Sistem Pendukung Keputusan untuk Seleksi Produk Unggulan UMKM dengan Metode MADM Model Yager

Muh. Nurtanzis Sutoyo

Abstract


This study is to evaluate the performance of eleven Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) utilizing the Multi-Attribute Decision Making (MADM) Yager Model. This approach is employed to identify the optimal alternative based on multiple variables, including product quality, innovation, production capacity, sustainability, and market potential. The research method commences with data normalization, achieved by dividing each criterion value by the maximum value, succeeded by Yager aggregation, which amalgamates the normalized values according to established criteria weights. The findings reveal that MSME_4 obtained the greatest score of 0.911, establishing it as the primary option. The ranking phase offers a summary of each MSME's standing according to the cumulative scores, so enabling systematic decision-making. The findings indicate that the MADM Yager Model is a proficient instrument for facilitating data-driven analysis and decision-making. This study aims to advance the development of MSMEs, namely by improving their market competitiveness

Keywords


MADM Model Yager; UMKM, Normalisasi; Agregasi Yager

Full Text:

PDF

References


B. V. Kristiana, A. Indrasari, and I. Giyanti, “Halal Supply Chain Management dalam Optimalisasi Penerapan Sertifikasi Halal UMKM,” Performa Media Ilm. Tek. Ind., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 113–120, 2020, doi: 10.20961/performa.19.2.46379.

R. Panjaitan, M. Andriana, T. Sumarlin, S. Rakasiswi, and Y. Fitrianto, “Literasi Metode Penelitian Dan Bisnis Teknologi Kreatif Di Era New Normal,” J. Komunitas J. Pengabdi. Kpd. Masy., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 109–116, 2021, doi: 10.31334/jks.v3i2.1272.

K. J. Wang, Y. H. Lee, and F. Kurniawan, “Evaluation criteria of new product development process a comparison study between Indonesia and Taiwan industrial manufacturing firms,” Int. J. Innov. Manag., vol. 16, no. 4, 2012, doi: 10.1142/S1363919612003824.

S. Wulandari, R. Buaton, and M. Simanjuntak, “Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications Recruitment of STMIK Kaputama Laboratory Assistant with the WASPAS Method,” vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 2808–4519, 2023, [Online]. Available: https://ioinformatic.org/.

B. Arifitama, “Decision Support System Scholarship Selection Using Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method,” JISA(Jurnal Inform. dan Sains), vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 80–84, 2022, doi: 10.31326/jisa.v5i1.1279.

I. Tyasari, E. Sarwoko, and I. N. Nurfarida, “The adoption of information technology as decision support system in SMEs,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1869, no. 1, pp. 0–6, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1869/1/012067.

G. Phillips-Wren, D. J. Power, and M. Mora, “Cognitive bias, decision styles, and risk attitudes in decision making and DSS,” J. Decis. Syst., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 63–66, 2019, doi: 10.1080/12460125.2019.1646509.

M. W. Arshad, S. Setiawansyah, and S. Sintaro, “Comparative Analysis of the Combination of MOORA and GRA with PIPRECIA Weighting in the Selection of Warehouse Heads,” BEES Bull. Electr. Electron. Eng., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 112–122, 2024, doi: 10.47065/bees.v4i3.4922.

J. D. Orr and G. L. Reid, Analytical methods in the clinical phase of development. Elsevier Ltd, 2020.

K. B. Bagshaw and K. L. Nissi, “Trend in Viewing Quantitative Analysis as a Primary Function Involving Decision Making in Organisations,” Am. J. Ind. Bus. Manag., vol. 09, no. 06, pp. 1492–1505, 2019, doi: 10.4236/ajibm.2019.96099.

R. R. Yager, A Non-Numeric Approach to Multi-Criteria/Multi-Expert Aggregation Based on Approximate Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1991.

R. R. Yager, “On the fusion of multiple multi-criteria aggregation functions with focus on the fusion of OWA aggregations,” Knowledge-Based Syst., vol. 191, pp. 1–22, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2019.105216.

H. Garg, G. Shahzadi, M. Akram, and S. A. Edalatpanah, “Decision-Making Analysis Based on Fermatean Fuzzy Yager Aggregation Operators with Application in COVID-19 Testing Facility,” Math. Probl. Eng., vol. 2020, 2020, doi: 10.1155/2020/7279027.

G. Shahzadi, M. Akram, and A. N. Al-Kenani, “Decision-making approach under pythagorean fuzzy yager weighted operators,” Mathematics, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 2020, doi: 10.3390/math8010070.

A. Paliling and M. N. Sutoyo, “Combination of The MADM Model Yager and k-NN to Group Single Tuition Payments,” Ilk. J. Ilm., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 326–334, 2023.

Y. Liu, H. Tang, H. Liang, H. Zhang, C. C. Li, and Y. Dong, “Ranking range models under incomplete attribute weight information in the selected six MADM methods,” Expert Syst., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 1–19, 2021, doi: 10.1111/exsy.12696.

E. M. Malathy and V. Muthuswamy, “Nelder-mead optimized MADM decision support for vertical handover,” Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng., vol. 8, no. 2 Special Issue 3, pp. 601–604, 2019, doi: 10.35940/ijrte.B1111.0782S319.

X. Contreras et al., “A genome-wide library of MADM mice for single-cell genetic mosaic analysis,” Cell Rep., vol. 35, no. 12, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109274.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2025 Muh. Nurtanzis Sutoyo

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