Selecting Best Employee of the Year Using Analytical Hierarchy Process

Transcription

1 J. Basc. Appl. Sc. Res., 5(11)72-76, , TextRoad Publcaton ISSN Journal of Basc and Appled Scentfc Research Selectng Best Employee of the Year Usng Analytcal Herarchy Process Nur Idalsa Norddn, Noran Ahmad, Zanarah Mohd Yusof Faculty of Computer Scence and Mathematcs, Unverst Teknolog MARA, Dungun, Terengganu, Malaysa ABSTRACT Receved: July 18, 2015 Accepted: October 14, 2015 In the organzaton system, employee plays an mportant role n achevng the company goals. Motvatng the employee by gvng them a reward such as bonus, vacaton and promoton that can optmze the productvty of each employee. In the selecton of the best employee of the year, a model s developed by usng Analytcal Herarchy Process (AHP) whch uses both qualtatve and quanttatve decson makng approaches. The developed model contans 4 levels of herarchy whch startng wth the goal, 4 crtera and 22 sub-crtera, and fnally the employee. The result s evaluated by usng an excel spreadsheet,whch shows the best employee of the year wth the hghest prorty value of qualty of work. KEYWORDS: Analytcal Herarchy Process, Best Employee. INTRODUCTION In the organzatonal context, an employee s an mportant asset for the organzaton to acheve ther goal and objectves. Employee performance apprasal s an mportant aspect of human resources management n order to assess each employee s contrbuton to the company. Performance s usuallydefned as the extent to whch an organzatonal member contrbutes to achevng the goals of the organzaton. Performance apprasal s defned as the process of dentfyng, evaluatng and developng the work performance of the employee n the organzaton, so that organzatonal goals and objectves are effectvely acheved whle, at the same tme, beneftng employees n terms of recognton, recevng feedback, and offerng career gudance [4]. Recognton from the company can motvate the employee to beng the best. It s a bg challenge to create a system that helps the human resource development n the ndustry to make ther work easer wthout mssng an opportunty to select a best employee.there are many methods whch avalable n the performance apprasal such as nformal apprasals that nvolve the assessment of an ndvdual s performance by ther supervsor. In [5] develops the decson makng and evaluatng system for employee recrutment by usng fuzzy analytcal herarchy process.analytc Herarchy Process (AHP) s a powerful tool that wdely used n evaluatng and rankng complex decsonproblems,where t s a multattrbute decson makng method whch proposed by [7].Ths study wll nvestgate the applcaton of the AHP model n seekng a best employee of the year. There are some related crtera that most employers shall consder durng the selecton process. In [6]categorzed the crtera n6 man categores namely qualty/quantty of work, plannng, commtment, cooperaton, communcaton and external factors.in [8] studed the employee performance evaluaton at PT. Kereta Ap Indonesaby usng expert choce software and categorzes the crtera n6 man categores such as ntegrty, professonal, orentaton toward safety, nnovaton and nnovaton of servce. Snce there are many crtera that must be consdered durng the selecton process of best employee, then there exsts a problem to evaluate the employee. Ths problem can be solved by usng Mult Crtera Decson Makng (MCDM). There have been many methods proposed to solve MCDM such as Weghted Sum Model [2], Analytcal Network Process (the generalzed AHP) [7] and ELECTRE [1]. However, many comparson revews have revealed that AHP process a number of benefts over other mult-crtera decson makng methods. Ths process nvolves par-wse comparsons. The decson maker starts by layng out the overall herarchy of the decson. Ths herarchy reveals the factors to be consdered as well as the varous alternatves n the decson. Then, a number of par-wse comparsons are done whch result n the determnaton of factor weghts and factor evaluatons METHODOLOGY The man purpose of ths study s to propose a model for the best employee of the year by usng AHP. Often, the selecton of the best employee s done by the top management of the company by usng nformal apprasals and Correspondng Author: Nur Idalsa Norddn, Faculty of Computer Scence and Mathematcs, UnverstTeknolog MARA, Dungun, Terengganu, Malaysa. Emal: nurdalsa@tganu.utm.edu.my 72

2 Norddn et al.,2015 makng them facng dffculty n assessng and causng merely a subjectve assessment. Therefore, ths paper proposed a model where all crtera are farly evaluated n the selectonprocess.ths model has two phases that s to determne theweght of each crteron and to calculate the overallprorty/rankng of all employees. Determne Weght of Each Crteron The followng 5 steps are requred to determnethe weght of each crteron: Step 1: Identfy the crtera, sub-crtera and employees (tobe evaluated) for evaluaton and put them nto theahp herarchy. Step 2: Assgn scores for each crteron. Step 3: Construct a par-wse comparson matrx. Step 4: Normalze the par-wse comparsonmatrx. Step 5:Test for consstency. Step 1: Identfy the Crtera, Sub-Crtera and Employees (to be Evaluated) for Evaluaton and Put Them Into theahp Herarchy Ths model contans 4 levels of herarchy startng wth the goal (best employee of the year) followed by more than 2 sub-crtera for each 4 major crtera. The full formsand necessary detals of the crtera and sub-crtera areprovded n Table 1. Table 1: Descrpton of crtera Crtera Meanng Sub-Crtera Qualty of Work(QW) Ths s concerned about the employee s able to manage multple projects and produce an approprate quantty of work. Quantty (Qu) Qualty (Ql) The work done s expected to mantan the hgh standards and Punctualty (P) regularly produces accurate work. Furthermore, the employee s Work Effectveness (WE) responsble to complete work n a tmely. Up to Standard (US) Dedcaton (D) Systematc (S) Personal Qualty(PQ) Knowledge and Sklls(KS) External Factor(EF) In a company, ndvduals must be able to work harmonously wth others such as staff, co-workers, peers and managers to make a job done. The employee must be responds postvely to nstructons and procedures. The employee must also be wllng to share crtcal nformaton wth everyone nvolved n a project and makes constructve suggestons. Ths crteron evaluates how ndvduals demonstrate knowledge of technques, sklls, equpment, procedure and materals. The employee must be able to exercse a professonal approach wth others by usng all approprate tools of communcaton. The employee must be able to contrbute job knowledge or techncal knowledge to the socety. Organze (Or) Dscplne (Dc) Competence (Ct) Teamwork/Cooperaton (TC) Sense of Humor (SH) Leader nstructon (LI) Opnon/Ideas (OI) Well dressed (WD) Knowledge (K) Skll (SK) Polcy Implementaton (PI) Communcaton (CM) Leadershp (L) Contrbuton to Socety (CS) Involvement of the Non-Organzatonal Actvty (IN) Step 2: Assgn Score for Each Crteron The score for each crteron(t)n ths study s basedon 1-9 preferences scale [9] (where 1 s theleast preferred and 9 s the most preferred).for example, the evaluaton for 5employees that have been done shortlsted by the management are gven as shown n Table 2: Table 2: Evaluaton for fve employees for each crteron 73

3 J. Basc. Appl. Sc. Res., 5(11)72-76, 2015 Step 3: Construct Par-Wse Comparson Matrx Afterthe herarchcal structure of the problem and the score s fnshed, the next step s to use a par-wse comparson to evaluate tselements and determne the prorty. The weghtage of respectve tems n each level of the A= whch based on the score from herarchy s determned by developng the par-wse comparson matrx, [ ] the entre selecton process. The formula for par-wse comparson between 2 crtera wth score t and t js gven by the followng equaton [3]: a j a j t = t j tj 1 t f f t t otherwse j (1) The decson maker uses a 9 pont scale to assess the prorty score. The procedure focuses on two factors at a tme and ther relaton to each other wth the scores 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9. The score 1 refers to equal mportance, 3 refers to slghtly more mportance, 5 refers to strong more mportance, 7 refers to the very strong mportance and 9 denotes extremely more mportance. The scores of 2, 4, 6 and 8 are ntermedate scores between the two judgments. The followng s the par-wse comparson matrx base on Qualty of Work (Qu) for each employee: Table 3: Par-wse comparson matrx based on Qu Qu E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E E E E E Step 4: Normalze the Par-Wse Comparson Matrx Consequently, the par-wse comparson matrx needs to be normalzed n order to obtan the prorty of the crtera and also for consstency analyss. The weghts or the prortes of the crtera are the average of each row. Next, calculate the weghts and prorty of these sub-crtera and also the employeen the same manner.therefore, the normalzed par-wse matrx base on Qualty of Work (Qu) for each employee as shown as follows: Table 4: The normalzed par-wse matrx base on QU and the prorty value Qu E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 Prorty E E E E E Total Step 5: Test for Consstency The consstency test provdes the valdaton and also a measurement of consstency among the par-wse comparson that have been done throughout the judgment process. Generally, the consstency rato s set to be less than 0.1. Develop Overall Prorty/Rankng of Employees There are 4 levels of herarchy n ths selecton model. Take one employee at a tme and measure hs/herperformance ntensty under each sub-crteron.add the global prortes of the ntenstes for theemployee. Repeat the process for all the employees. Suppose that the weghtage of sub-crteron QW are (Qu), (Ql), (P), (WE), (US), (D) and (S). Next, the prorty vector of employee (E1) for Qualty of Work (QW) crteron s computed as follows: Prorty of QW for E1 = (weghtage of Qu x prorty Qu for E1) + (weghtage of Ql x prorty Ql for E1) + (weghtage of P x prorty P for E1) + (weghtage of WE x prorty WE for E1) + (weghtage of US x prorty US for E1) + (weghtage of D x prorty D for E1) + (weghtage of S x prorty S for E1) = (2) 74

4 Norddn et al.,2015 Table 5 shows a sample of prortes of crtera for each level wth 5 employees. The overall prorty/rankng wll be computed from the lowest level to the upper level n order to acheve the goal of selectng the best employee of the year. Table 5: Overall prorty vectors QW PQ KS EF E E E E E RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Prortes of employee from Table 5 are used to rank the employee of the fnal selecton decson. An employee wth the hghest prorty value s the most preferred and assgned to rank 1, employee wth the second hghest prorty s assgned to rank 2 and so on. Therefore, n ths partcular case, canddate E1 who obtaned the hghest prorty value s the most preferred employee where employee E4 wll be the least preferred employee. The rankng of those employees s shown n Table 6. Table 6: Rankng of employee Employee Prorty Rankng E E E E E From Table 6, the employees E1 and E2 have hghest prorty value for qualty of work and external factor respectvely.employee E3 has hghest prorty value for two crtera whch are personal qualty and knowledge and sklls. Even though the employee E3 has the hghest prorty for two crtera, employee E1 s rank 1 wherethe frst crtera whch sthe qualty of work contrbutes more on the value of the prorty followed by personal qualty, knowledge and sklls and external factors. To be precse n our case, the weghtage s , , and for crteron QW, PQ, KS and EF respectvely. CONCLUSION In ths study, a model of the best employee for the year was developed based on AHP and the result s computedby usng an Excel Spreadsheet. By usng the AHP methodology, employees can be ranked by consderng all requred crtera. The rankng can assst the organzaton to select the best employee. REFERENCES 1. Afshar, A.R., M. Mojahed, R.M. Yusuff, T.S. Hong and M.Y. Ismal, Personnel selecton usng ELECTRE. Journal of Appled Scences, 10 (23): Fshburn, P.C., Addtve utltes wth ncomplete product set: Applcatons to prortes and sharngs. Operatons Research, 15 (3): Norddn, N.I., K. Ibrahm and A. Azz, Selectng new lecturer usng the analytcal herarchy process (AHP).In the Proceedngs of the 2012 Internatonal Conference on Statstcs n Scence, Busness and Engneerng, pp: Lansbury, R., Performance management: A process approach.asa Pacfc Journal of Human Resources, 26 (2): Islam, R. and S.B.M. Rasad,2006. Employee performance evaluaton by the AHP: Case study. Asa Pacfc Management Revew, 11 (3):

5 J. Basc. Appl. Sc. Res., 5(11)72-76, Ablhamd, R.K., B. Santoso and M.A. Muslm, Decson makng and evaluaton system for employee recrutment usng fuzzy analytc herarchy process. Internatonal Refereed Journal of Engneerng and Scence, 2 (7): Thomas L. Saaty, Decson makng wth dependence and feedback: The analytc network process. RWS publcatons. 8. Wdayat, Q., Employee performance evaluaton usng the AHP wth expert choce software (Case study: PT. kereta ap Indonesa). In the Proceedngs of the 2013 Technology, Educaton, and Scence Internatonal Conference, pp: Chang, Y.W., Employee performance apprasal n a logstcs company. Open Journal of Socal Scences, 3(7):