Optimasi Pemilihan Jenis Kayu Berbasis Multi-Kriteria untuk Mendukung Keputusan pada Industri Furnitur Menggunakan Metode Simple Additive Weighting
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47065/bulletincsr.v6i4.1181Keywords:
Decision Support System; Wood Species Selection; Simple Additive WeightingAbstract
Selecting the right type of wood is a crucial factor in the furniture industry, as it directly impacts product quality, cost efficiency, and market value. Relying on subjective selection processes can lead to inconsistent decision-making. This study aims to develop a decision support system to optimize wood selection for Sumber Rejeki Mebel using the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) method. The wood types evaluated include Teak, Merbau, Kamper Samarinda, Meranti, and Borneo, based on four criteria: color, texture, price, and availability. Criterion weights were determined through subjective assessment by an expert—the furniture business owner, who possesses extensive experience in raw material selection—and were subsequently applied during the normalization and ranking stages of the SAW method. Data analysis results indicate that Kamper Samarinda achieved the highest preference score (0.668), followed by Teak (0.653), Merbau (0.615), Meranti (0.610), and Borneo (0.605). Implemented using PHP and MySQL, the system facilitates a faster, more consistent, and transparent evaluation process compared to manual methods. Theoretically, this research demonstrates that the SAW method effectively integrates various material quality criteria into a simple, easily implementable multi-criteria decision-making model. Practically, the developed system supports more objective raw material selection, thereby offering the potential to enhance product quality and operational efficiency within the furniture industry.
Downloads
References
Z. Wang, S. R. Nabavi, and G. P. Rangaiah, "Multi-criteria decision making in chemical and process engineering: Methods, progress, and potential," Processes, vol. 12, no. 11, Art. no. 2532, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.3390/pr12112532.
M. Velasquez and P. T. Hester, "An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods," International Journal of Operations Research, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 56–66, 2013.
E. Triantaphyllou, Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study. Boston, MA, USA: Springer, 2000, doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-3157-6.
G. H. Tzeng and J. J. Huang, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 2011, doi: 10.1201/b11032.
A. Afshari, M. Mojahed, and R. M. Yusuff, "Simple Additive Weighting Approach to Personnel Selection Problem," International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 511–515, Dec. 2010, doi: 10.7763/IJIMT.2010.V1.89.
C. L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1981, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9.
E. K. Zavadskas et al., "Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS): A Review," Applied Soft Computing, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2014.08.031.
T. L. Saaty, "Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Journal of Services Sciences, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 83–98, 2008, doi: 10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590.
E. Turban et al., Decision Support and Business Intelligence Systems. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2015, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-10978-7.
J. P. Shim, M. Warkentin, J. F. Courtney, D. J. Power, R. Sharda, and C. Carlsson, "Past, Present, and Future of Decision Support Technology," Decision Support Systems, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 111–126, Jun. 2002, doi: 10.1016/S0167-9236(01)00139-7.
D. J. Power and R. Sharda, "Model-Driven Decision Support Systems: Concepts and Research Directions," Decision Support Systems, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 1044–1061, Apr. 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.030.
D. Arnott and G. Pervan, "Eight Key Issues for the Decision Support Systems Discipline," Decision Support Systems, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 657–672, Feb. 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2007.09.003.
X. Li, L. Xu, J. Cai, J. Wang, and Y. Ou, "Applying Hybrid MCDM Methods for Power Transmission System Evaluation and Selection," Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, vol. 48, no. 11, pp. 15625–15639, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s13369-023-07925-3.
P. H. Nguyen, L. A. T. Nguyen, S. Narayanamoorthy, T. H. T. Nguyen, and T. G. Vu, "Analysis of Quantum Computing's Applicability in Data Analysis Utilizing a Hybrid MCDM Approach with Quantum Spherical Fuzzy Sets," IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 110526–110549, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3439629.
R. Bisdorff, Evaluation and Decision Models with Multiple Criteria. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018, doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-46816-6.
C. Kahraman, S. C. Onar, and B. Oztaysi, "Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision-Making: A Literature Review," International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 637–666, 2015, doi: 10.1080/18756891.2015.1046325.
E. K. Zavadskas, K. Govindan, J. Antucheviciene, and Z. Turskis, "Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Review of Applications for Sustainability Issues," Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 857–887, 2016, doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2016.1237302.
A. Mardani et al., "Application of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques and Approaches to Evaluating Service Quality: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Journal of Business Economics and Management, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 1034–1068, 2015, doi: 10.3846/16111699.2015.1095233.
S. Luthra, K. Govindan, D. Kannan, S. K. Mangla, and C. P. Garg, "An Integrated Framework for Sustainable Supplier Selection and Evaluation in Supply Chains," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 140, pp. 1686–1698, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.078.
S. Hashemkhani Zolfani et al., Decision-Making in Smart Systems. Vilnius, Lithuania: Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Press, 2018.
S. R. Nabavi et al., "Sensitivity Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2024, doi: 10.1021/acs.iecr.2c04270.
C. L. Hwang and K. Yoon, "TOPSIS Method," in Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1993, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-46768-4.
M. Behzadian, S. K. Otaghsara, M. Yazdani, and J. Ignatius, "A State-of-the-Art Survey of TOPSIS Applications," Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 39, no. 17, pp. 13051–13069, Dec. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.056.
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, Jul. 2004, doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1.
Bila bermanfaat silahkan share artikel ini
Berikan Komentar Anda terhadap artikel Optimasi Pemilihan Jenis Kayu Berbasis Multi-Kriteria untuk Mendukung Keputusan pada Industri Furnitur Menggunakan Metode Simple Additive Weighting
ARTICLE HISTORY
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2026 Iwan Giri Waluyo, Savitri Savitri, Wiwit Kurniawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (Refer to The Effect of Open Access).
