BULANIK ANALİTİK HİYERARŞİ PROSESİ İLE PERSONEL SEÇİMİ VE BİR UYGULAMA

Öz

Personel seçimi organizasyonlar için önemli bir konu olup, karar verme sürecinde kesin olmayan ve belirsizverilerin kullanılmasını gerektirir. Bu çalışmada Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (BAHP) yöntemi ile personelseçimi probleminin çözümüne yönelik bir algoritma önerilmiştir. Önerilen algoritma bir işletmede terfi edecekpersonelin belirlenmesi amacıyla kullanılmış ve aday personeller için öncelik değerleri belirlenmiştir. Adaypersonellerin faktörler temelinde değerlendirilmesinde dilsel değişkenler kullanılmış ve bulanık ağırlıklarındurulaştırılması α-kesme ve iyimserlik indeksi temelinde geliştirilen bir durulaştırma işlemi ile yapılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İnsan kaynakları yönetimi, personel seçimi, AHP, bulanık AHP, çok kriterli analiz

Kaynakça

1. Kaynak, T., İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi,
2. İ.Ü.İşletme Fakültesi Yayınları, İstanbul, 1998.
3. Sabuncuoğlu, Z., İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi,
4. Ezgi Yayınevi, Bursa, 2000.
5. Erdoğan, İ., İşletmelerde Personel Seçimi ve
6. Başarı Değerleme Teknikleri, İşletme İktisadı
7. Enstitüsü Yayınları, İstanbul, 1991.
8. Özgen, H., Öztürk, A., Yalçın, A., İnsan

9. Kaynakları Yönetimi, Nobel Kitabevi, Adana,
10. -
11. Bingöl, D., İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi, Beta
12. Yayınları, İstanbul, 1998.
13. Arvey, R.D., Campion, J.E., “The employment
14. interview: A summary and review of recent
15. research”, Personel Psychology, 35(1), 281-322,
16. -
17. Gargano, M.L., Marose, R.A., Kleeck, L., “An
18. application of artificial neural Networks and
19. genetic algorithms to personnel selection in the
20. financial industry”, Proceedings of the First
21. International Conference on Artificial
22. Intelligence Applications, 257-262, 1991.
23. Miller, G.M., Feinzig, S.L., “Fuzzy sets and
24. personnel selection: Discussion and an
25. application”, Journal of Occupational and
26. Organizational Psychology, 66(1), 163-169,
27. -
28. Liang, S.L., Wang M.J., “Personnel selection
29. using fuzzy MCDM algorithm”, European
30. Journal of Operational Research, 78(2), 22-33,
31. -
32. Karsak, E.E, “Personnel selection using a fuzzy
33. MCDM approach based on ideal and anti-ideal
34. solutions”, Multiple Criteria Decision Making
35. in the New Millenium, Berlin, 425-432, 2001.
36. Hooper, R.S., Galvin, T.P., Kimler, R.A.,
37. Liebowitz, J., “Use of an expert system in a
38. personnel selection process”, Expert Systems
39. with Applications, 14(1), 425-432, 1998.
40. Bohanec, M., Urh, B., Rajkovic, V., “Evaluating
41. options by combined qualitative and quantitative
42. methods”, Acta Psychologica, 80(2), 67-89,
43. -
44. Timmermans, D., Vlek, C., “Multi-attribute
45. decision support and copmlexity: An evaluation
46. and process analysis of aided versus unaided
47. decision making”, Acta Psychologica, 80(1), 49-
48. , 1992.
49. Timmermans, D., Vlek, C., “Effects on decision
50. quality of supporting multi-attribute evaluation in groups”, Organizational Behavior and Human
51. Decision Processes, 68(2), 158-170, 1996.
52. Gardiner, A.R., Armstrong-Wright, D.,
53. “Employee selection and anti-discrimination law:
54. Implications for multi-criteria group decision
55. support”, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision
56. Analysis, 9(1), 99-109, 2000.
57. Spyridakos, A., Siskos, Y., Yannacopoulos, D.,
58. Skouris, A., “Multicriteria job evaluation for
59. large organisations”, European Journal of
60. Operational Research, 130(2), 375-387, 2001.
61. Jessop, A., “Minimally biased weight
62. determination in personnel selection”, European
63. Journal of Operational Research, 153(2), 433-
64. , 2004.
65. Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process,
66. McGraw-Hill, New York, 37-85, 1980.
67. Dağdeviren, M., “Analitik hiyerarşi prosesi ile
68. yeni bir analitik iş değerlendirme tekniğinin
69. geliştirilmesi”, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi
70. Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara,
71. -63, 2002.
72. Zadeh, L.A., “Fuzzy sets”, Information and
73. Control, 8, 338-353, 1965.
74. Zimmermann, H.J., “Fuzzy Set Theory and its
75. Application”, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
76. Boston, 35-85, 1990.
77. Karsak, E.E., Tolga, E., “Fuzzy multi-criteria
78. decision-making procedure for evaluating
79. advanced manufacturing system investments”,
80. International Journal of Production
81. Economics, 69,49-64,2001.
82. Kahraman, C., Beşkese, A., Ruan, D.,
83. “Measuring flexibility of computer integrated
84. manufacturing systems using fuzzy cash flow
85. analysis”, Information Sciences, 168,77-
86. ,2004.
87. Ding, J.F., Liang, G.S., “Using fuzzy MCDM to
88. select partners of strategic alliances for liner
89. shipping”, Information Sciences, 173,197-
90. ,2005.
91. Van Laarhoven, P.J.M., Pedrycz, W., “A fuzzy
92. extension of Saaty’s priority theory”, Fuzzy Sets
93. and Systems, 11,229-241,1983.
94. Buckley, J.J., “Fuzzy hierarchical analysis”,
95. Fuzzy Sets and Systems,17,233-247,1985.
96. Chang, D.Y., “Applications of te extent analysis
97. method on fuzzy AHP”, European Journal of
98. Operational Research, 95(2), 649-655, 1996.
99. Cheng, C.H., “Evaluating naval tactical misilse
100. systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value
101. of membership function”, European Journal of
102. Operational Research, 96(2), 343-350, 1997.
103. Weck, M., Klocke, F., Schell, H., Rüenauver, E.,
104. “Evaluating alternative production cycles using
105. the extended fuzzy AHP method”, European
106. Journal of Operational Research, 100(2), 351-
107. , 1997.
108. Kahraman, C., Ulukan, Z., Tolga, E., “A fuzzy
109. weighted evaluation method using objective and
110. subjective measures”, Proceedings of the
111. International ICSC Symposium on
112. Engineering of Intelligent Systems, 1, 57-63,
113. -
114. Deng, H., “Multicriteria analysis with fuzzy
115. pairwise comparison”, International Journal of
116. Approximate Reasoning, 21(3), 215-231, 1999.
117. Lee, M., Pham, H., Zhang, X., “A methodology
118. for priority setting with application to software
119. development process”, European Journal of
120. Operational Research, 118(2), 375-389, 1999.
121. Chan, F.T.S., Chan, M.H., Tang, N.K.H.,
122. “Evaluation methodologies for technology
123. selection”, Journal of Materials Processing
124. Technology, 107(1-3), 330-337, 2000a.
125. Chan, F.T.S., Jiang, B., Tang, N.K.H., “The
126. development of intelligent decision support tools
127. to aid the design of flexible manufacturing
128. systems”, International Journal of Production
129. Economics, 65(1), 73-84, 2000b.
130. Kuo, R.J., Chi, S.C., Kao, S.S., “A decision
131. support system for selecting convenience store
132. location through integration of fuzzy AHP and
133. artificial neural network”, Computers in
134. Industry, 47(2), 199-214, 2002.
135. Mikhailov, L., Singh, M.G., “Fuzzy analytic
136. network process and its application to the
137. development of decision support systems”, IEEE
138. Transactions on Systems, Man and
139. Cybernetics-Part C: Applications and
140. Revıews, 33(1), 33-41, 2003.
141. Mikhailov, L., “A fuzzy approach to deriving
142. priorities from interval pairwise comparison
143. judgement”, European Journal of Operational
144. Research, 159(3), 687-704, 2004.
145. Mikhailov, L., Tsvetinov, P., “Evaluation of
146. services using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy
147. process”, Applied Soft Computing, Article in
148. pres, 2004.
149. Prakash, T.N., “Land Suitability Analysis for
150. Agricultural Crops: A Fuzzy Multicriteria
151. Decision Making Approach”, MSc Thesis, ITC
152. Institue, 2003.
153. Dağdeviren, M., “Performans Değerlendirme
154. Sürecinin Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Yöntemleri
155. İle Bütünleşik Modellenmesi”, Doktora Tezi,
156. Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü,
157. Ankara, 2005.