Recently, the reform practice of government procurement of public service (GPPS) in China has been promoted gradually and got great breakthrough. Meanwhile, in order to guarantee that the expected goal of this reform achieved, mature and effective regulation is of vital importance. Considering the practical demand, the capability maturity model is applied into the evaluation of quality regulatory capability in GPPS. The concept of quality regulatory capability maturity is proposed, and the evaluation model based on TODIM (an acronym in Portuguese of interactive and multiple attribute decision making) method for probabilistic linguistic term sets (PLTSs) is provided. Taking Jiangsu Province as an example, an empirical study of its quality regulatory capability evaluation for GPPS is conducted, through which, not only comparative results of maturity levels of different cities in Jiangsu is obtained, but the improving measures are also determined. The proposed maturity evaluation model fully reflects experts’ preferences and evaluation information, and is able to point out the direction for regulatory capability’s future promotion level by level, as well as its continual improvement.
GrudinschiD., SintonenS. and HallikasJ., Relationship risk perception and determinants of the collaboration fluency of buyer–supplier relationships in public service procurement, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management20(2) (2014), 82–91.
2.
WuF., ZhouZ. and LiuY., The US experience of contracting for public services and lessons for china: A case study of public service, Journal of Public Administration4 (2016), 4–22.
3.
WangP., Reformation of government’s purchasing public service from social forces: Analysis and its implications, Journal of Jilin University: Social Sciences Edition (4) (2015), 78–89.
4.
YangS., Research on the government purchase of public cultural services: A case study of Jiangsu local government, Nanjing University (2018).
5.
DongY. and JuH., Research on the quality guarantee mechanism of government purchasing public service, Chinese Public Administration5 (2016), 43–37.
6.
LiuP. and LiuZ.P., Measurement and Evaluation of Social Regulatory Agency’s Capacity: A Comparative Study among Three Regulatory Departments, Wuhan University Journal (Philosophy & Social Sciences)69(4) (2016), 57–74.
7.
WangH., ZhaoD. and ZengF., Research on the quality management mechanism of Chinese Government procurement of public services, Canadian Social Science11(8) (2015), 27–31.
8.
RodriguezR.M., MartinezL. and HerreraF., Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems20(1) (2012), 109–119.
9.
ZhangG.Q., DongY.C. and XuY.F., Consistency and consensus measures for linguistic preference relation based on distribution assessment, Information Fusion17 (2014), 46–55.
10.
DongY.C., WuY.Z., ZhangH.J. and ZhangG.Q., Multi-granular unbalanced linguistic distribution assessments with interval symbolic proportions, Knowledge-based Systems82 (2015), 139–151.
11.
DongY.C., XuY.F. and YuS., Computing the Numerical Scale of the Linguistic Term Set for the 2-Tuple Fuzzy Linguistic Representation Model, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems17(6) (2009), 1366–1378.
12.
DongY.C., ZhangG.Q. and HongW.C., Linguistic Computational Model Based on 2-Tuples and Intervals, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems21(6) (2013), 1006–1018.
13.
LiC.C., DongY.C., HerreraF., Herrera-ViedmaE. and MartínezL., Personalized individual semantics in computing with words for supporting linguistic group decision making. An application on consensus reaching, Information Fusion33 (2017), 29–40.
14.
LiC.C., RodríguezR.M., MartínezL., DongY.C. and HerreraF., Personalized individual semantics based on consistency in hesitant linguistic group decision making with comparative linguistic expressions, Knowledge-Based Systems145 (2018), 156–165.
15.
LiC.C., DongY.C. and HerreraF., A consensus model for large-scale group decision making with a feedback recommendation based on clustered personalized individual semantics and opposing consensus groups, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems27 (2019), 221–233.
16.
PangQ., WangH. and XuZ., Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making, Information Sciences369 (2016), 128–143.
17.
ZhangY., XuZ., WangH. and LiaoH., Consistency-based risk assessment with probabilistic linguistic preference relation, Applied Soft Computing49(C) (2016), 817–833.
18.
YuS.M., WangJ., WangJ.Q. and LiL., A multi-criteria decision-making model for hotel selection with linguistic distribution assessments, Applied Soft Computing (2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2017.08.009.
19.
WuX. and LiaoH., An approach to quality function deployment based on probabilistic linguistic term sets and ORESTE method for multi-expert multi-criteria decision making, Information Fusion43 (2018), 13–26.
20.
PengH.G., ZhangH.Y. and WangJ.Q., Cloud decision support model for selecting hotels on tripadvisor.com with probabilistic linguistic information, International Journal of Hospitality Management68 (2018), 124–138.
21.
BaiC., ZhangR., QianL. and WuY., Comparisons of probabilistic linguistic term sets for multi-criteria decision making, Knowledge-Based Systems119(C) (2016), 284–291.
22.
GouX. and XuZ., Novel basic operational laws for linguistic terms, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and probabilistic linguistic term sets, Information Sciences372 (2016), 407–427.
23.
LongK., Building internal supervision capability in organizations, The OCM Coach and Mentor Journal3 (2012), 2–5.
24.
KjeldsenA.M., Dynamics of public service motivation: Attraction— selection and socialization in the production and regulation of social services, Public Administration Review74(1) (2014), 101–112.
25.
YadavS., Building regulatory capabilities for pharmaceutical firms’ internationalization, International Journal of Pharmaceutical & Healthcare Marketing7(1) (2013), 58–74.
26.
McallisterL.K., Dimensions of enforcement style: Factoring in regulatory autonomy and capacity, Law & Policy32(1) (2010), 61–78.
27.
RooijB.V., Implementation of Chinese environmental law: Regular enforcement and political campaigns, Development and Change37(1) (2006), 57–74.
28.
LiuB., LiN., LiQ. and ChengY., Cooperation management, relationship quality, outsourcing effect in sanitation service outsourcing——on the example of Shenzhen, Management Review28(2) (2016), 197–209.
29.
LiL., The performance evaluation system of American urban public utilities regulation, Chinese Public Administration(6) (2014), 114–119.
30.
YangB., A study on the theoretical paradigm and roadmap of enhancing china’s regulatory governance system–implications of responsive regulatory theory, Chinese Public Administration (6) (2014), 47–54.
31.
HuJ.H., YangY. and ChenX.H., A novel TODIM method based three-way decision model for medical treatment selection, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems20(4) (2018), 1240–1255.
32.
WuH., PanF. and ZhangY., The role transition researches of the government in public service outsourcing, Open Journal of Business & Management3(4) (2015), 465–470.
33.
LodiA., MalagutiE., StiermosesN.E. and BoninoT., Design and control of public-service contracts and an application to public transportation systems, Management Science62(1) (2016), 1165–1187.
34.
JohanssonT., SiverboS. and CaménC., Managing cooperation, coordination, and legitimacy, Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal29(6) (2016), 1012–1037.
35.
CunninghamI. and JamesP., Analysing public service outsourcing: The value of a regulatory perspective, Environment & Planning C35(6) (2016).
36.
Ainuddin, AbdullahI., Djumardin and NurjayaN., The essence of transparency principle in the procurement of goods and government services through the exchange (Ruilslag): Towards good governance in public services, American and Chinese Law Review (8) (2016), 597–614.
37.
MaciejewskiM., To do more, better, faster and more cheaply: Using big data in public administration, International Review of Administrative Sciences (online first) (1) (2016).
38.
IdaY. and TalitG., Regulation of public bus services: The Israeli experience, Transport Policy42 (2015), 156–165.
39.
LinS.F., Understanding the effectiveness of capability maturity model integration by examining the knowledge management of software development processes, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence20(5) (2009), 509–521.
40.
CafaggiF. and PistorK., Regulatory capabilities: A normative framework for assessing the distributional effects of regulation, Regulation & Governance9(2) (2015), 95–107.
41.
WangK.J., WidagdoJ., LinY.S., YangH.L. and HsiaoS.L., A service innovation framework for start-up firms by integrating service experience engineering approach and capability maturity model, Service Business10(4) (2016), 1–50.
42.
CarrollN. and HelfertM., Service capabilities within open innovation - revisiting the applicability of capability maturity models, Journal of Enterprise Information Management28(2) (2015), 275–303.
43.
BenmoussaR., AbdelkabirC., AbdA. and HassouM., Capability/maturity-based model for logistics processes assessment, International Journal of Productivity & Performance Management64(1) (2017), 28–51.
44.
KrishnanS., ThompsonS.H. and LymmJ., Determinants of electronic participation and electronic government maturity: Insights from cross-country data, International Journal of Information Management37(4) (2017), 297–312.
45.
PongsuwanP., How does procurement capability maturity affect e-procurement adoption and leverage purchasing in supply chain?International Journal of Business and Economic Development4(3) (2016), 45–54.
46.
RendonR.G., Benchmarking contract management process maturity: A case study of the US navy, Benchmarking: An International Journal22(7) (2015), 1481–1508.
47.
GomesL.F.A.M. and LimaM.M.P.P., TODIM: Basics and application to multicriteria ranking of projects with environmental impacts, Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences16 (1991), 113–127.
48.
JiP., ZhangH.Y. and WangJ.Q., A projection-based TODIM method under multi-valued neuromorphic environments and its application in personnel selection, Neural Computing & Applications29 (2018), 221–234.
49.
LlamazaresB., An analysis of the generalized TODIM method, European Journal of Operational Research269 (2018), 1041–1049.
