Author, Subjects, Keywords

Cited Author

 
 
   » By Author or Editor
 » Browse Author by Alphabet
 » By Journal
 » By Subjects
 » Malaysian Journals
 » By Type
 » By Year
 » By Latest Additions
 
 
   » By Author
 » Top 20 Authors
 » Top 20 Article
 » Top Journal Cited
 » Top Article Cited
 » Journal Citation Statistics
 » Usage Since Sept 2007


 
 
 

Login | Create Account

Pembuatan Keputusan Multi-Kriteria untuk Kenaikan Pangkat Kakitangan Akademik di Institusi Pengajian Tinggi Awam

Khairul Anuar Mohd. Ali, and Wan Salmuni Wan Mustaffa, (2007) Pembuatan Keputusan Multi-Kriteria untuk Kenaikan Pangkat Kakitangan Akademik di Institusi Pengajian Tinggi Awam. Journal of Quality Measurement and Analysis (JQMA), 3 (1). pp. 47-63. ISSN 1823-5670

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
17Kb

Official URL: http://pkukmweb.ukm.my/~ppsmfst/jqma/V3_1/JQMA-3-1-05-abstractrefs.pdf

Affiliations

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Faculty of Science and Technology, School of Mathematical Sciences
niversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Faculty of Science and Technology, School of Mathematical Sciences

Abstract

Isu kenaikan pangkat bagi kakitangan akademik di Institusi Pengajian Tinggi(IPT) merupakan satu perkara yang sangat mencabar dan sering menimbulkan kontroversi.Kajian ini membincangkan pembuatan keputusan untuk kenaikan pangkat bagi kakitangan akademik di Institusi Pendidikan Tinggi Awam dengan menggunakan Teknik Proses Hierarki Analisis
(PHA). Teknik PHA telah digunakan bagi menentukan keutamaan kepentingan(pemberat) terhadap komponen serta kriteria-kriteria untuk kenaikan pangkat kakitangan akademik. Kriteria-kriteria telah dibina berdasarkan 4 komponen, iaitu Penyelidikan dan Penerbitan, Pengajaran, Perkhidmatan dan Keperibadian.Data dianalisis dengan menggunakan 3 prinsip dalam teknik PHA iaitu pembinaan hierarki,pertimbangan perbandingan relatif dan sintesis prioriti. Hasil kajian mendapati komponen terpenting semasa pertimbangan untuk kenaikan pangkat yang dilakukan oleh pembuat keputusan adalah komponen Penyelidikan dan Penerbitan dengan nilai pemberat tertinggi (0.3919). Nilai kekonsistenan adalah diantara (0.000) hingga (0.0144).

[The issue of academic staff promotion in Higher Educational Institution(HEI) is very challenging and always gives rise to controversy. This research discusses the academic staff promotion in Public Institution of Higher Learning by using Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP) technique. AHP technique is used to determine and obtain the priorities of importance (weights) to the component and criteria for academic staff promotion. The criteria developed will cover 4 major components which consist of Research and Publications, Teaching, Services and Personality.The data was analyzed based on three principles in AHP technique:the principle of constructing hierarchies, the principle of relative comparison and the principle of synthesizing priorities. The study found that the most important components in deciding academic staff promotion are Research and Publications with a weightage of (0.3919). The range of consistency value is between (0.0000) and (0.0114).]

Item Type:Journal
Keywords:Kualiti; Sistem Ganjaran; Proses Hierarki Analisis (PHA); Pendidikan Tinggi [Quality; Award Systems; Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP); Higher Education]
Subjects:Q Science, Computer Science
ID Code:9987

Ali N. S., Young C.H. & Ali N.M. 1996. Determining The Quality of Publications and Research for Tenure or Promotion Decisions: A Preliminary Checklist To Assist. Library Review 45(1): 39-53.

Badri A. M & Abdulla H. M. 2004. Awards of Excellent in Institution of Higher Education: An AHP Approach. International Journal of Educational Management 18(4): 224-242.

Beach S. D. 1975. Personnel: The Management of People at Work. Macmillan Publishing Co Inc.: New York.

Clement R. & Stevens G. 1989. Performance appraisal in higher education: comparing department of management with other business units, Public Personnel Management, 18(3): 263-278.

Crosby P. B. (1979). Quality is Free, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Frank A. 1998. Personnel Evaluation With AHP. Journal of Management Decision 46(10): 679-685.

Go I.G. & Kleiner H. B. 2001. How to Manage Promotions Decisions Effectively. Management Research News 24(3/4): 109-113.

Harris V. & Thomas R. 2000. Teaching Quality and Staff Research:Are There Connections?A Case Study of a Metropolitan University Department. Journal of Quality Assurance in Education 8(3): 139-147.

Helms M., Williams A. & Nixon J. 2001. TQM principles and their relevance to higher education: the question of tenure and post-tenure review, The International Journal of Education Management. 15(7): 322-331.

Ismail W.R. 2003 Penentuan Pemeringkatan Kepentingan Perbandingan Berpasangan Berdasarkan Kaedah Pemangkatan. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Laporan Teknik, PPSM, FST.

Jolson M. 1974. Criteria for promotion and tenure: a faculty view: research note. Academy of Management Journal 17: 149-154.

Juran J. M. 1988. Juran on Planning for Quality. New York: Free Press.

Kasten K. 1984. Tenure and merit pay as reward/awards for research, teaching, and service at a research university.Journal of Higher Education 55(4): 500-514.

Liberatore M., Nydick R. & Sanchez P. 1992. The evaluation of research papers, Interfaces. 22(2): 92-100.

Lynn C. 2000. A Trivial Pursuit? Information Technology and the Tenure Track. Campus-Wide Information Systems 17(4): 113-119.

McElwee G. & Holmes G. 1995. Total Quality Management in Higher Education: How to Approach Human Resource Management. The TQM Magazine 7(6): 5-10.

Mesak H. & Jauch L. 1991. Faculty performance evaluation: modeling to improve personnel decisions, Decision Sciences 22(5): 1142-1157.

Mustafa A. & Goh M. 1995. Multi-Criterion Models for Higher Education Administration. International Journal Management Science 24(2): 167-178.

Oshagbemi T. 2000. How Satisfied Are Academics with Their Primary Task of Teaching, Research and Administration and Management? International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 1(2): 124-136.

Rafikul I. 2003. The Analytic Hierarchy Process : An Effective Multi-Criteria Decision Making Tool. International Islamic University Malaysia, IIUM Publication.

Rowley J. 1996. Motivation and Academics Staff in Higher Education. Journal of Quality Assurance in Education 4(3): 11-16.

Ruderman M.N., Ohlott P.J. & Kram K.E. 1995. Promotion Decisions as a Diversity Practice. Journal of Management Development 14(2): 6-23.

Saaty T.L. 1994. How to make a decision: the analytical hierarchy process. Interfaces 24(6): 9-26.

Saaty T.L. 1990. Multicriteria decision making: The Analytical Hierarchy Process, RSW Publications.

Saaty T.L. & Ramanujam, V. 1983. An objective approach to faculty promotion and tenure by the analytical hierarchy process, Research in Higher Education 18(3): 311-331.

Saaty T.L.. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill. United Stated of America.

Sekaran U. (2000). Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach, (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Repository Staff Only: item control page
 
 
 
 
 
 
© Copyright 2007 MyAIS Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya – All Rights Reserved. Malaysian Abstracting and Indexing System is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.