Multi-criteria decision making process has been one of the fastest growing areas during the last decades depending on the change in the business sector. Multi-criteria decision making is the most important branch of operation research by which people make complex decision daily life. The major steps in the decision- making approach are selecting the most preferred alternative for the decision-maker, ranking alternatives in order of importance for selection problems, and screening alternatives for the final decision. Employees are an important element of a company that determines its progress. Conventional (manual) recruitment methods are vulnerable to non-technical factors, such as frequent duplication or invalid data. In this study, simple additive weighting and profile matching are proposed to solve the employee selection problem. This study was conducted at the (UPT) Career Development and Entrepreneurship Universitas Brawijaya Malang using data collected from written test selection in 2019. The effectiveness of both methods was analyzed using confusion matrix. The SAW method provides an accuracy rate of 94.7%, a precision rate of 87.5%, Recall rate of 91.3% and F-measure rate of 89.4%. On the other hand, profile matching method obtained the Accuracy rate of 90.4%, Precision rate of 81.4%, Recall rate of 81.4% and F-measure rate of 81.4%. Thus, it can be concluded that both methods have high accuracy values accompanied by high precision values when used for the selection process. This system can also effectively reduce the bias rate of the same data very well, as can be seen from the high recall and F-measure rates.

1. [1] M. Popović, “An MCDM approach for personnel selection using the COCOSO method,” J. of Process Management and New Technologies, Vol.9, Issues 3-4, pp. 78-88, 2021.
2. [2] Sunarti and J. Sundari, “Comparison of SAW and Profile Matching Methods for Home Selection Case Study: Depok Housing,” J. Nasional Tidak Terakreditasi, Vol.2, No.2, pp. 115-126, 2020.
3. [3] H. Taherdoost, “Analysis of Simple Additive Weighting Method (SAW) as a Multi Attribute Decision-Making Technique: A Step-by-Step Guide,” J. of Management Science & Engineering Research, Vol.6, Issue 1, 2023.
4. [4] T. Susilowati, E. Y. Anggraeni, Fauzi, W. Andewi, Y. Handayani, and A. Maseleno, “Using Profile Matching Method to Employee Position Movement,” Int. J. of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol.118, No.7, pp. 415-423, 2018.
5. [5] N. A. Azhar, N. A. M. Radzi, A. M. Nurul, and W. S. H. M. W. Ahmad, “Multi-criteria Decision Making: A Systematic Review,” Recent Advances in Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Vol.14, No.8, pp. 779-801, 2021.
6. [6] M. D. L. Siahaan, Elviwani, A. Br. Surbakti, A. H. Lubis, and A. P. U. Siahaan, “Implementation of Simple Additive Weighting Algorithm in Particular Instance,” Int. J. of Scientific Research in Science and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 6, 2017.
7. [7] J. Martinez-Gil, A. L. Paoletti, G. Rácz, A. Sali, and K. Schewe, “Accurate and Efficient Profile Matching in Knowledge Bases,” Data & Knowledge Engineering, Vol.117, pp. 195-215, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2018.07.010
8. [8] L. Sopianti and N. Bahtiar, “Students Major Determination Decision Support Systems using Profile Matching Method with SMS Gateway Implementation,” J. Sains & Matematika, Vol.23, Issue 1, pp. 14-24, 2015.
9. [9] M. Rashidi, M. Ghodrat, B. Samali, and M. Mohammadi, “Decision Support Systems,” Management of Information Systems, 2018.
10. [10] P. G. W. Keen and M. S. Scott Morton, “Decision Support Systems: An Organisational Perspective,” Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1978.
11. [11] R. Bonczek, C. Holsapple, and A. Whinston, “The evolving roles of models in decision support systems,” Decision Sciences, Vol.11, Issue 2, pp. 337-356, 2007.
12. [12] M. Mora, G. Forgionne, and J. Gupta, “Decision Making Support Systems: Achievements and Challenges for the New Decade,” Natural Resources Planning, Silva Fennica: Harrisburg, 2003.
13. [13] A. Memariani, A. Amini, and A. Alinezhad, “Sensitivity analysis of simple additive weighting method (SAW): The results of change in the weight of one attribute on the final ranking of alternatives,” J. of Industrial Engineering, Vol.2, Issue 4, pp. 13-18, 2009.
14. [14] T. Susilowati, E. Y. Anggraeni, W. Fauzi, Y. Andewi, A. Handayani, and A. Maseleno, “Using Profile Matching Method to Employee Position Movement,” Int. J. of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol.118, No.7, pp. 415-423, 2018.