Ranking of indices affecting operational budgeting based on performance information in the country's municipalities using the AHP method

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Department of Accounting, Birjand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Birjand, Iran

2 Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (FUM), Mashhad, Iran


The current paper aims at structuring the implementation of operational budgeting using performance information to allocate budget resources in the country's municipalities. This is a development-applied, exploratory (causal) and cross-sectional survey. The statistical population of the study in the qualitative stage included university experts specializing in government budgeting and accounting. Experimental municipality elites were also used as experts, and finally, 30 experts were selected. In the quantitative stage of research; 420 employees working in the administrative and financial departments of municipalities were selected. The sample size of 200 people was estimated using the Krejcie -Morgan table. Purposeful and random sampling methods were used in the qualitative and quantitative sections. Experts' opinion determined 8 main indices as the main indices for evaluating operational budgeting in municipalities. These indices are (implementation, organizational performance, efficiency and effectiveness, planning, cost management, organizational change management, reward and accountability management, statistics and information management), each of which consists of several components through coding. The mean expert opinions for the first component, i.e. the method of implementation in the operational budgeting of municipalities, are such that the maximum and the minimum impact from the expert opinions are 9.6 and 5.9, respectively, while most opinions are in the range of 8.1 to 9.2. The opinions are very influential, taking into account the opinions and trapezoidal fuzzy numbers diagrams. Given the significance level of the Friedman test, because the probability value is (0.000) and is less than 0.05, it shows that the variables are significantly different from each other. The results also show that the management component of the reward and accountability system has the maximum rank and the management and statistics management component has the minimum rank. The results of the model evaluation showed that there was a significant difference and effect with respect to the mean and the difference between the means obtained from the comparison of indices and the indices affecting operational budgeting in municipalities. The significance level is less than 0.01 and has been confirmed at the confidence level of 0.99. The magnitude of this effect is (B = 0.72)), (B = 0.77), (B = 0.54), (B = 0.87), (B = 0.46), (B = 0.51), (B = 0.49), (B = 0.47)) for Implementation Method, Organizational Performance, Efficiency and Effectiveness, Planning, Cost Management, Organizational Change Management, Reward and Accountability System Management, Statistics and Information Management, respectively.


[1] A. Abbasi, Public sector budget management and its new approaches, Higher Education and Research Institute
Publications, Tehran, 2015.
[2] T. Aghaee and A.B. Saifullah, Evolution of government budget to operational budget and GFS system, Islamic
Azad University Press, Tehran, 2017.
[3] J. Babajani, The role of accounting and auditing in establishing an operational budgeting system, Second Int.
Conf. Oper. Budget., 2014.
[4] C. Fornell and D.F. Larcker, Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error:
Algebra and statistics, J. Market. Res. 18 (1981), no. 3, 382–388.
[5] M. Ghazizadeh and M. Ghazizadeh, Barriers to non-establishment of operational budgeting system (case study of
Fatemeh Zahra Hospital in Sari), First Int. Conf. Second Nat. Conf. Tird Millennium and Humanities, 2016, pp.
[6] M. Hosseini Masoom and P. Saeedi, Research entitled feasibility study of implementing operational budgeting based
on Shah model in Bojnourd Islamic Azad University, Second Int. Conf. Futurology, Management and Economic
Development, 2015.
[7] S.I. Mandizvidza, An examination and analysis of the application of performance-based budgeting systems in
California urban transit agencies, University of La Verne, 2005.
[8] A. Mansour Abadi, Feasibility study of implementing operational budgeting based on the ”Shah” model: a case
study of Shiraz municipality, Master Thesis, Islamic Azad University, Marvdasht, Iran, 2016.
[9] R.M. Mcnab and F. Melese, Implementing the GPRA: Examining the prospects for performance budgeting in the
federal government, Public Budget. Finance 23 (2003), no. 2, 73–95.
[10] D.P. Moynihan, Performance-based budgeting: beyond rhetoric, Public Sector Washington, D.C.: World Bank
Group, 2003.
[11] M. Rasoulian and H. Abrishami, Operational budgeting as a model for improving the financial management system
in municipalities, Second Int. Conf. Oper. Budget., 2017.
[12] P. Saeedi and A.R. Mazidi, Operational budgeting (principles, concepts and legal requirements), Negah Danesh
Publications, Tehran, 2016.
[13] F. Sarraf, Government budgeting and Iran’s budget system, Publications of the Higher Institute of Commerce,
10th edition, 2016.
Volume 13, Issue 2
July 2022
Pages 2781-2794
  • Receive Date: 24 May 2021
  • Revise Date: 12 July 2021
  • Accept Date: 26 July 2021