Penerapan Metode Analytical Hierarchy Process Dalam Pemilihan Tas Fashion Wanita

Surmiati Surmiati; Elvin Leander Hadisaputro; Emilinda Emilinda

doi:10.47134/jacis.v5i2.140

Authors

Surmiati Surmiati STMIK Borneo Internasional
Elvin Leander Hadisaputro STMIK Borneo Internasional
Emilinda Emilinda STMIK Borneo Internasional

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47134/jacis.v5i2.140

Keywords:

AHP, sistem pendukung keputusan, tas fashion

Abstract

Tas fashion merupakan sebuah kebutuhan tambahan yang melekat pada generasi muda saat ini. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk merancang sistem pendukung keputusan (SPK) dalam pemilihan tas fashion wanita menggunakan metode Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). AHP digunakan untuk membantu konsumen dalam memilih tas berdasarkan kriteria harga, kualitas, desain, kapasitas, dan kenyamanan. Data diperoleh melalui kuesioner yang diisi oleh mahasiswi STIEPAN Balikpapan. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa model tas slingbag memiliki nilai prioritas tertinggi (0.547) sehingga direkomendasikan sebagai pilihan utama. Sistem SPK yang dikembangkan diharapkan dapat membantu pengguna dalam proses pengambilan keputusan pembelian produk fashion secara objektif dan terukur

References

[1] J. Stofkova, M. Krejnus, K. R. Stofkova, and P. Malega, “Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Selected Methods in the Managerial Decision-Making Process in the Context of Sustainable Development,” Sustain. - MDPI, vol. September, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141811546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202207.0153.v1

[2] T. T. Liu, C. Q. Rodriguez, W. M. Huang, T. Tripp, C. Q. Rodriguez, and W. Melody, “Measuring consumers’ dominant value perceptions to determine their purchase intention of luxury fashion consumption,” Cogent Bus. Manag., vol. 10, no. 3, 2023, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2023.2272374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2272374

[3] A. Informatics and A. Informatics, “Consumer Preferences In The Fashion Industry : A Comparative Analysis In Developing And Developed,” Int. J. Anal. Hierarchy Process, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 1–15, 2024, doi: 10.13033/ijahp.v16i2.1186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v16i2.1186

[4] A. N. Hakim and D. Setiawan, “Analisis Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) pada Pengambilan Keputusan Pemilihan Vendor dengan Metode Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP),” Qomaruna J. Multidiscip. Stud., vol. 02, no. 02, pp. 10–21, 2025, doi: 10.62048/qjms.v2i2.89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.62048/qjms.v2i2.89

[5] Z. N. D. Khotrul Nada, O. O. Damayora, T. A. Sri Pengestu, P. Wijayanti, and A. D. Limantara, “Analisis Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Keputusan Pembelian Mie Gacoan Untuk Meningkatkan Penjualan Dengan Metode Analytical Hierarchy Process (Ahp),” Simp. Manaj. dan Bisnis IV Progr. Stud. Manaj. - FEB UNP Kediri, vol. 4, no. 1991, pp. 1545–1554, 2025, doi: 10.29407/ch6ygc61.

[6] D. P. Anggraeni and Y. L. Prambodo, “Model Analytical Hierarchy Process ( AHP ) untuk Rekomendasi Smartphone Berdasarkan Preferensi Pengguna Gen Z,” Krisnadana, vol. 4, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.58982/krisnadana.v4i1.769.

[7] G. Fattoruso, S. Scognamiglio, and A. Violi, “A New Dynamic and Perspective Parsimonious AHP Model for Improving Industrial Frameworks,” Math. - MDPI, vol. September, 2022, doi: 10.3390/math10173138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math10173138

[8] S. Pant, A. Kumar, M. Ram, Y. Klochkov, and H. K. Sharma, “Consistency Indices in Analytic Hierarchy Process : A Review,” Math. - MDPI, vol. April, 2022, doi: 10.3390/math10081206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math10081206

[9] V. Antonio Pamplona Salomon and L. F. A. M. Gomes, “Consistency Improvement in the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Math. - MDPI, vol. Macrh, 2024, doi: 10.3390/math12060828. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math12060828

[10] J. V. G. Alves Araujo et al., “Multi-criteria Decision Support Method AHP-TOPSIS-2N Information Technology and Quantitative Management (ITQM 2023) Multi-criteria Decision Support Method AHP-TOPSIS-2N,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 221, pp. 362–369, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2023.07.049. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2023.07.049

[11] A. M. Ponsiglione, F. Amato, S. Cozzolino, G. Russo, M. Romano, and G. Improta, “A Hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process and Likert Scale Approach for the Quality Assessment of Medical Education Programs,” Math. - MDPI, vol. April, 2022, doi: 10.3390/math10091426. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math10091426

[12] P. Benedek, “A Novel AHP-PRISM Risk Assessment Method—An Empirical Case Study in a Nuclear Power Plant,” Sustain. - MDPI, vol. September, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141711023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su141711023

[13] A. Angelina, M. Saffira, M. R. Humolta, C. Vinnchi, and V. A. Widjaya, “Decoding Jakarta’ S Generation Z : An Analysis of Initial Purchase Intention In The Pre-Owned Luxury Bag Sector,” MODA, vol. 6, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.37715/moda.v6i2.5280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37715/moda.v6i2.5280