The Use of Analytical Hierarchy Process in Identifying Weight age Criteria for Academic Staff Selection

  • Authors

    • Wan Norsyafawati W. Muhamad Radzi
    • Norshahrizan Nordin
    • Razamin Ramli
    • Aidanazima Abashah
    • Sayang Nurshahrizleen Ramlan
    2018-08-08
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.21.17157
  • Staff selection, Academic staff selection criteria, Analytical Hierarchy Process

  • The academic staff selection for any organization is an important process that involves in decision making process. The process must be carried out carefully because it involves some important aspects towards the staff selection. During the interview session, the selection process based on five criteria of the applicant. The five selection criteria consists of academic qualification, religious knowledge, community services, knowledge, and communication skills. Furthermore, the selection of applicants for the academic ability and suitability with the field in order to make the selection process is becoming more complex. The selection of the applicants for academic staff also relies on judgments of the committee that was appointed for interviewing the applicants with a lot of experience in the selection of academic staff applicant. The study finds that the objectives are to identify all criteria relevant to the selection of staffs. The technique used in giving weights to each criterion is Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique. As a result, the highest weight was assigned to the first criteria which are academic qualification with the weight 0.3423. It shows that the academic qualification was the most important criterion compared to the other criteria. In addition, the selection of applicant for academic staff is able to assist in the selection of potential qualified academic staff.

     

     

  • References

    1. [1] Gordon Stanley and Jeff Oliver. (1994). Variation in Student Selection within the Australian Unified National System: A Case Study in Undergraduate Business Studies from Western Australia. Higher Education, 28(3), 291-299.

      [2] Grant Harman. (1994). Student selection and admission to higher education: Policies and practices in the Asian

      [3] region. Higher Education, 27(3), 313-339.

      [4] Herman, H.D. (1995). School-leaving examinations, selection and equity in higher education in South Africa. Comparative Education. 31(2), 261-274.

      [5] Hermien Zaaiman, Henk van der Flier, and Gerard D. Thijs. (2000). Selection as Contract to Teach at the Student's Level. Experiences from a South African Mathematics and Science Foundation. Higher Education, 40(1), 1-21.

      [6] Lindley Darden and Joseph A. Cain. (1989). Selection Type Theories. Philosophy of Science. 56(1), 106-129.

      [7] Ling-Hin Li. (2009). Community Attachment and Housing Choice in Hong Kong. 27(1), 42-57.

      [8] M. Bavilacqua and M. Braglia, (2000). The Analytic Hierarchy Process applied to maintainance strategy selection. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 71-83.

      [9] Manouselis N. and Sampson D. (2002). Dynamic Knowledge Route Selection For Personalised Learning Environments uUsing Multiple Criteria.

      [10] Marvin E. Gonza´lez, Gioconda Quesada and Carlo A. Mora Monge. (2004). Determining the importance of the supplier selection process in manufacturing: a case study. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 34(6), 492-504.

      [11] Mehmet Sevkli, S.C.Lenny Koh, Selim Zaim, Mehmet Demirbag and Ekrem Tatoglu. (2008). Hybrid analytical hierarchy process model for supplier selection. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 108(1), 122-142.

      [12] Nian Cai Liu dan Ying Cheng. (2005). The Academic Ranking of World Universities. Higher Education in Europe, 30(2).

      [13] Pekka Korhnan and Mikka Syrjanen. (2004). Resource Allocation Based on Efficiency Analysis. Management Science, 50(8) 1134-1144.

      [14] Philip J. Boland and Kevin Hutchinson. (2000). Student Selection of Random Digits. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 49(4), 519-529.

      [15] Rachelle S. Klien and Hanan Luss. (1991). Minimax Resource Allocation with Tree Structured Substitutable Resources. Operations Research, 39(2), 285-295.

      [16] Richard Whitley. (1995). Academic Knowledge and Work Jurisdiction in Management. SAGE Journals, 16(1), 81-105.

      [17] T.M. El-Hossainy (2011). A Fuzzy Model for Multi-Criteria. Journal of King Abdul Aziz University, 22(1), 99-118.

      [18] Thomas L. Saaty. (2003). Decision Making with The AHP:Why is the principal eigenvector necessary?. European Journal of Operational Research, 145, 85-91.

      [19] Thomas L. Saaty. (2008). Decision Making with The Analytical Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Norsyafawati W. Muhamad Radzi, W., Nordin, N., Ramli, R., Abashah, A., & Nurshahrizleen Ramlan, S. (2018). The Use of Analytical Hierarchy Process in Identifying Weight age Criteria for Academic Staff Selection. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(3.21), 181-184. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.21.17157