Sivil Toplum Kuruluşlarında Yöneticilerin Bütünleşik Bir Yaklaşım İle Seçilmesi

Year 2014, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 39 - 46, 15.06.2014

Aşır Özbek

https://doi.org/10.29137/umagd.346092

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Sivil toplum kuruluşlarında (STK) yönetici, mevcut yönetim kurulu
üyeleri arasından seçilmektedir. Ancak yönetici seçiminin objektif
kriterlerden çok sübjektif kriterlere göre yapıldığı yaygın görülen bir
uygulamadır. Başarılı olmak isteyen STK’lar, kuruluşu ileriye taşıyacak
ve toplumla uyumlu çalışacak bir adayı yönetici olarak seçmek
durumundadır. Yönetici seçme aşamasında kesin olmayan ve birbiriyle
çelişen birçok kriter seçim sürecine dahil edilmektedir. Bu gibi
durumlarda yönetici belirlemek; çok kriterli karar verme problemi olarak
görülmektedir. Bu çalışmada, bir STK’nın yedi yönetim kurulu üyesi
arasından en uygun yöneticiyi seçmek için Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci
(AHS), Technique For Order Performance By Similarity To Ideal Solution
(TOPSIS) ve VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR)
yöntemlerine dayanan hibrid bir seçim modeli geliştirilmiştir. Bu
süreçte STK’nın yedi yönetim kurulu üyesi, 41 dernek üyesi tarafından 12
farklı kritere göre değerlendirilmiştir. Önerilen modelde; seçim
kriterleri, STK yetkililerinin görüşleri ve literatür taraması sonucu
belirlenmiştir. Kriter ağırlıkları AHS ile tespit edilmiş ve en uygun
adayın yönetici olarak seçilmesi TOPSIS ve VIKOR yöntemleriyle ayrı ayrı
gerçekleştirilmiştir. Daha sonra iki farklı yöntemle elde edilen
sonuçlar karşılaştırılarak değerlendirme yapılmıştır.

Keywords

Personel Seçimi, Analitik HiyerarĢi Süreci (AHS), VIKOR, TOPSIS, Çok Kriterli Karar Verme (ÇKKV)

Selection of Executives in Non-Governmental Organizations with an Integrated Approach

Abstract

The head executives in non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are elected from among the board members. However, this election process is widely based on subjective criteria rather than objective criteria. If NGOs want to be successful, they should be led by competent administrators with good communication skills. The process by which the chief administrator is chosen involves many imprecise and conflicting criteria. Therefore, the determination of the chief administrator is seen as a multi-criteria decision-making problem. This study focuses on developing a hybrid model to determine the chief administrator of a non-governmental organization from among seven board members, combining three techniques: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Technique For Order Performance By Similarity Tom Ideal Solution ( TOPSIS ) and VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR). In this process, the seven board members of the NGO were evaluated by 41 regular members of the Organization according to 12 different criteria. In the proposed model, the criteria were determined according to the opinions of the NGO’s officials and the related literature. The criteria weights were determined by AHP and the selection of the most appropriate member as the chief executive was carried out through TOPSIS and VIKOR methods separately. Finally, the results obtained with two separate methods were compared and evaluated.

Keywords

Staff Selection, Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), VIKOR, TOPSIS, Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM )

References

• [1] http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivil_toplum_kurulu%C5%9Fu, EriĢim Tarihi:14/08/2014. [2] S. Lazarevic-Petrovic, “Personnel Selection FuzzyModel”, International Transactions in Operational Research, Vol. 8, pp, 89-105, 2001. [3] C. T. Chen, Y.C. Hwang and W.Z Hung, “Applying Multiple Linguistic PROMETHEE Method for Personnel Evaluation and Selection”, IEEE International Conference, pp. 1312-1316, 2009. [4] M. Ayub, J. Kabir and G.R. Alam, “Personnel Selection Method Using Analytic Network Process (ANP) and Fuzzy Concept”, 12th International Conference on Computerand Information Technology, pp. 373-377, 2009. [5] E. Aksakal ve M. Dağdeviren, “ANP ve DEMATEL Yöntemleri Ġle Personel Seçimi Problemine BütünleĢik Bir YaklaĢım” Gazi Üniv. Müh. Mim. Fak. Der. , Vol. 25, No. 4, ss. 905-913, 2010. [6] A. Kelemenis and D. Askounis, “A new TOPSIS-based multi-criteria approach to personnel selection” Expert Systems with Applications Vol. 37, No. 7, pp. 4999–5008, 2010. [7] S-F. Zhang and S-Y. Liu, “A GRA-based intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria group decision making method for personnel selection”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 9, pp. 11401–11405, 2011. [8] C. F. Chien and L. F. Chen, “Data mining to improve personnel selection and enhance human capital: A case study in high-technology industry”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 280–290, 2008. [9] E. Kalugina and S. Shvydun, “An Effective Personnel Selection Model”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 31, pp 1102-1106, 2014. [10] R. Gibney and J. Shang, “Decision making in academia: A case of the dean selection process”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 46, No. 7, pp. 1030–1040, 2007. [11] V. Keršulienė and Z. Turskis, “Integrated Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making Model for Architect Selection”, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 645-666, 2011. [12] M. Kabak, S. Burmaoğlu and Y. Kazancoğlu, “A fuzzy hybrid MCDM approach for professional selection”, Expert Systems with Applications Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 3516–3525, 2012. [13] A. Yıldız ve M. Deveci, “ Bulanık VIKOR Yöntemine Dayalı Personel Seçim Süreci” Ege Akademik Bakış, Cilt. 13, No. 4, ss. 427-436, 2013. [14] E Köse, H. S. Aplak ve M. Kabak. “Personel Seçimi için Gri Sistem Teori Tabanlı BütünleĢik Bir YaklaĢım”, Ege Akademik Bakış, Cilt. 13, No. 4, ss. 461-471, 2013. [15] D. Wang, “Extension of TOPSIS Methodfor R& D Personnel Selection Problem with Interval Grey Number”, International conference on IEEE IEEM, pp. 1-4, 2009. [16] E, Aksakal, M. Dağdeviren and Ġ. Yüksel, “Personel Selection based on Talent Management”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 73, pp. 68-72, 2013. [17] V. Keršulienė and Z. Turskis, “An integrated multi-criteria group decision making process: selection of the chief accountant”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, No. 110, pp. 897-904, 2014. [18] T. L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York, McGraw-Hill. 1980. [19] T. L. Saaty, Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory With The Analytical Hierarchy Proces, Pittsburg, RWS Publ., 1994. [20] T. L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decision Making, Kobe, Japan, 1999. [21] A. Vijayvargiya and A. K. Dey, "An analytical approach for selection of a logistics provider" Management Decision, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 403–418, 2010. [22] S. H. Soh, “A decision model for evaluating third-party Logistics providers using fuzzy analytic hierarchy Process”, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 339-349, 2010. [23] K. Fu, J. Xu, Q. Zhang and Z. Miao, “An AHP-based Decision Support Model for 3PL Evaluation” ,IEEE Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM), 7th International Conference on, pp. 1-6, 2010 [24] S. Perez Vega, I. Salmeron-Ochoa, A. Nieva-de la Hidalga and P.N. Sharratt, “Analytical hierarchy processes (AHP) for the selection of solvents in early stages of pharmaceutical process development”, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 89, No. 4, pp. 261-267, 2011. [25] T. J. Barker and Z. B. Zabinsky, “A multicriteria decision making model for reverse logistics using analytical hierarchy process”, Omega, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 558-573, 2011. [26] A. Özbek and T. Eren, “Selecting the Third Party Logistic(3PL) Firm through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)”, International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, Vol. 5, No. 2, 46-54, 2013 [27] M. Sadeghi and A. Ameli “An AHP decision making model for optimal allocation of energy subsidy among socio-economic subsectors in Iran”, Energy Policy, Vol. 45, pp. 24-32, 2012. [28] A. Özbek ve Ö. Selvi, “Meslek Yüksekokullarında Yönetici Kriterlerinin Değerlendirilmesine Yönelik Bir Uygulama”, Akademik BakıĢ, Sayı. 44, 2014. [29] Ġ. Yüksel, “Kariyer Değerlerinin Analitik HiyerarĢi Proses Yöntemiyle Önceliklendirilmesi” Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt. 7. No.25, ss. 59-67. 2006. [30] G. Akyüz, “Bulanık Analitik HiyerarĢi Prosesi ile Fabrika Ġmalat Performansının Ölçümü”, Ege Akademik Bakış, Vol. 12, No. 3, ss. 323-338, 2012. [31] C. L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Application, A State-of-the-Art Survey, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1981. [32] S. Cheng, C. W. Chan and G. H. Huang, “Using Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for Supporting Decisions of Solid Waste Management”, Journal of Environment Science Health, Vol. 37, No. 6, p. 983, 2002. [33] M. Janic, “Multicriteria Evaluation of High-Speed Rail, Transrapid Maglev and Air Passenger Transport in Europa”, Transportion Planning & Technology, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 491-512, 2003. [34] J. Chu and Y. Su, “The Application of TOPSIS Method in Selecting Fixed Seismic Shelter for Evacuation in Cities”, Systems Engineering Procedia, Vol. 3, pp. 391-397, 2012. [35] K. Pazand, A. Hezarkhani and M. Ataei, “Using TOPSIS approaches for predictive porphyry Cu potential mapping: A case study in Ahar-Arasbaran area (NW, Iran)”, Computers & Geosciences, Vol. 49, pp. 62-71, 2012. [36] A. Özbek, “Performance Evaluation of Learning Management System”, NWSA-Education Sciences, Vol. 8, No. 2 pp. 164-178, 2013. [37] F. Xi and L. Zhang, “A Personnel Selection Model Based on TOPSIS”, Management science and Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 107-110, 2011. [38] A. Awasthi, S. C. Satyaveer, S. C. and H. Omrani, “Application of fuzzy TOPSIS in evaluating sustainable transportation systems”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 10, pp. 2270-12280, 2011. [39] I. Chamodrakas and F. Martakos, “A utility-based fuzzy TOPSIS method for energy efficient network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks”, Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 12, No 7, pp.1929-1938, 2012. [40] V. Ravi, “Selection of third-party reverse logistics providers for End-of-Life computers using TOPSIS-AHP based approach”, International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 24-37, 2012. [41] A. Özbek ve T. Eren, “Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Teknikleri Ġle Hizmet Sağlayıcı Seçimi”, Akademik Bakış Dergisi, No. 36, ss. 1-22, 2013. [42] A. Baykasoğlu, V. Kaplanoğlu, Z. D. U. DurmuĢoğlu and C. ġahin, “Integrating fuzzy DEMATEL and fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS methods for truck selection”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 99-907, 2013. [43] T. Paksoy, N. Yapici Pehlivan and C. Kahraman, “Organizational strategy development in distribution channel management using fuzzy AHP and hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 2822-2841, 2012. [44] R. V. Rao, “Evaluation of environmentally conscious manufacturing programs using multiple attribute decision-making methods”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers - Part B - Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 222, No. 3, pp. 441-451, 2008. [45] M. Yurdakul and Y. T. Ġç, “Development of a performance measurement model for manufacturing companies using the AHP and TOPSIS approaches”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 43, No. 21, pp. 4609-4641, 2005 [46] M. L. Peters und S. Zelewski, “TOPSIS als Technik zur Effieienzanalyse”, Zeitschrift für Ausbildung und Hochschulkontakt, pp. 1-9. 2007. [47] E. Triantaphyllou, Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000. [48] S. Opricovic and G. H. Tzeng, “Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS”, European Journal of Operational Research Vol. 156, No. 2, pp. 445-455, 2004. [49] S. Opricovic and G. H. Tzeng, “Extended VIKOR Method in Comparison with Other Outranking Methods”, European Journal of Operational Research, No. 178, No. 2, pp. 514-529, 2007. [50] S. Opricovic, “A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning”, Water Resources Management, Vol. 23, No. 8, pp. 1549-1561, 2009. [51] A. Ali-Mohammad, B. Mahdi and A.Zahra, “The critical path definition with fuzzy multi criteria decision making”, IEEE Xplore-Computer and Automation Engineering (ICCAE), The 2nd International Conference on, Vol. 5, pp. 206-210, 2010. [52] J. R. San Cristóbal, “Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in spain: The Vikor method”, Renewable Energy, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 498-502, 2011. [53] A. Sanayei, S. F. Mousavi and A. Yazdankhah, “Group Decision Making Process For Supplier Selection With VIKOR Under Fuzzy Environment”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 24-30, 2010. [54] J. J. Liou, C.-Y. Tsai, R.-H. Lin and G.-H. Tzeng, “A modified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improving domestic airlines service quality”, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 57-61, 2011. [55] K. Devi, “Extension of VIKOR method in intuitionistic fuzzy environment for robot selection”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 11, pp. 14163-14168, 2011. [56] G-H. Tzeng, C-W. Lin and S. Opricovic, “Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation”, Energy Policy, Vol. 33, No. 11, pp. 1373-1383, 2005. [57] H.Y Wua, G.H. Tzeng and Y.H. Chen, “A Fuzzy Mcdm Approach For Evaluating Banking Performance Based On Balanced Scorecard”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp.10135-10147, 2009. [58] J. J. H. Liou and Y.T. Chuang, “Developing a Hybrid Multi-Criteria Model for Selection of Outsourcing Providers”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 37, NO. 5, pp. 3755-3761, 2010. [59] M.-S. Kuo and G. Liang, “Combining VIKOR with GRA techniques to evaluate service quality of airports under fuzzy environment”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 1304-1312, 2011. [60] J. Girubha and S. Vinodh, “Application of fuzzy VIKOR and environmental impact analysis for material selection of an automotive component”, Materials & Design, Vol. 37, pp. 478-486, 2012.