. The institution not
only provides an infrastructure and positive foundation for economic development but also
enables industries to progress to the international arena. A firm needs to cultivate
professional skills and social responsibility and professionalism in students to develop their
commitment to business and workplace ethics. This vision of an elaborative TVHE

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
integrates additional resources to synchronise the institutional infrastructure with the
market demand in workforces to enhance the quality of education. However,
industrial-academic cooperation has to involve practical teaching and applicable knowledge,
which encourages students with advanced technical skills to pursue successful careers.
Recently, TVHE has experienced challenges due to the gap between educational
programmes and industrial human resource needs. This study proposes two top universities
of science and technology and industrial cooperation firms to evaluate their performance

PT
through discussions with ten industrial practitioners and ten professors from institutions
and industrial firms.
The two top TVHE universities of science and technology decided to develop and

RI
determine the weights of modified BSC aspects and attributes to evaluate their
organisational SD performance. First, the institutions continued to improve their

SC
operational processes but experienced difficulty managing the BSC model in the
competitive environment. Second, the institutions had to sustain reform as a performance
measure to address intensive competition. The management decided to measure their

U
performance with a valid BSC-SD model. The proposed hybrid approach is presented to
AN
address the hierarchical structure and interdependence relations. The management
anticipates that the hybrid approach helps their institutions understand their performance
and address future challenges. The expert team has to be familiar with the evaluation of
M

the BSC-SD model and also needs to fully understand this approach to the modified BSC
model. The team consists of twenty senior professors and practitioners with extensive
D

industrial experience. The role of the team is to serve as a performance system integrator
by developing a total approach evaluation.
TE

4.2 Analytical results

EP

1 The modified BSC aspects are sustainability (AS1), stakeholders (AS2), internal
operations (AS3), and learning and growth (AS4). Several attributes were obtained from
the twenty senior professors and industry practitioners. There are numerical data from
C

the operations, and the data have to transform the quantitative data and qualitative
data into a comparable scale using Eq. (1).
AC

2 The FDM is employed to eliminate part of the attributes based on the experts opinions
using Eqs. (2) and (3). Out of an initial 77 attributes, 52 are included in the modified BSC
attributes, as shown in Table 2; the threshold value of 0.495 was computed for expert
validity. The validity of the measurement scale is satisfactory.

INSERT Table 2 here Table 2. The modified BSC hierarchical model by the fuzzy Delphi
method

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3 The BSC model is composed of qualitative and quantitative information from the

the process is repeated under AS2, AS3 and AS4. OJP and OJ are also computed
S
aspects and attributes. Table 3 lists the aspects FPS under AS1 by applying Eqs. (5)-(9);

to obtain the FPS under C1, as shown in Table 4. The computational process was
repeated 52 times to obtain a supermatrix.

PT
INSERT Table 3 here Table 3. The modified BSC aspects FPS under AS1

INSERT Table 4 here The modified BSC criterias FPS under C1

RI
4 The modified BSC model is a closed-loop hierarchical structure. The supermatrix is

SC
composed of the FPS computation of all aspects and attributes. Table 3 shows the
computation of the integrated importance and performance weights for the aspects,
and Table 4 presents the FPS values of the attributes for C1, which is presented as a

U
supermatrix in Table 5. This study applied Eq. (10) to obtain the converged supermatrix.
AN
INSERT Table 5 here Table 5. Unweighted supermatrix
M

Table 6 presents the converged matrix. The ranking sequence of aspects is as follows:
sustainability (AS1), stakeholders (AS2), internal operations (AS3) and learning and growth
D

(AS4). The top five weighted attributes are as follows: (1) industry leadership: market share
(C5-0.0118); (2) student acquisition: number of new students/total revenue to new
TE

students (C15-0.0117); (3) student satisfaction (via satisfaction surveys; C16-0.0117); (4)
cost of service quality comparison (other institutions; C27-0.0115); and (5) strategic plan for
EP

SD (economics, environmental and social; C11-0.0114).

The last five attributes, which are less important, are as follows: (48) internship
programme providers (C20-0.008); (49) annual growth in revenue (C1-0.078); (50)
C

faculty/employee turnover rate per year (C49-0.0077); (51) growth from new
services/educational department (C4-0.0073); and (52) cost of revenue: the extent to which
AC

it remains flat or decreases each year (C2-0.0070).

INSERT Table 6 here Table 6. Converged supermatrix

5. Theoretical and managerial Implications

TVHE cultivates practical professionals according to their aptitudes and capabilities,
thereby contributing to various industries. Another area of emphasis is industrial-academic

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
cooperation. However, institutions should consider how to enhance industry leadership (i.e.,
increase the market share). From the perspective of industrial leadership, this
enhancement requires a focus on industrial-academic cooperation in TVHE higher
education and industrial practitioners. Currently, TVHE is a comprehensive system
consisting of programmes in industrial-academic cooperation. The different tracks within
the TVHE system have been designed with vertical continuity and horizontal flexibility to
ensure suitable educational opportunities in numerous fields. Student acquisition is

PT
generally considered to have the highest weight in the performance evaluation of
institutions due to the intensive competition in the educational market. Intensive
competition compensates for the enhanced cost of service quality comparisons among

RI
institutions (Tseng, 2010).
TVHE institutions should integrate contemporary knowledge and technology into the

SC
curriculum and include internships in their educational programmes. The cost of service
quality comparison persists among customers who are considering TVHE in their career
training. Student satisfaction is critical for institutions to investigate and understand their

U
current status. The basic needs of customers must be satisfied to enhance industrial
AN
leadership and market share. On contemporary campuses, having a green campus is an
important issue that management should pursue along with practicing environmental
activities. TVHE is responsible for knowledge transformation, the cultivation of science and
M

technology and technical innovation (Tan et al., 2014).

Institutions should teach students concepts related to constructing a sustainable and
D

environmentally friendly organisation once the students have joined the

industrial-academic cooperation programme. The students might assist firms in building
TE

sustainable and environmentally friendly working environments. Usually, SD contains

tactical and strategic levels. The strategic level focuses on the strategic plan for SD, which
EP

needs to include economic, environmental and social perspectives. SD also supports the
necessary harmonisation and extension of existing policies and plans through the adoption
of an identifiable strategy to improve or restructure the decision-making process and to
C

ensure that social, economic and environmental issues are fully integrated into a
development blueprint. SD provides an environmental approach, economic incentives and
AC

social stakeholder concerns to the strategic plan, which includes renewable energy, the
re-use of water bottles, the eco-friendly handling of returns, green transport,
awareness-raising events and adequate waste disposal; these activities are deemed
important elements (Yuan et al., 2013). This study justified the need to strengthen the
connections between stakeholders by benefiting from the advantages of a strategic plan
and tactical practices from the SD.
From the point of view of stakeholders, TVHE institutions aim to fulfil long-term

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
commitments to education and culture, such as contributions to communities and
community sponsorships and the support of employee and student volunteer programmes.
In addition, these institutions consistently consider stakeholders to be partners and work
together to build stable and sustainable long-term relationships while considering service
quality and satisfaction. SD education aims to reduce carbon generation and environmental
effects, to enhance environmentally friendly awareness to create a win-win situation for
stakeholders and to collaborate with stakeholders to create sustainable values and

PT
customer service and satisfaction. Thus, institutions not only comply with environmental
regulations but also enhance their economic and social reputation for sustainable
development and take the lead in adopting TVHE industrial-academic cooperation

RI
education and practices.
The BSC model is a leading model of performance measures; however, the traditional

SC
BSC model is not suitable to describe the status of TVHE for SD. Therefore, modifications of
BSC aspects are necessary. This study proposes four aspects: sustainability, stakeholders,
internal operations and learning and growth. This proposed BSC model incorporates

U
qualitative and quantitative scales. The qualitative scales must be converted by TFN, and
AN
the quantitative measures must be converted into a comparable scale with fuzzy scales.
The modified BSC model integrates different measures into a comparable scale. In addition,
a major contribution of this study is to integrate the importance and performance weights
M

into a FPS and to combine the FPSs for all aspects and attributes in a supermatrix to
present the hierarchical structure.
D

6. Conclusions
TE

This study integrated the SD issues to all operational activities of TVHE institutions
that need to include environmental protection, economic and social values. Hence, a
EP

modified assessment framework is needed for included the qualitative and quantitative
measures. In general, SD currently exists to underpin the continued existence of education
in Taiwan. A long-term vision for TVHE should be developed that considers stakeholders
C

who represent different aspects and attributes. The involvement of stakeholders is

necessary to address their needs and long-term visions. SD has been extensively practiced
AC

in the institutes. The performance and effects of firms should be evaluated, and
uncertainty should be considered in the design of suitable strategies. Thus, the theoretical
BSC model presented in this study can be extended to address stakeholder considerations
that are different from the stakeholder considerations in previous BSC studies. The
challenge is to devise a suitable theoretical BSC model and a hybrid analytical method that
can aggregate the importance and performance levels while considering possible
interactions under uncertainty.

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
This study presented a multi-attribute approach for a modified BSC for SD evaluation
based on the integration of different managerial decision-making methodologies. The
proposed modified model considers the importance and performance levels together, and
the measures are with qualitative and quantitative information. This proposed approach
applied the FDM and closed-loop ANP in the practical analysis. The modified BSC model
ranks the aspects and attributes that are consistent with TVHE for SD in Taiwan. Based on
the FDM, the aspects and attributes from the set of initial aspects and attributes are

PT
eliminated. The closed-loop ANP is used to represent the hierarchical structure of the
modified BSC model, which contains complexity relations among the aspects and
attributes.

RI
The modified BSC model proposes a new approach to evaluate the importance and
performance levels by applying a quantitative analysis that combines qualitative and

SC
quantitative measures into a clear value. Therefore, differences between importance and
performance continually exist. This study integrates the importance and performance
levels into a final performance score. The hierarchical structure and interdependence

U
relations among the BSC aspects and attributes are inadequately addressed in the majority
AN
of studies. The proposed model is consistent with the proposed hybrid methodology and
can be used to evaluate other industry projects. The contribution is threefold: 1) This study
considered fewer important attributes in the first stage of the evaluation and was
M

successful; 2) the modified BSC approach to evaluating the performance and importance
levels is converted into a final performance score; and 3) this study proposed a hybrid
D

approach to address the hierarchical structure and interdependence relations among the
modified BSC aspects and attributes.
TE

The findings indicate that student acquisitions exerted more effort in providing
package service quality (i.e., internship and new services). Enhancing industrial leadership
EP

may provide guidance and render TVHE beneficial to SD. However, the strategic plan for SD
was particularly helpful for enhancing the stakeholder relationship, developing a shared
understanding of the inter-stakeholder of SD and explaining TVHE activities in a meaningful
C

manner. Despite the support of SD activities, students are eager to learn from the TVHE
industrial-academic cooperation for their future careers, which requires service quality
AC

comparisons. This finding suggests that student satisfaction is significantly related to SD

and that meaningful practice is a way to respond to the changing needs of a future career.
This study identified the role of TVHE in guiding students to understand SD. Institutions
should socially, environmentally and economically differentiate themselves from higher
education.
This study summarises the limitations of the modified BSC for SD to describe
successful attributes that are associated with deploying a modified BSC in TVHE and to

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
provide recommendations for institutions to successfully implement the modified BSC for
SD in Taiwan. This study outlines important attributes for educators in TVHE,
demonstrating that this proposed model could deliver meaningful information to society.
Additional attributes are required to enable institutions to become industrial leaders in a
competitive environment. Thus, management should prepare to implement these decisive
attributes. This analysis can be merged into the system to innovate a new and adaptable
strategic SD plan. If understood and used appropriately, several methods may produce

PT
equally beneficial adjustments for each decision type that are aligned with the paradigms
on which they are based.

RI
Acknowledgment
This study is supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan

SC
(103-2410-H-262 -008 -). The authors appreciate the insightful comments by the
anonymous reviewers.

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
References
1. Ahi, P., Searcy, C., (2013). A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and
sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production 52, 329-341.
2. Alshuwaikhat, H., Abubakar, I. (2008). An integrated approach to achieving campus
sustainability: assessment of the current campus environmental management
practices. Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (16), 1777-1785.
3. Barth, M., Adoment, M., Albrecht, P., Burandt, S., Godemann, J., Franz-Balsen, A.,

PT
Rieckmann, M. (2011). Towards a Sustainable University: scenarios for sustainable
university development. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable
Development 5 (4), 313-332.

RI
4. Braae, M., and Rutherford, D. A. (1978). Fuzzy relations in a control setting.
Kybernetes, 7(3), 185-188.

SC
5. Carter, C.R., Rogers, D.S. (2008). Sustainable supply chain management: toward new
theory in logistics management. International Journal of Physical Distribution and
Logistics Management 38 (5), 360-387.
6.
U
Cebeci, U. (2009). Fuzzy AHP-based decision support system for selecting ERP systems
AN
in textile industry by using balanced scorecard. Expert Systems with Applications 36,
8900-8909.
7. Chen, S. M. (1996). Evaluating weapon systems using fuzzy arithmetic operations.
M

Fuzzy Sets and Systems 77, 265-276.

8. Cheng, C. H., Lin, Y. (2002). Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision
D

theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research

142(1), 174-186.
TE

9. Clarke, A., Kouri, R. (2009). Choosing an appropriate university or college

environmental management system. Journal of Cleaner Production 17, 971-984.
EP

10. Crossley, M., Sprague, T. (2014). Education for sustainable development: Implications
for small island developing states (SIDS). International Journal of Educational
Development 35,86-95
C

11. Dias, S.B., Diniz, J. A. (2013). FuzzyQoI model: A fuzzy logic-based modelling of users
quality of interaction with a learning management system under blended learning.
AC

Computers and Education 69, 38-59.

12. Dong, Y.C., Xu, Y.F., Li, H.Y. (2008). On consistency measures of linguistic preference
relations. European Journal of Operational Research 189 (2), 430-444.
13. Fien, J., (2002). Advancing sustainability in higher education: issues and opportunities
for research. Higher Education Policy 15, 143-152.
14. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman,
United States.

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
15. Friedman, A.L., Miles, S. (2002). Developing Stakeholder Theory. Journal of
Management Studies 39 (1), 1-21.
16. Grindsted, T. S. (2011). Sustainable Universities: from declarations on sustainability in
higher education to national law. Environmental economic, 2(2), 29-36.
17. Haake, H., Seuring, S. (2009). Sustainable procurement of minor items e exploring
limits to sustainability. Sustainable Development 17 (5), 284-294.
18. Hsu, C.W., Hu, A.H., Chiou, C.Y., Chen, T.E. (2011). Using the FDM and ANP to construct

PT
a sustainability balanced scorecard for the semiconductor industry. Expert Systems
with Applications 38(10), 12891-12899.
19. Hubbard, G., (2009). Measuring organizational performance: beyond the triple bottom

RI
line. Business Strategy Environment 19, 177-191.
20. Inayat, I., ul Amin, R., Inayat, Z., Salim, S.S. (2013). Effects of Collaborative Web Based

SC
Vocational Education and Training (VET) on Learning Outcomes. Computers and
Education 68, 153166 .
21. Ishikawa, A., Amagasa, M., Shiga, T., Tomizawa, G., Tatsuta, R., Mieno, H. (1993). The

U
maxmin Delphi method and fuzzy Delphi method via fuzzy integration. Fuzzy Sets and
AN
Systems, 55, 241-253.
22. Kaplan, R., Norton, D. (1996). Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy. California
management review 39(1), 54-79.
M

23. Kaplan, R., Norton, D. (JanuaryFebruary, 1992). The balanced scorecard measures
that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 71-79.
D

24. Karatas, A., El-Rayes, K. (2014). Evaluating the performance of sustainable

development in urban neighborhoods based on the feedback of multiple stakeholders.
TE

Sustainable Cities and Society 14, 374-382

25. Karatzoglou, B., (2013). An in-depth literature review of the evolving roles and
EP

contributions of universities to education for sustainable development. Journal of

Cleaner Production 49, 44-53.
26. Lambert, D.M., Croxton, K.L., Garcia-Dastugue, S.J., Knemeyer, M., Rogers, D.S. (2006).
C

Supply Chain Management Processes, Partnerships, Performance, 2nd edition. Hartley

Press Inc., Jacksonville, United States.
AC

27. Laplume, A., Karan S., Reginald L. (2008). Stakeholder Theory: Reviewing a Theory That
Moves Us. Journal of Management 34 (6), 1152-1189.
28. Lewin, C., Facer, K., Tsai, C.C. (2012). Learning futures: education, technology and
sustainability The CAL 2011 conference. Computers and Education 59, 1-2.
29. Li, D.F., Hong, F.X. (2012). Solving constrained matrix games with payoffs of triangular
fuzzy numbers. Computers and Mathematics with Applications 64, 432-446.

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
30. Lidgren, A., Rodhe, H., Huisingh, D., (2006). A systemic approach to incorporate
sustainability into university courses and curricula. Journal of Cleaner Production 14
(9-11), 797-809.
31. Lin, Q.L., Liu, L., Liu, H.C., Wang, D.J. (2013). Integrating hierarchical balanced
scorecard with fuzzy linguistic for evaluating operating room performance in hospitals.
Expert Systems with Applications 40(6), 1917-1924.
32. Lozano, R., (2010). Diffusion of sustainable development in universities curricula: an

PT
empirical example from Cardiff University. Journal of Cleaner Production 18, 637-644.
33. Milutinovi, S., Nikoli, V. (2014). Rethinking higher education for sustainable
development in Serbia: an assessment of Copernicus charter principles in current

RI
higher education practices. Journal of Cleaner Production 62, 107-113.
34. Ministry of Education (MOE). (August, 2011). Technological and Vocational Education

SC
in Taiwan, ROC.
35. Nejati, M. and Nejati, M. (2013). Assessment of sustainable university factors from the
perspective of university student. Journal of Cleaner Production 48, 101-107.

U
36. Nikolaou, I.E, Tsalis, T.A. (2013). Development of a sustainable balanced scorecard
AN
framework. Ecological Indicators 34, 76 86
37. Noorderhaben, N. Strategic decision making. Addison-Wesley (1995), United Kingdom.
38. Saeidi, S.P. Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P. Saaeidi, S.A. (2015). How does corporate
M

social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of

competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Business
D

Research 68, 341-350.

39. Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P., Saeidi, S.A. (2015). How does corporate
TE

social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of

competitive advantage, reputation and customer satisfaction, Journal of Business
EP

Research 68/2, 341-350.

40. Sedlacek, S. (2013). The role of universities in fostering sustainable development at
the regional level. Journal of Cleaner Production 48, 74-84
C

41. Seuring, S., Muller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for
sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production 16(15),
AC

1699-1710.
42. Slack, N. (1994). The importance-performance matrix as a determinant of
improvement priority. International Journal of Operations and Production
Management 14(5), 59-75.
43. Tan, H., Chen, S., Shi, Q., Wang L., (2014). Development of green campus in China.
Journal of Cleaner Production 64, 646-653.

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
44. Tang, C. S., Zhou, S. (2012). Research advances in environmentally and socially
sustainable operations. European Journal of Operational Research 223, 585-594.
45. Tarrant, A., Smith, E. K. (2002). The use of modified importance-performance
framework to examine visitor satisfaction with attributes of outdoor recreation
settings. Managing Leisure 7, 69-82.
46. Tseng M.L. (2010). Implementation and performance evaluation using fuzzy network
balanced scorecard. Computers and Education 55(1), 188-201.

PT
47. Tseng M.L. (2013). Modeling the sustainable production indicators in linguistic
preferences. Journal of Cleaner Production 40, 46-56.
48. Tseng, M.L., Chiang, J.H., Lan, W. L. (2009a). Selection of optimal supplier in supply

RI
chain management strategy with analytic network process and choquet integral.
Computer and Industrial Engineering 57(1), 330-340.

SC
49. Tseng, M.L., Lim, K. M., Wong, W.P. (2015). Sustainable supply chain management: a
closed-loop network approach. Industrial Management & Data System (Article in
Press)

U
50. Tseng, M.L., Lin, R.J., Lin, Y.H., Chen, R.H., Tan K., (2014). Close-loop or open
AN
hierarchical structures in green supply chain management under uncertainty. Expert
Systems with Applications 41(7), 3250-3260.
51. Tseng, M.L., Lin, R.J., Tan K., Geng, Y., Lim, M. (2013). Benchmarking eco-efficiency in
M

green supply chain practices in uncertainty. Production Plan and Control 25(13-14),
1079-1090.
D

52. Tseng, M.L.Louie Divinagracia, Rochelle Divinagracia (2009b). Evaluating firms

sustainable production indicators in uncertainty. Computer and Industrial Engineering,
TE

57, 1393-1403.
53. Tseng, M.L.; Wu, W.W.; Lin, YH; Liao, CH., (2008). An exploration of relationships
EP

between environmental practice and manufacturing performance using the PLS path
modeling. WSEAS transactions on environment and development 4(6), 487-502.
54. Wade, D. J., Eagle, P. F. J. (2003). The use of importance-performance analysis and
C

market segmentation for tourism management in parks and protected areas: an

application to Tanzanias national parks. Journal of Ecotourism 2(3), 196-212.
AC

55. Wals, A.E.J., Jickling, B., (2002). Sustainability in higher education: from doublethink
and newspeak to critical thinking and meaningful learning. Higher Education Policy 15
(2), 121-131.
56. Wang, C.H., Lu, I.Y., Chen, C.B. (2010). Integrating hierarchical balanced scorecard with
non-additive fuzzy integral for evaluating high technology firm performance.
International Journal Production Economics 128, 413-426.
57. Wang, M. J. J., Chang, T. C. (1995). Tool steel materials selection under fuzzy

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 72, 263-270.
58. Weenen, H., (2000). Towards a vision of a sustainable university. International Journal
of Sustainability in Higher Education 1 (1), 20-34.
59. Wright, T., (2002). Definitions and frameworks for environmental sustainability in
higher education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 8(3),
203-220.
60. Wu, C. T., Tsai, H. T., Shih, M. H., Fu, H. H. (2010). Government performance

PT
evaluation using a balanced scorecard with a fuzzy linguistic scale. Service Industries
Journal 30(3), 449-462.
61. Wu, W.W; Lee, Y.T.; Tseng M.L.; Chiang, Y.H. (2010). Data mining for exploring hidden

RI
patterns between KM and its performance. Knowledge-Based Systems 23(5), 397-40.
62. Yuan, X.L., Zuo, J., Huisingh, D. (2013). Green Universities in China - what matters?

SC
Journal of Cleaner Production 61, 36-45.
63. Zailani, S., Jeyaraman, K., Vengadasan, G., Premkumar, R. (2012). Sustainable supply
chain management (SSCM) in Malaysia: A survey. International Journal of Production
Economics 140(1), 330-340.
U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Tables- Sustainable development in technological and vocational higher
education: balanced scorecard measures with uncertainty

Table 1. Linguistic scales

Linguistic terms (TFNs)

PT
(Performance/Importance)
Extreme (0, 0.1, 0.3)

RI
Demonstrated (0.2, 0.3, 0.5)
Strong (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
Moderate (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)

SC
Equal (0.7, 0.9, 1.0)
Note: this table is the linguistic scale and corresponding TFN (Wang and Chang, 1995 and

U
Chen, 1996) AN
Table 2. The modified BSC hierarchical model by fuzzy Delphi method
Aspects Attributes Judgment
Annual growth in revenue (C1) 0.532 Accepted
M

Cost of revenue: extent that it remains flat or decreases each

year (C2) 0.558 Accepted
D

Profit margin: return on total capital employed (C3) 0.544 Accepted

Growth from new services/ educational departments (C4) 0.553 Accepted
TE

Industry leadership: market share (C5) 0.553 Accepted

Sustainability (AS1)

Academic reputation and image (C6) 0.536 Accepted

EP

Encouraging to be environmentally friendly in the property

(C7) 0.544 Accepted
Industrial oriented educational program (C8) 0.553 Accepted
C

Internationalization in campus (C9) 0.536 Accepted

AC

Encourage stakeholders to participate in SD initiatives (C10) 0.553 Accepted

Strategic plan for SD (Economics, environment and social)
(C11) 0.544 Accepted
Reduce carbon emissions (C12) 0.553 Accepted
Recycle/Reuse/Reduce resources (C13) 0.548 Accepted
Student retention/percentage of growth with existing
Stakeholder
s (AS2)

students (C14) 0.548 Accepted

Student acquisition: number of new students /total revenue
to new students (C15) 0.540 Accepted
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Student satisfaction (via satisfaction surveys) (C16) 0.540 Accepted
Industrial professional lectures (C17) 0.553 Accepted
Service quality: student complain rates (C18) 0.553 Accepted
University funding supports eg. Trustees, government etc.
(C19) 0.540 Accepted
Internship program providers (C20) 0.536 Accepted
International collaborators (C21) 0.540 Accepted

PT
Industrial collaborators (C22) 0.553 Accepted
Faculties with industrial experiences (C23) 0.548 Accepted
Policy makers eg. Government, management levels etc. (C24) 0.548 Accepted

RI
Harmonize with local communities eg. Associations etc. (C25) 0.548 Accepted
Service cycle processing time (C26) 0.548 Accepted

SC
Cost of service quality comparison (Other institutions) (C27) 0.558 Accepted
Reduce service costs: service costs as percentage of revenue
(C28) 0.553 Accepted

U
Service output per hour/facilities utilization (C29) 0.544 Accepted
Internal operations (AS3)

AN
Environmental safety incident index (C30) 0.540 Accepted
Social responsibility promotions (C31) 0.656 Accepted
Award programs for faculties /Employee/Students (C32) 0.536 Accepted
M

Student bridging educational programs to Industry (C33) 0.553 Accepted

Friendly environment for International students (C34) 0.553 Accepted
D

International education programs/collaborations(C35) 0.553 Accepted

Friendly approach to university information (C36) 0.540 Accepted
TE

One stop-shop policy for students/faculties solutions(C37) 0.540 Accepted

Investment to university structural and infrastructural (C38) 0.553 Accepted
EP

Certified programs and Certificates eg. AACSB, ISO9001,

ISO14001 IEET etc. (C39) 0.540 Accepted
Innovation of educational program (C40) 0.544 Accepted
C

Rate of new services/educational package introduction per

Learning and growth (AS4)

AC

year (C41) 0.548 Accepted

Enhance Faculties /Employee capabilities eg. Continuous
education programs (C42) 0.536 Accepted
Faculties /Employee satisfaction survey (C43) 0.548 Accepted
Faculties /Employees awareness on SD (Economics,
environment and social) (C44) 0.540 Accepted
Faculties /Employee retention: percentage of key staff
turnover (C45) 0.553 Accepted
Number of promotions from internal organization (C46) 0.548 Accepted
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Absenteeism rate for Faculties /Employee (C47) 0.553 Accepted
Student learning and growth activities after classes eg. Clubs,
teams etc. (C48) 0.536 Accepted
Faculties /Employees turnover rate per year(C49) 0.544 Accepted
Student achievements eg. Licenses, competitions awards,
internship etc. (C50) 0.553 Accepted
Faculties /Employees achievements eg. awards, career

PT
development etc. (C51) 0.540 Accepted
Encourage learning and growth program for faculties
/employees(C52) 0.532 Accepted

RI
Threshold value ( )= 0.495

SC
Table 3. The modified BSC aspects FPS under AS1
Aspects FPS

U
AS1 0.653 0.843 0.043
AS2 0.679 0.750 0.044
AN
AS3 0.723 0.882 0.047
AS4 0.568 0.917 0.037
3.392
M

Table 4. The modified BSC criterias FPS under C1

D

Attributes FPS
TE

C1 0.653 0.673 0.531

C2 0.644 0.750 0.523
C3 0.703 0.878 0.571
EP

C4 0.668 0.917 0.542

C5 0.694 0.713 0.564
C6 0.643 0.779 0.522
C

C7 0.623 0.813 0.507

AC

C8 0.679 0.865 0.552

C9 0.659 0.868 0.536
C10 0.704 0.749 0.572
C11 0.761 0.816 0.618
C12 0.703 0.739 0.571
C13 0.701 0.860 0.570
C14 0.723 0.779 0.587
C15 0.734 0.850 0.597
C16 0.574 0.542 0.467
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
C17 0.615 0.882 0.500
C18 0.693 0.877 0.563
C19 0.658 0.917 0.534
C20 0.655 0.837 0.532
C21 0.608 0.750 0.494
C22 0.696 0.733 0.565
C23 0.643 0.779 0.522

PT
C24 0.706 0.797 0.574
C25 0.649 0.704 0.528
C26 0.673 0.730 0.547

RI
C27 0.636 0.763 0.517
C28 0.721 0.900 0.586

SC
C29 0.658 0.853 0.534
C30 0.678 0.803 0.551
C31 0.626 0.857 0.509
C32 0.659
U 0.850 0.536
AN
C33 0.657 0.890 0.534
C34 0.709 0.853 0.576
C35 0.698 0.803 0.567
M

C36 0.701 0.857 0.570

C37 0.723 0.850 0.587
D

C38 0.734 0.890 0.597

C39 0.691 0.770 0.561
TE

C40 0.603 0.743 0.490

C41 0.744 0.882 0.605
EP

C42 0.723 0.785 0.587

C43 0.707 0.888 0.574
C44 0.614 0.792 0.499
C

C45 0.632 0.852 0.513

C46 0.666 0.792 0.541
AC

C47 0.724 0.833 0.588

C48 0.619 0.805 0.503
C49 0.583 0.805 0.473
C50 0.715 0.830 0.581
C51 0.719 0.828 0.584
C52 0.673 0.888 0.547
42.258
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 5. Unweighted supermatrix

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 6. Converged supermatrix

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 5. Unweighted supermatrix

AS1 AS2 AS3 AS4 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18 C19 C20 C21 C22 C23 C24 C25 C26 C27 C28 C29 C30 C31 C32 C33 C34 C35 C36 C37 C38 C39 C40 C41 C42 C43 C44 C45 C46 C47 C48 C49 C50 C51 C52

AS1 0.043 0.102 0.046 0.068 0.035 0.046 0.052 0.063 0.042 0.044 0.045 0.042 0.046 0.049 0.044 0.051 0.056 0.052 0.094 0.051 0.047 0.049 0.046 0.050 0.045 0.048 0.044 0.048 0.047 0.043 0.048 0.045 0.041 0.047 0.042 0.041 0.054 0.062 0.061 0.062 0.047 0.048 0.045 0.041 0.047 0.042 0.041 0.045 0.047 0.044 0.049 0.062 0.058 0.061 0.061 0.063

AS2 0.044 0.044 0.048 0.051 0.091 0.047 0.048 0.045 0.063 0.051 0.048 0.050 0.051 0.041 0.040 0.036 0.045 0.043 0.052 0.047 0.046 0.040 0.045 0.038 0.047 0.041 0.047 0.043 0.044 0.049 0.042 0.046 0.052 0.045 0.049 0.052 0.064 0.054 0.055 0.052 0.044 0.042 0.046 0.052 0.045 0.049 0.052 0.046 0.042 0.047 0.039 0.054 0.057 0.056 0.055 0.052

PT
AS3 0.047 0.052 0.062 0.046 0.042 0.051 0.055 0.058 0.058 0.045 0.063 0.042 0.045 0.039 0.038 0.056 0.029 0.050 0.046 0.044 0.051 0.037 0.038 0.040 0.040 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.037 0.038 0.035 0.038 0.039 0.053 0.052 0.053 0.055 0.035 0.037 0.037 0.038 0.035 0.038 0.039 0.034 0.039 0.040 0.039 0.051 0.055 0.052 0.053 0.063

AS4 0.037 0.052 0.048 0.074 0.047 0.046 0.047 0.041 0.051 0.044 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.048 0.044 0.044 0.059 0.054 0.029 0.040 0.044 0.040 0.038 0.039 0.036 0.039 0.039 0.040 0.039 0.037 0.040 0.039 0.036 0.040 0.037 0.035 0.050 0.054 0.054 0.053 0.040 0.040 0.039 0.036 0.040 0.037 0.035 0.041 0.038 0.036 0.039 0.055 0.053 0.053 0.053 0.052

C1 0.596 0.474 0.514 0.556 0.531 0.562 0.620 0.627 0.568 0.647 0.584 0.547 0.584 0.560 0.569 0.565 0.590 0.606 0.585 0.593 0.608 0.560 0.549 0.587 0.571 0.606 0.440 0.558 0.558 0.580 0.584 0.609 0.587 0.611 0.516 0.577 0.509 0.466 0.486 0.546 0.528 0.655 0.425 0.493 0.495 0.596 0.620 0.636 0.534 0.511 0.684 0.575 0.381 0.543 0.670 0.652

RI
C2 0.396 0.448 0.508 0.534 0.523 0.658 0.641 0.681 0.625 0.715 0.639 0.615 0.651 0.615 0.629 0.629 0.653 0.668 0.645 0.642 0.671 0.625 0.620 0.652 0.625 0.673 0.484 0.612 0.630 0.654 0.416 0.426 0.420 0.439 0.269 0.244 0.421 0.371 0.423 0.337 0.336 0.477 0.303 0.387 0.403 0.321 0.357 0.377 0.253 0.225 0.405 0.272 0.427 0.589 0.716 0.528

SC
C3 0.546 0.508 0.502 0.422 0.571 0.641 0.652 0.609 0.604 0.690 0.617 0.579 0.614 0.585 0.595 0.598 0.615 0.624 0.611 0.625 0.639 0.605 0.587 0.608 0.607 0.637 0.473 0.592 0.591 0.613 0.783 0.728 0.762 0.733 0.632 0.894 0.762 0.857 0.843 0.478 0.469 0.578 0.935 0.901 0.869 0.647 0.877 0.795 0.954 1.075 0.855 1.026 0.381 0.543 0.681 0.421

C4 0.462 0.570 0.476 0.489 0.542 0.634 0.659 0.667 0.576 0.703 0.626 0.609 0.626 0.593 0.619 0.591 0.623 0.636 0.623 0.616 0.654 0.604 0.596 0.620 0.610 0.644 0.496 0.597 0.602 0.625 0.497 0.466 0.472 0.462 0.259 0.409 0.446 0.380 0.542 0.452 0.322 0.436 0.490 0.449 0.370 0.429 0.391 0.352 0.415 0.645 0.378 0.446 0.473 0.635 0.762 0.365

C5 0.652 0.369 0.661 0.635 0.564 0.685 0.726 0.713 0.667 0.708 0.682 0.650 0.682 0.655 0.661 0.651 0.683 0.690 0.672 0.684 0.701 0.658 0.639 0.675 0.664 0.697 0.530 0.631 0.656 0.681 0.826 0.855 0.827 0.827 0.375 0.546 0.586 0.974 0.969 0.489 0.578 0.527 0.946 0.980 0.975 0.524 0.639 0.758 0.975 0.784 0.524 1.048 0.358 0.520 0.670 0.665

U
C6 0.664 0.589 0.613 0.622 0.522 0.657 0.678 0.668 0.632 0.710 0.602 0.612 0.664 0.589 0.613 0.622 0.640 0.655 0.632 0.629 0.658 0.623 0.608 0.646 0.634 0.657 0.502 0.596 0.618 0.641 0.550 0.554 0.562 0.572 0.474 0.559 0.532 0.554 0.485 0.553 0.550 0.533 0.514 0.551 0.548 0.517 0.552 0.576 0.539 0.606 0.620 0.580 0.312 0.473 0.635 0.635

AN
C7 0.589 0.426 0.577 0.581 0.507 0.606 0.622 0.609 0.582 0.655 0.604 0.524 0.589 0.548 0.577 0.581 0.598 0.598 0.573 0.590 0.593 0.564 0.547 0.585 0.576 0.604 0.455 0.549 0.553 0.574 0.535 0.536 0.542 0.518 0.557 0.555 0.596 0.512 0.622 0.629 0.658 0.692 0.658 0.649 0.491 0.494 0.449 0.550 0.462 0.569 0.592 0.497 0.497 0.658 0.774 0.256

C8 0.452 0.620 0.565 0.629 0.552 0.680 0.705 0.698 0.650 0.739 0.670 0.636 0.628 0.620 0.656 0.629 0.678 0.687 0.645 0.669 0.690 0.647 0.635 0.674 0.656 0.696 0.525 0.623 0.645 0.670 0.751 0.746 0.751 0.458 0.790 0.635 0.807 0.257 0.635 0.909 0.574 0.687 0.961 0.888 0.918 0.943 0.369 0.841 0.523 0.637 0.905 0.562 0.404 0.566 0.704 0.715

M
C9 0.616 0.548 0.415 0.586 0.536 0.628 0.651 0.651 0.613 0.698 0.620 0.594 0.616 0.548 0.588 0.586 0.635 0.639 0.608 0.622 0.629 0.591 0.573 0.610 0.599 0.635 0.466 0.588 0.589 0.612 0.555 0.617 0.620 0.634 0.530 0.681 0.691 0.608 0.552 0.663 0.703 0.820 0.612 0.647 0.611 0.529 0.528 0.688 0.533 0.469 0.740 0.573 0.427 0.589 0.728 0.226

C10 0.592 0.426 0.537 0.562 0.572 0.600 0.635 0.613 0.573 0.658 0.591 0.555 0.592 0.558 0.537 0.562 0.598 0.601 0.573 0.594 0.609 0.565 0.563 0.580 0.591 0.617 0.454 0.558 0.575 0.597 0.697 0.698 0.691 0.703 0.846 0.671 0.876 0.808 0.854 0.519 0.659 0.677 0.779 0.707 0.816 0.605 0.528 0.745 0.731 0.487 0.801 0.786 0.473 0.635 0.751 0.638

D
C11 0.611 0.576 0.596 0.550 0.618 0.632 0.642 0.636 0.604 0.683 0.621 0.589 0.611 0.576 0.596 0.550 0.620 0.630 0.601 0.597 0.626 0.580 0.581 0.608 0.601 0.628 0.466 0.582 0.584 0.606 0.692 0.689 0.678 0.713 0.729 0.762 0.781 0.764 0.841 0.635 0.635 0.850 0.672 0.720 0.761 0.845 0.795 0.820 0.794 0.837 0.635 0.854 0.312 0.473 0.624 0.528

C12 0.594 0.478 0.576 0.571 0.571 0.599 0.621 0.615 0.572 0.648 0.591 0.558 0.594 0.551 0.576 0.571 0.558 0.601 0.583 0.584 0.609 0.564 0.559 0.582 0.575 0.610 0.448 0.546 0.556 0.578 0.668 0.682 0.653 0.697 0.581 0.782 0.748 0.736 0.797 0.458 0.833 0.832 0.666 0.846 0.484 0.916 0.757 0.761 0.725 0.744 0.818 0.780 0.450 0.612 0.739 0.645

TE
C13 0.627 0.594 0.456 0.611 0.570 0.660 0.665 0.659 0.613 0.697 0.623 0.607 0.627 0.594 0.611 0.611 0.637 0.603 0.630 0.626 0.642 0.601 0.589 0.617 0.616 0.647 0.473 0.588 0.599 0.622 0.842 0.758 0.825 0.861 0.523 0.552 0.325 0.635 0.352 0.396 0.425 0.298 0.532 0.524 0.637 0.754 0.358 0.632 0.524 0.733 0.680 0.563 0.520 0.681 0.785 0.552

C14 0.258 0.421 0.599 0.586 0.587 0.643 0.666 0.672 0.599 0.695 0.621 0.599 0.625 0.604 0.599 0.601 0.635 0.650 0.579 0.627 0.643 0.605 0.587 0.625 0.608 0.651 0.472 0.593 0.594 0.617 0.440 0.461 0.466 0.453 0.507 0.510 0.458 0.442 0.351 0.683 0.600 0.615 0.513 0.496 0.503 0.600 0.452 0.496 0.449 0.640 0.533 0.482 0.404 0.566 0.704 0.469
EP
C15 0.635 0.610 0.613 0.624 0.597 0.652 0.678 0.675 0.620 0.717 0.645 0.610 0.627 0.610 0.613 0.624 0.640 0.656 0.636 0.598 0.664 0.611 0.595 0.624 0.616 0.644 0.484 0.613 0.617 0.641 0.653 0.657 0.672 0.673 0.666 0.795 0.765 0.689 0.796 0.635 0.639 0.623 0.782 0.709 0.724 0.600 0.787 0.725 0.727 0.825 0.780 0.782 0.381 0.543 0.693 0.396

C16 0.617 0.572 0.601 0.586 0.467 0.619 0.645 0.645 0.597 0.679 0.608 0.591 0.617 0.572 0.601 0.586 0.621 0.632 0.610 0.625 0.592 0.592 0.584 0.607 0.606 0.637 0.470 0.591 0.584 0.606 0.772 0.747 0.755 0.744 0.447 0.761 0.755 0.754 0.685 0.779 0.776 0.633 0.747 0.774 0.737 0.848 0.821 0.799 0.868 0.854 0.859 0.933 0.450 0.612 0.739 0.739
C

C17 0.556 0.577 0.639 0.569 0.500 0.614 0.637 0.637 0.593 0.675 0.606 0.574 0.621 0.577 0.593 0.569 0.628 0.628 0.597 0.614 0.630 0.551 0.579 0.600 0.589 0.638 0.457 0.578 0.595 0.618 0.558 0.533 0.567 0.531 0.649 0.519 0.555 0.512 0.432 0.527 0.697 0.668 0.637 0.549 0.517 0.530 0.518 0.512 0.511 0.608 0.550 0.550 0.381 0.543 0.704 0.704
AC

C18 0.563 0.539 0.548 0.540 0.563 0.580 0.598 0.586 0.557 0.621 0.572 0.540 0.563 0.539 0.548 0.540 0.585 0.581 0.564 0.562 0.580 0.552 0.508 0.573 0.566 0.610 0.432 0.536 0.563 0.584 0.579 0.549 0.554 0.524 0.805 0.530 0.509 0.546 0.498 0.450 0.625 0.375 0.612 0.567 0.520 0.624 0.608 0.594 0.593 0.422 0.426 0.521 0.473 0.635 0.762 0.762

C19 0.624 0.585 0.591 0.605 0.534 0.635 0.649 0.646 0.604 0.687 0.630 0.588 0.624 0.585 0.591 0.605 0.631 0.639 0.614 0.622 0.632 0.592 0.596 0.581 0.607 0.647 0.469 0.582 0.609 0.632 0.466 0.477 0.478 0.445 0.611 0.448 0.562 0.456 0.403 0.428 0.570 0.506 0.529 0.433 0.455 0.411 0.409 0.438 0.473 0.465 0.526 0.536 0.450 0.612 0.739 0.739

C20 0.615 0.567 0.526 0.578 0.532 0.611 0.637 0.639 0.593 0.677 0.615 0.580 0.615 0.567 0.605 0.578 0.619 0.621 0.590 0.614 0.621 0.590 0.592 0.606 0.559 0.629 0.464 0.561 0.592 0.614 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.032 0.035 0.036 0.048 0.047 0.048 0.050 0.032 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.032 0.035 0.036 0.031 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.047 0.050 0.048 0.049 0.058

C21 0.618 0.583 0.580 0.584 0.494 0.623 0.646 0.646 0.606 0.678 0.606 0.586 0.618 0.583 0.580 0.584 0.628 0.615 0.600 0.608 0.621 0.584 0.585 0.619 0.589 0.595 0.476 0.583 0.598 0.620 0.036 0.035 0.033 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.046 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.036 0.036 0.035 0.033 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.037 0.034 0.033 0.036 0.050 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.047

C22 0.527 0.512 0.453 0.499 0.565 0.539 0.563 0.554 0.528 0.586 0.526 0.495 0.527 0.502 0.514 0.499 0.538 0.540 0.518 0.519 0.543 0.511 0.504 0.527 0.518 0.553 0.379 0.487 0.507 0.526 0.532 0.555 0.535 0.557 0.470 0.526 0.463 0.424 0.443 0.497 0.481 0.596 0.387 0.449 0.451 0.543 0.565 0.579 0.487 0.465 0.623 0.524 0.347 0.495 0.610 0.594

C23 0.598 0.502 0.421 0.577 0.522 0.622 0.635 0.638 0.598 0.678 0.614 0.576 0.598 0.578 0.589 0.577 0.623 0.622 0.586 0.603 0.618 0.589 0.581 0.614 0.594 0.630 0.459 0.536 0.584 0.606 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.522 0.563 0.522 0.428 0.639 0.367 0.639

C24 0.563 0.589 0.570 0.585 0.574 0.617 0.637 0.640 0.596 0.671 0.602 0.571 0.612 0.589 0.570 0.585 0.613 0.618 0.609 0.617 0.627 0.584 0.569 0.612 0.585 0.628 0.458 0.539 0.545 0.608 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.574 0.463 0.574 0.463 0.574 0.397 0.356

C25 0.485 0.635 0.539 0.496 0.528 0.579 0.594 0.594 0.560 0.616 0.556 0.530 0.550 0.526 0.539 0.527 0.568 0.568 0.541 0.561 0.569 0.546 0.548 0.566 0.553 0.593 0.425 0.532 0.509 0.525 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.528 0.509 0.463 0.511 0.528 0.384 0.259
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

C26 0.471 0.671 0.829 0.565 0.547 0.580 0.550 0.420 0.480 0.490 0.510 0.500 0.580 0.620 0.468 0.680 0.499 0.453 0.130 0.480 0.420 0.590 0.463 0.680 0.350 0.478 0.680 0.350 0.791 0.635 0.887 0.758 0.690 0.719 0.663 0.728 0.647 0.700 0.634 0.692 0.678 0.620 0.694 0.656 0.591 0.681 0.615 0.591 0.658 0.689 0.641 0.714 0.899 0.839 0.889 0.886

C27 0.529 0.729 0.886 0.629 0.517 0.710 0.650 0.310 0.350 0.260 0.490 0.430 0.350 0.446 0.438 0.340 0.320 0.410 0.411 0.434 0.520 0.444 0.485 0.511 0.413 0.474 0.420 0.630 0.536 0.783 0.795 0.754 0.638 0.580 0.652 0.552 0.676 0.601 0.688 0.618 0.639 0.709 0.611 0.666 0.751 0.651 0.716 0.749 0.671 0.613 0.677 0.570 0.788 0.833 0.809 0.797

C28 0.471 0.671 0.843 0.562 0.586 0.710 0.540 0.430 0.820 0.680 0.410 0.520 0.480 0.520 0.420 0.610 0.426 0.414 0.630 0.620 0.340 0.520 0.620 0.462 0.425 0.433 0.350 0.480 0.770 0.753 0.770 0.794 0.515 0.544 0.553 0.578 0.574 0.555 0.540 0.530 0.546 0.556 0.535 0.536 0.555 0.514 0.555 0.572 0.499 0.574 0.575 0.567 0.746 0.793 0.760 0.777

C29 0.586 0.786 0.637 0.591 0.534 0.650 0.320 0.190 0.340 0.260 0.750 0.280 0.478 0.430 0.480 0.300 0.508 0.516 0.543 0.525 0.430 0.515 0.481 0.471 0.470 0.530 0.512 0.443 0.733 0.790 0.778 0.774 0.580 0.578 0.554 0.565 0.525 0.567 0.560 0.581 0.560 0.536 0.582 0.564 0.526 0.576 0.536 0.511 0.593 0.546 0.530 0.572 0.797 0.766 0.772 0.770

C30 0.443 0.643 0.829 0.651 0.551 0.720 0.340 0.330 0.680 0.450 0.390 0.560 0.431 0.240 0.590 0.210 0.610 0.415 0.520 0.425 0.560 0.458 0.520 0.630 0.421 0.441 0.490 0.416 0.398 0.377 0.389 0.374 0.474 0.475 0.333 0.468 0.389 0.257 0.458 0.348 0.433 0.387 0.410 0.283 0.382 0.396 0.449 0.421 0.331 0.385 0.376 0.413 0.384 0.364 0.394 0.381

PT
C31 0.386 0.586 0.786 0.463 0.509 0.510 0.410 0.350 0.620 0.620 0.420 0.720 0.451 0.441 0.447 0.660 0.421 0.428 0.720 0.448 0.438 0.470 0.477 0.447 0.630 0.477 0.450 0.464 0.259 0.270 0.260 0.271 0.229 0.256 0.225 0.206 0.215 0.242 0.234 0.290 0.188 0.218 0.219 0.264 0.275 0.282 0.237 0.226 0.299 0.284 0.283 0.246 0.271 0.263 0.264 0.261

C32 0.614 0.814 0.556 0.581 0.536 0.920 0.970 0.860 0.540 0.680 0.440 0.610 0.690 0.530 0.534 0.522 0.479 0.561 0.517 0.584 0.561 0.513 0.552 0.582 0.581 0.550 0.550 0.570 0.184 0.189 0.186 0.194 0.119 0.108 0.186 0.164 0.187 0.149 0.149 0.211 0.134 0.171 0.179 0.142 0.158 0.167 0.112 0.100 0.137 0.145 0.103 0.121 0.181 0.198 0.187 0.636

C33 0.500 0.700 0.871 0.629 0.534 0.380 0.650 0.420 0.258 0.870 0.260 0.550 0.550 0.432 0.418 0.407 0.550 0.362 0.451 0.399 0.462 0.458 0.470 0.406 0.510 0.381 0.680 0.372 0.347 0.323 0.338 0.325 0.469 0.396 0.337 0.435 0.373 0.331 0.452 0.256 0.414 0.399 0.385 0.342 0.388 0.352 0.423 0.476 0.351 0.490 0.320 0.447 0.340 0.325 0.341 0.332

RI
C34 0.529 0.729 0.633 0.586 0.576 0.420 0.530 0.230 0.430 0.310 0.520 0.610 0.443 0.470 0.447 0.489 0.449 0.457 0.540 0.620 0.414 0.442 0.446 0.421 0.460 0.520 0.434 0.456 0.220 0.206 0.209 0.205 0.115 0.181 0.198 0.168 0.240 0.200 0.142 0.193 0.217 0.199 0.164 0.190 0.173 0.156 0.184 0.286 0.159 0.163 0.163 0.154 0.203 0.220 0.213 0.201

C35 0.586 0.786 0.436 0.562 0.567 0.620 0.526 0.630 0.870 0.320 0.660 0.370 0.465 0.497 0.473 0.440 0.479 0.620 0.525 0.411 0.467 0.510 0.477 0.504 0.510 0.458 0.550 0.540 0.366 0.379 0.366 0.366 0.425 0.408 0.401 0.431 0.429 0.472 0.408 0.452 0.419 0.434 0.432 0.511 0.437 0.435 0.432 0.347 0.489 0.335 0.564 0.401 0.357 0.375 0.356 0.374

SC
C36 0.386 0.586 0.771 0.550 0.570 0.170 0.210 0.611 0.350 0.350 0.442 0.130 0.446 0.461 0.451 0.380 0.435 0.468 0.453 0.433 0.520 0.452 0.630 0.423 0.448 0.475 0.443 0.448 0.244 0.245 0.249 0.253 0.210 0.247 0.236 0.245 0.215 0.245 0.244 0.236 0.228 0.244 0.243 0.229 0.244 0.255 0.239 0.269 0.230 0.263 0.214 0.223 0.247 0.248 0.251 0.456

C37 0.557 0.757 0.449 0.571 0.587 0.210 0.320 0.880 0.410 0.460 0.497 0.460 0.521 0.515 0.511 0.680 0.473 0.512 0.477 0.483 0.495 0.443 0.517 0.518 0.523 0.480 0.532 0.506 0.237 0.237 0.240 0.230 0.247 0.246 0.264 0.227 0.276 0.279 0.292 0.307 0.292 0.288 0.218 0.219 0.199 0.244 0.205 0.252 0.242 0.301 0.161 0.243 0.231 0.241 0.229 0.237

U
C38 0.643 0.681 0.563 0.611 0.597 0.420 0.830 0.270 0.280 0.680 0.505 0.620 0.491 0.508 0.507 0.502 0.546 0.410 0.484 0.546 0.487 0.490 0.438 0.508 0.560 0.510 0.505 0.492 0.333 0.331 0.333 0.344 0.350 0.417 0.357 0.419 0.502 0.403 0.254 0.304 0.426 0.393 0.407 0.418 0.458 0.373 0.426 0.544 0.368 0.419 0.429 0.436 0.354 0.346 0.341 0.332

AN
C39 0.500 0.513 0.871 0.601 0.561 0.310 0.380 0.380 0.190 0.440 0.470 0.421 0.580 0.423 0.428 0.408 0.402 0.406 0.411 0.427 0.407 0.406 0.399 0.357 0.450 0.427 0.419 0.413 0.246 0.273 0.275 0.281 0.235 0.302 0.306 0.269 0.245 0.294 0.311 0.363 0.271 0.287 0.271 0.234 0.234 0.305 0.236 0.208 0.262 0.288 0.203 0.237 0.265 0.266 0.274 0.865

C40 0.471 0.671 0.857 0.624 0.490 0.520 0.240 0.660 0.480 0.250 0.427 0.340 0.419 0.670 0.520 0.404 0.436 0.720 0.410 0.467 0.510 0.386 0.376 0.407 0.290 0.473 0.414 0.414 0.309 0.309 0.306 0.312 0.375 0.297 0.388 0.358 0.399 0.230 0.292 0.300 0.345 0.313 0.362 0.268 0.350 0.330 0.324 0.216 0.271 0.276 0.324 0.276 0.312 0.311 0.302 0.307

C41 0.557 0.757 0.633 0.586 0.605 0.270 0.210 0.320 0.320 0.780 0.423 0.430 0.435 0.510 0.443 0.465 0.402 0.432 0.418 0.421 0.407 0.483 0.440 0.442 0.590 0.630 0.210 0.475 0.307 0.305 0.300 0.316 0.323 0.338 0.346 0.339 0.372 0.403 0.281 0.377 0.298 0.319 0.337 0.374 0.352 0.363 0.352 0.371 0.371 0.382 0.377 0.377 0.316 0.308 0.305 0.489

M
C42 0.471 0.671 0.871 0.569 0.587 0.330 0.760 0.340 0.500 0.270 0.590 0.474 0.320 0.459 0.487 0.670 0.497 0.495 0.470 0.441 0.530 0.520 0.516 0.506 0.468 0.490 0.415 0.496 0.296 0.302 0.289 0.309 0.258 0.346 0.331 0.326 0.353 0.425 0.369 0.368 0.295 0.375 0.371 0.406 0.335 0.337 0.321 0.330 0.376 0.321 0.394 0.292 0.292 0.309 0.296 0.310

C43 0.586 0.786 0.248 0.540 0.574 0.370 0.320 0.680 0.638 0.650 0.430 0.447 0.270 0.453 0.490 0.436 0.680 0.520 0.425 0.420 0.680 0.429 0.520 0.470 0.456 0.440 0.350 0.385 0.373 0.390 0.366 0.381 0.390 0.462 0.552 0.495 0.459 0.576 0.439 0.537 0.406 0.469 0.528 0.575 0.479 0.487 0.513 0.325 0.467 0.300 0.537 0.389 0.368 0.458 0.391 0.368

D
C44 0.557 0.757 0.536 0.605 0.499 0.580 0.050 0.780 0.170 0.450 0.480 0.480 0.580 0.467 0.477 0.462 0.430 0.469 0.580 0.499 0.450 0.504 0.459 0.436 0.506 0.457 0.560 0.470 0.195 0.204 0.207 0.201 0.225 0.226 0.203 0.196 0.156 0.303 0.266 0.272 0.227 0.220 0.223 0.266 0.200 0.220 0.199 0.283 0.259 0.241 0.587 0.259 0.258 0.201 0.205 0.205

TE
C45 0.529 0.729 0.489 0.578 0.513 0.280 0.380 0.280 0.230 0.560 0.438 0.570 0.630 0.460 0.520 0.465 0.465 0.451 0.423 0.453 0.422 0.540 0.290 0.396 0.439 0.410 0.550 0.456 0.289 0.291 0.298 0.298 0.295 0.352 0.339 0.305 0.353 0.281 0.283 0.276 0.347 0.314 0.321 0.266 0.349 0.321 0.322 0.365 0.280 0.342 0.217 0.307 0.309 0.292 0.311 0.458

C46 0.557 0.657 0.556 0.584 0.541 0.320 0.480 0.290 0.190 0.170 0.450 0.479 0.390 0.447 0.449 0.471 0.490 0.479 0.462 0.458 0.481 0.424 0.427 0.423 0.498 0.465 0.481 0.720 0.342 0.331 0.334 0.330 0.406 0.337 0.334 0.334 0.303 0.345 0.344 0.281 0.331 0.343 0.327 0.376 0.364 0.354 0.385 0.378 0.425 0.337 0.525 0.464 0.327 0.343 0.307 0.338

C47 0.557 0.757 0.856 0.499 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.588 0.247 0.236 0.251 0.235 0.287 0.230 0.246 0.227 0.191 0.234 0.309 0.296 0.282 0.243 0.229 0.235 0.229 0.227 0.226 0.269 0.369 0.273 0.188 0.262 0.235 0.241 0.241 0.240
EP
C48 0.503 0.617 0.357 0.577 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.270 0.276 0.277 0.257 0.354 0.259 0.326 0.264 0.233 0.248 0.330 0.293 0.306 0.250 0.263 0.238 0.237 0.254 0.385 0.269 0.274 0.320 0.213 0.307 0.280 0.243 0.283 0.268

C49 0.473 0.637 0.385 0.585 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.473 0.206 0.211 0.212 0.197 0.271 0.198 0.249 0.202 0.179 0.189 0.252 0.224 0.234 0.192 0.201 0.182 0.181 0.194 0.458 0.206 0.209 0.245 0.163 0.235 0.215 0.186 0.217 0.469
C

C50 0.500 0.581 0.563 0.527 0.487 0.592 0.292 0.173 0.310 0.237 0.683 0.255 0.436 0.392 0.438 0.273 0.463 0.470 0.495 0.479 0.392 0.470 0.438 0.429 0.428 0.483 0.466 0.403 0.668 0.719 0.709 0.477 0.582 0.466 0.498 0.459 0.387 0.473 0.625 0.599 0.571 0.492 0.464 0.475 0.465 0.459 0.528 0.546 0.496 0.553 0.380 0.530 0.476 0.489 0.488 0.487
AC

C51 0.547 0.584 0.584 0.485 0.502 0.656 0.310 0.301 0.620 0.410 0.355 0.510 0.393 0.219 0.538 0.191 0.556 0.378 0.474 0.388 0.510 0.417 0.474 0.574 0.383 0.402 0.447 0.379 0.362 0.344 0.355 0.521 0.717 0.525 0.659 0.535 0.473 0.501 0.668 0.593 0.620 0.507 0.533 0.482 0.479 0.514 0.555 0.545 0.554 0.649 0.431 0.621 0.568 0.492 0.574 0.542

C52 0.528 0.547 0.422 0.513 0.463 0.465 0.374 0.319 0.565 0.565 0.383 0.656 0.411 0.401 0.407 0.601 0.384 0.390 0.656 0.408 0.399 0.428 0.434 0.408 0.574 0.435 0.410 0.423 0.236 0.246 0.237 0.399 0.549 0.402 0.504 0.409 0.362 0.384 0.511 0.454 0.474 0.388 0.408 0.369 0.367 0.393 0.424 0.417 0.424 0.496 0.330 0.475 0.435 0.377 0.439 0.415
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 6. Weighted supermatrix

AS1 AS2 AS3 AS4 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18 C19 C20 C21 C22 C23 C24 C25 C26 C27 C28 C29 C30 C31 C32 C33 C34 C35 C36 C37 C38 C39 C40 C41 C42 C43 C44 C45 C46 C47 C48 C49 C50 C51 C52 Ranking

AS1 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1394 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1309 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1393 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 0.1394 1

PT
AS2 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1137 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1210 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 0.1211 2

AS3 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1128 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1200 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 0.1201 3

AS4 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1115 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1187 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 0.1188 4

RI
C1 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0074 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 49

C2 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0066 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 52

SC
C3 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0082 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 0.0088 37

C4 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0069 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 51

U
C5 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0111 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 0.0118 1

AN
C6 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0104 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 9

C7 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0096 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 18

C8 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0107 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 7

M
C9 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0099 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 16

C10 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0102 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 12

D
C11 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0107 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 5

TE
C12 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0104 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 8

C13 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0102 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 0.0108 13

C14 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0088 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 29
EP
C15 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0110 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 2

C16 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0110 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 0.0117 3
C

C17 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0100 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 14
AC

C18 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0096 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 19

C19 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0099 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 15

C20 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0075 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 48

C21 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0077 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0082 0.0081 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0082 0.0081 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 45

C22 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0087 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 30

C23 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0094 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 20

C24 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0099 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 0.0105 17

C25 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0092 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

C26 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0107 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 0.0114 6

C27 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0108 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 0.0115 4

C28 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0103 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 10

C29 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0102 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109 11

C30 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0090 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 24

PT
C31 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0077 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 0.0082 44

C32 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0084 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 0.0090 35

RI
C33 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0092 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 21

C34 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0078 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 43

SC
C35 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0090 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 25

C36 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0075 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 47

C37 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0080 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 42

U
C38 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0091 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 0.0097 23

AN
C39 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0081 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 38

C40 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0086 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 33

C41 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0086 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 32

M
C42 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0088 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 28

C43 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0091 0.0091 0.0091 0.0091 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0086 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0091 0.0091 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 34

D
C44 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0080 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 40

TE
C45 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0081 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 39

C46 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0083 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 0.0089 36
EP
C47 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0090 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 0.0096 26

C48 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0076 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 46

C49 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0073 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 50
C

C50 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0087 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 31
AC

C51 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0089 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 27

C52 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0080 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 41
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Figure- Sustainable development in technological and vocational higher
education: balanced scorecard measures with uncertainty

Sustainable development

PT
The modified balanced
scorecard aspects and
attributes

RI
To arrive the expert
Fuzzy Delphi method validity and correctness

SC
The key performance To merge the
Triangular fuzzy attributes with validity qualitative and

U
numbers quantitative
information together
AN
Closed-loop
Analytical network To deal with the
process Theoretical and managerial aspects and criteria in
implications hierarchical
M

Proposed methods dependence relations

Purposes
D

Figure 1. Proposed analytical flow for sustainable development in TVE higher

education
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlights

This study aims to benchmark the SD competencies for TVHE professionals.

The SD integrated into the modified balanced scorecard model.

A model contains quantitative and qualitative measures under uncertainty.

The industrial leadership and service quality comparisons ranked as top priority.

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC