Hybrid approach to modeling labor productivity factors: Synthesis of randomized controlled experiments and causal Bayesian networks

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

Solving the problem of effective management of labor productivity of company employees, taking into account many heterogeneous factors, often of a stochastic, non-stationary and non-linear nature, embedded in complex chains of cause-and-effect interactions in the context of digital transformation of the economy presents certain difficulties. The paper proposes a technology that ensures, with a high degree of certainty, the establishment of causal relationship between the implementation of alternative management decisions and the productivity of company employees, and is designed to select solutions based on an assessment of the effect of their impact on labor productivity. The novelty of the proposed technology is based on a hybrid approach to modeling the object of study and combines two models. First model – a structural model built on the basis of a priori knowledge of the laws of functioning and development and providing a causal understanding of the object and capable of predicting the effect of factors (explicit and indirect). Second model – a model based on data, which is tuned (adapted) taking into account empirical data obtained as a result of observation (measurement) of an object. The developed technology uses heterogeneous research methods —a randomized controlled experiment to obtain information about the tested activities, statistical data analysis —descriptive data analysis, correlation and regression analysis, the difference-difference method to establish a causal relationship between the implemented event and the growth of labor productivity, a Bayesian network of causality for building and analyzing a structural model of an object and explaining the causal relationships of explicit and hidden factors that affect labor productivity in the context of the implementation of measures. Of practical significance are the results of testing the proposed theoretical provisions, methods and technologies on actual data on the activities of a food service company. The results obtained will contribute to the effective use of the developed technology aimed at ensuring the growth of labor productivity under uncertainty in the external and internal environment and will contribute to the sustainable development of companies and the growth of its profitability.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

E. V. Orlova

Ufa University of Science and Technology

Author for correspondence.
Email: ekorl@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Ufa

References

  1. Бахтизин А.Р. (2008). Агент-ориентированные модели экономики. М.: Экономика. 279 с. [Bakhtizin A.R. (2008). Agent-based models of the economy. Moscow: Ekonomika. 279 p. (in Russian).]
  2. Орлова Е.В. (2022а). Системный инжиниринг цифровых двойников организационно-технических систем с использованием методов интеллектуального анализа // Программная инженерия. Т. 13. № 9. С. 425–440. doi: 10.17587/prin.13.425-440 [Orlova E.V. (2022a). System engineering of the organizational and technical systems' digital twins using artificial intelligence methods. Programmnaya Ingeneria (Software Engineering), 13, 9, 425–439. doi: 10.17587/prin.13.425-440 (in Russian).]
  3. Орлова Е.В. (2022б). Влияние социального капитала компании на инновационность личности в России: экономические механизмы и диагностический инструментарий // Journal of Applied Economic Research. Т. 21. № 3. С. 545–575. doi: 10.15826/vestnik.2022.21.3.019 [Orlova E.V. (2022). Impact of companies' social capital on person's innovativeness in Russia: Economic mechanisms and diagnostic tools. Journal of Applied Economic Research, 21, 3, 545–575. doi: 10.15826/vestnik.2022.21.3.019 (in Russian).]
  4. Слуцкин Л.Н. (2019). Моделирование причинных зависимостей в экономике (научный доклад). М.: Институт экономики РАН. 42 c. Режим доступа: https://inecon.org/docs/2019/Slutskin_paper_2019.pdf [Slutskin L.N. (2019). Modeling causal dependencies in economics (report). Moscow: Institute of Economics RAS. 43 p. Available at: https://inecon.org/docs/2019/Slutskin_paper_2019.pdf (in Russian).]
  5. Arkhangelsky D.Y, Athey S., Hirshberg D.A., Imbens G.W., Wager S. (2021). Synthetic difference-in-differences. American Economic Review, 111, 12, 4088–4118.
  6. Armstrong M. (2008). Strategic human resource management. London: Kogan Pag.
  7. Ashenfelter O., Card D. (1985). Using the longitudinal structure of earnings to estimate the effect of training programs. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 67, 4, 648–660. doi: 10.2307/1924810
  8. Athey S., Imbens G.W. (2022). Design-based analysis in difference-in-differences settings with staggered adoption. Journal of Econometrics, 226, 1, 62–79, doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.10.012
  9. Bryson J.M., Ackermann F.M, Eden С., Finn C.B. (2004). Visible thinking: Unlocking causal mapping for practical business results. N.Y.: Willey & Sons. 396 p.
  10. Edvinsson L., Mallone M.S. (2007). Intellectual capital: Realizing your company’s true value by finding its hidden brain power. N.Y.: Harper Business.
  11. Gratton L., Ghoshal S. (2003). Managing personal human capital: New ethos for the ‘volunteer’ employee. European Management Journal, 21, 1, 1–10.
  12. Orlova E.V. (2021a). Innovation in company labor productivity management: Data science methods application. Applied System Innovation, 4, 3, 68. doi: 10.3390/asi4030068
  13. Orlova E.V. (2021b). Design of personal trajectories for employees’ professional development in the knowledge society under Industry 5.0 Social Sciences, 10, 11, 427. doi: 10.3390/socsci10110427
  14. Orlova E.V. (2022a). Methodology and Statistical modeling of social capital influence on employees’ individual innovativeness in a company. Mathematics, 10, 11, 1809, doi: 10.3390/math10111809
  15. Orlova E.V. (2022b) Technique for data analysis and modeling in economics, finance and business using machine learning methods. IEEE Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Control Systems, Mathematical Modeling, Automation and Energy Efficiency (SUMMA), 369–374. doi: 10.1109/SUMMA57301.2022.9973885
  16. Pearl J. (1995). Causal diagrams for empirical research. Biometrica, 82, 669–710.
  17. Pearl J. (2009). Causal inference in statistics: An overview. Statistical Survey, 3, 96–146. doi: 10.1214/09-SS057
  18. Pearl J. (2021). Radical empiricism and machine learning research. Journal of Causal Inference, 9, 78–82. doi: 10.1515/jci-2021-0006
  19. Peters J., Janzing D., Scholkopf B. (2017). Elements of causal inference foundations and learning algorithms. London: The MIT Press Cambridge.
  20. Rosenbaum P.R., Rubin D.B. (1982). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.
  21. Samad S. (2020). Achieving innovative firm performance through human capital and the effect of social capital. Management and Marketing, 15, 2, 326–344.
  22. Sheridan N., Ball L. (2005). Does inflation targeting matter? In: The inflation targeting debate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research, 249–276.
  23. Youndt M.A. (2000). Human resource configurations and value creation: The mediating role of intellectual capital. Toronto: Annual Conference of the Academy of Management.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2. Fig.1

Download (194KB)
3. Fig.2

Download (65KB)

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences