The Group Decision Support System to Evaluate the ICT Project Performance Using the Hybrid Method of AHP, TOPSIS and Copeland Score

Setiawan, Herri; Istiyanto, Jazi Eko; Wardoyo, Retantyo; Santoso, Purwo

doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2016.070444

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study continues the research conducted by [21] who has not yet carried out the process of making web-based applications, so this study designs a Web-based GDSS Model Prototype [22] for Project Evaluation in Local Governments. The prototype is built based on a review of research results as described in the Literature Review, which relates to MCDM methods that can be applied in the scope of evaluating a project.…”

Section: A Designmentioning

confidence: 62%

Assessment System of Local Government Projects Prototype in Indonesia

Setiawan¹,

Husnawati²,

Tasmi³

2021

IJACSA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this research is to build an application that is used for project evaluation and provide recommendations on project performance in local government agencies. In this study, project evaluation was carried out using the Group Decision Making (GDM) model based on the Group Decision Support System (GDSM) concept. The project output and outcome parameters used by the Decision Maker (DM) use a hybrid of the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) and Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) methods to reduce subjectivity in scoring qualitative data and to determine project ratings from all DMs. Copeland Score voting method. The results of application computing on the implementation of Group Decision Support System (GDSS) and MCDM indicate that the project ranking process will be faster and more accurate. The results of the sensitivity test show that two criteria have a great influence on project performance so that they have a very important role in project evaluation.

show abstract

Section: A Designmentioning

confidence: 62%

Assessment System of Local Government Projects Prototype in Indonesia

Setiawan¹,

Husnawati²,

Tasmi³

2021

IJACSA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, it emphasizes the importance of the evaluator's intuitive judgments as well as consistency in comparing the factors. AHP allows an expert to apply their knowledge and combine this with objective and subjective data in a logical hierarchy [27][28][29][30]. In addition, AHP combines both components of human thinking: qualitative and quantitative.…”

Section: Research Methodology and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process based on Geometric Mean Method to Prioritize Social Capital Network Indicators

Huynh¹,

Nguyen²,

Nguyen³

et al. 2018

ijacsa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vietnam is striving to develop dynamically and overcome many human resource challenges. As the economy expands, the demand for jobs and human resource development has become increasingly critical. The pressures from reform and international integration are forcing many changes. New graduates must provide proof of their academic capabilities, while also actively developing their social capital to support their job search process. In fact, social capital is an essential capital for personal development as well as professional development of new graduates. This paper applies Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process based on Geometric Mean Methodology to evaluate factors for measuring the social capital of graduates at Ho Chi Minh City Open University in Vietnam. The research results highlight the important role of social networks for graduates, in which a linking network is the most important, a bonding network is the second most important, and a bridging network is the third most important. In addition, the research shows that trust plays an even more important role than networks; and specific belief is more important than general belief.

show abstract

“…Sedangkan penelitian yang menerapkan GDSS dalam penentuan keputusan yaitu [16] mengungkapkan kombinasi metode AHP-BORDA dalam menentukan keputusan, mengekstrak informasi, dan mengidentifikasi masalah dalam sektor pariwisata khususnya objek wisata. Kombinasi metode AHP, TOPSIS dan Copeland Score digunakan dalam mengevaluasi kinerja proyek teknologi informasi dan komunikasidi instansi pemerintah daerah indonesia [17] dijelaskan Copeland Score dapat digunakan dalam melakukan agregasi berbasis kelompok pengambilan keputusan terhadap nilai preferesi yang diberikan menggunakan teknik voting [5][18]. Penelitian GDSS lainnya [19] dalam pemilihan vendor untuk keberhasilan dan daya saing organisasi manufaktur menggunakan 10 kriteria penilaian, dengan metode MOORA untuk perankingan alternatif dan Copeland Score model untuk melakukan agregasi penilaian 3 pengambil keputusan.…”

Section: Pendahuluanunclassified

Group Decision Support System Using SMART-COPELAND SCORE Model In Choosing The Best Alternative Pair

Waas,

Arsitana,

Permana

et al. 2022

Telematika

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Adjust the Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model in completing case studies of selecting the best alternative candidate pairs for the OSIS core board with many decision-makers and problems in the differences in the preferences of decision-makers as well as modeling in decision making with multi-criteria and multi-attributes and combining preferences decision-makers to choose the best alternative partner candidate.Design/methodology/approach: The Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model combines the SMART method for modeling multi-criteria and multi-attribute assessments and the Copeland Score model for aggregating the judgments of five decision-makers against the selected pair of OSIS core board candidates using a voting mechanism.Findings/result: The comparison test for the manual calculation of the SMART- Copeland Score Model method with the results of the system calculation is the same. From the ten alternative data in the first stage of the test through the SMART method calculation, it then passes into four alternatives divided into two alternative candidate pairs, namely alternative candidate pairs (A1, A3) and alternative candidate pairs (A2, A4). The second stage test uses calculations Copeland Score voting, which produces the best alternative candidate pair, namely alternative (A1, A3) with a final point score = 4.Originality/value/state of the art: Based on a review of previous research, this study uses line-up criteria, written tests, and interview tests with the SMART method to calculate alternative scores on each criteria, and the Copeland Score model to aggregate decision makers' preferences to produce the best alternative candidate pairs. In calculating the final value of the alternative ranking.

show abstract

The Group Decision Support System to Evaluate the ICT Project Performance Using the Hybrid Method of AHP, TOPSIS and Copeland Score

Abstract: Abstract-This

Cited by 11 publications

References 10 publications

Assessment System of Local Government Projects Prototype in Indonesia

Assessment System of Local Government Projects Prototype in Indonesia

Application of Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process based on Geometric Mean Method to Prioritize Social Capital Network Indicators

Group Decision Support System Using SMART-COPELAND SCORE Model In Choosing The Best Alternative Pair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About