Effective methods for employee performance assessment

Abstract

This study aims to select the most effective multi-criteria decision-making method used in an employee performance appraisal system. The approach used in this study is a comparative experiment where three multi-criteria decision-making methods simple additive weighting (SAW), analytical hierarchy process (AHP), and technique for order preference similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) are compared. The dataset involves 16 employees, considering input data such as work behavior scores, and performance targets (SKP). The criteria for evaluating work behavior include service quality, accountability, competence, harmony, loyalty, adaptability, collaboration, and achievement of targets. The comparison results were tested using a one-way ANOVA to evaluate whether there are significant differences among the three methods, as well as to provide supporting evidence for the conducted research. The results indicated that the SAW method provides the most accurate and relevant performance assessments while AHP yields less precise rankings as some employees received the same scores despite having different workloads. TOPSIS also produced rankings that did not accurately reflect the relative workloads. Implementing the SAW method in the employee performance information system enhances the assessment process, making it faster, more objective, transparent, and credible. Thus, SAW emerges as the most effective method for aligning performance scores with employee roles and responsibilities.