Comparison of Selection for Employee Position Recommended MCDM-AHP, SMART and MAUT Method

Authors

  • Akmaludin Akmaludin STMIK Nusa Mandiri Jakarta
  • Erene Gernaria Sihombing Universitas Nusa Mandiri
  • Linda Sari Dewi Universitas Nusa Mandiri
  • Rinawati Universitas Nusa Mandiri
  • Ester Arisawati Universitas Nusa Mandiri

DOI:

10.33395/sinkron.v8i2.11843

Keywords:

MAUT, MCDM-AHP, Promotion, Ranking, Selections, SMART.

Abstract

In a company, employees are high-value assets, therefore it is necessary to select employees for the continuity of the company, of course, by getting quality human resources. The purpose of this paper is to refute the difference in the number of rankings in selecting the best employees through a comparison of the SMART and MAUT methods. Many methods can be used in the selection process. This article describes in detail about the selection of employee promotions using the MCDM-AHP collaboration method which is used to provide an assessment of the main criteria through eigenvector values ​​based on joint decisions by company leaders based on consistent and optimal questionnaire instrumentation which is not set based on percentages manually based on wishes leader. The SMART method is used to provide a sub-criteria assessment based on a balanced weighting utility according to the number of criteria used, with an assessment weight starting from zero as the lowest value and one as the highest value. The MAUT method will be used as a comparison against the results of the SMART method, where the MAUT method has differences in determining the weights on the sub-criteria based on the perception of understanding the criteria, so that they are arranged in an orderly manner and then determine the utility value of the criteria, so that there are similarities between the two methods. The ranking results obtained from the comparison of the two methods are that they have the same rating, so that the decision support taken also has similarities between the two SMART methods and the MAUT method. This can happen if the standard of measurement is carried out consistently through the MCDM-AHP method by not changing the assessment range in determining the interval range of each criterion.

GS Cited Analysis

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akmaludin, Badrul, M., Marlinda, L., Dalis, S., Sidik, & Santoso, B. (2019). The Employee Promotion Base on Specification Job’s Performance Using: MCDM, AHP, and ELECTRE Method. 2018 6th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management, CITSM 2018, CITSM, 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/CITSM.2018.8674347

Alonso, J. A., & Lamata, M. T. (2006). Consistency in the analytic hierarchy process: a new approach. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 14(4), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488506004114

Aouadni, S., Rebai, A., & Turskis, Z. (2017). The Meaningful Mixed Data TOPSIS (TOPSIS-MMD) Method and its application in supplier selection. Studies in Informatics and Control, 26(3), 353–363. https://doi.org/10.24846/v26i3y201711

Aziz, N. F., Sorooshian, S., & Mahmud, F. (2016). MCDM-AHP method in decision makings. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 11(11), 7217–7220. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2013.2297315

Deshmukh, S. C. (2013). Preference Ranking Organization Method Of Enrichment Evaluation (Promethee). International Journal of Engineering Science Invention, 2(11), 28–34.

Gunawan, A. (2020). Implementasi Metode Multi Attribute Utility Theory (Maut) Pada Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Pemilihan Hotel Murah Terbaik Di …. http://repository.wicida.ac.id/id/eprint/2972

Haki, A. Y., Syahminan, S., & Budianto, A. E. (2021). Implementasi Metode Smart Pada Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Objek Wisata Di Kabupaten Timor Tengah Utara. Rainstek Jurnal Terapan Sains Dan Teknologi, 3(1), 59–63. https://doi.org/10.21067/jtst.v3i1.5562

Hayati, R. S., Rahayu, S. L., & Sanjaya, A. (2021). Pemilihan Susu Formula Menggunakan Metode Multi Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT). Infosys (Information System) Journal, 6(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.22303/infosys.6.1.2021.42-51

Hu, H., Mao, X., & Li, J. (2018). Study on multimodal transportation route selection based on a Simplified ELECTRE approach considering environmental impacts. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 308–312. https://doi.org/10.1145/3230348.3230432

Imanuwelita, V., Regasari, R., Putri, M., & Amalia, F. (2018). Penentuan Kelayakan Lokasi Usaha Franchise Menggunakan Metode AHP dan VIKOR. Jurnal Pengembangan Teknologi Informasi Dan Ilmu Komputer, 2(1), 122–132.

Kasie, F. M. (2013). Combining Simple Multiple Attribute Rating Technique and Analytical Hierarchy Process for Designing Multi-Criteria Performance Measurement Framework. The Global Journal of Researches in Engineering: Industrial Engineering, 13(1), 15–30.

Lestari, A. T., Novita, N., & Widiastuti, T. (2020). Metode multi attribute utility theory (maut) berbasis web pada sistem pendukung keputusan pemberian komisi untuk salesman pt. bandar trisula palembang. 1(1), 22–29.

Mahendra, G. S., & Hartono, E. (2021). Implementation of AHP-MAUT and AHP-Profile Matching Methods in OJT Student Placement DSS. Jurnal Teknik Informatika …, March.

Manalu, A. S. (2018). Dengan metode SMART ( Simple Multi Attribute Dengan metode SMART ( Simple Multi Attribute Rating Technique ) Berbasis Web ( Studi.

maryaningsih, maryaningsih, & Suranti, D. (2021). Penerapan Metode Simple Multi Atributte Rating Technique ( Smart ) Dalam Pemilihan Dosen Terbaik. JIKO (Jurnal Informatika Dan Komputer), 4(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.33387/jiko.v4i1.1921

Nasution, M. I., Fadlil, A., & Sunardi, S. (2021). Perbandingan Metode Smart dan Maut untuk Pemilihan Karyawan pada Merapi Online Corporation. Jurnal Teknologi Informasi Dan Ilmu Komputer, 8(6), 1205. https://doi.org/10.25126/jtiik.2021863583

Purnomo, F. (2019). Program Ladit (Lapak Digital) : Optimalisasi Media Digital sebagai Wadah dalam Pengembangan Umkm di Madura. Jurnal Studi Manajemen Dan Bisnis, 6(2), 89–95. https://doi.org/10.21107/jsmb.v6i2.6687

Saaty, T. L. (2010). The Eigenvector In Lay Language 2 . What we learn when we have measurement. 2(2), 163–169.

Safrizal, M. (2015). Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Pemilihan Karyawan Teladan dengan Metode SMART (Simple Multi Attribute Rating Technique). Jurnal CoreIT, 1(2), 25–29.

Savitha, K., & Chandrasekar, C. (2011). Trusted Network Selection using SAW and TOPSIS Algorithms for Heterogeneous Wireless Networks. International Journal of Computer Applications, 26(8), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.5120/3125-4300

Serra Costa, J. F., Borges, A. R., & Machado, T. D. S. (2016). Analytic Hierarchy Process Applied To Industrial Location: a Brazilian Perspective on Jeans Manufacturing. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 8(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v8i1.210

Yusnitha, K., Tursina, T., & Irwansyah, M. A. (2019). Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Pemilihan Wilayah Prioritas Intervensi Kegiatan Keluarga Berencana dengan Metode AHP-SMART. Jurnal Edukasi Dan Penelitian Informatika (JEPIN), 5(1), 99. https://doi.org/10.26418/jp.v5i1.31338

Downloads


Crossmark Updates

How to Cite

Akmaludin, A., Sihombing, E. G. ., Dewi, L. S. ., Rinawati, & Arisawati, E. . (2023). Comparison of Selection for Employee Position Recommended MCDM-AHP, SMART and MAUT Method. Sinkron : Jurnal Dan Penelitian Teknik Informatika, 7(2), 603-616. https://doi.org/10.33395/sinkron.v8i2.11843

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 2 (2023): Research Article, Volume 7 Issue 2 April, 2023

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Akmaludin Akmaludin

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2