EXPERIENCE WITH THE APPLICATION OF ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS METHOD IN THE EMPLOYEE'S COMPETENCY PROFILE OF INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

EXPERIENCE WITH THE APPLICATION OF

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS METHOD IN THE EMPLOYEE'S COMPETENCY PROFILE OF INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING

AND MANAGEMENT

Author: Ing. Monika Šujaková

Supervisor: prof. Ing. Peter Sakál, CSc.

Language supervisor: PaedDr. Dagmar Rusková, PhD.

Layout

1 Analysis of University Training for Strategic Managers of the 21ST Century

2 Application of AHP Method for Evaluation Employee of UPIM – Model 1 – EMS QUT (Evaluation model of Sustainability Quality of University Teacher)

3 Application of AHP Method for Evaluation of Teacher Competency Profile of UPIM – Model 2 – EMSUT (Evaluation Model for Selection of University Teacher)

2/16

1 Analysis of University Training for Strategic Managers of the 21ST Century

Change of teacher status: new model of university teacher as a

professional; teacher as a high-educated expert on

education and teaching.

Application of AHP method: software Expert Choice.

3/16

4/16

2 Application of AHP Method for Evaluation Employee of UPIM – Model 1 – EMS QUT (Evaluation Model of Sustainability Quality of University Teacher)

Figure 1

Hierarchical structure- starting point for the application of AHP method.

Determination of objective decision-making: Aim: evaluate the competency profile of an employee of

UPIM.

Alternatives of solution: employees of Institute of UPIM MTF STU; sample of five employees.

5/16


Proposal of criteria for evaluation of alternatives

6/16


Figure 2 Figure 3

7/16

Proposal of criteria for evaluation of alternatives


Figure 4

Figure 5

Solving the problem through Expert Choice:

Determination and input of objective criteria and alternatives to the decision problem.

Assigning weight to individual criterion by pairwise comparison of criteria.

Evaluation of alternatives by paired comparisons for individual criteria.

Evaluation of the optimal alternative solution.

8/16


Determination the weights of criteria: criterions of first-level hierarchical structure; the most important criterion: Cooperation; the least important criterion: Qualification.

9/16


Figure 6

Evaluation of alternatives: employees are named as P1, P2, P3, P4 and P5; the most competent employee: P1; the least competent employee: P4.

10/16


Figure 7


model for the assessment of candidates for a job position as a university teacher;

recommendations from the personnel department faculty.

Determination of objective decision-making:

Aim: Creation of competency profile of candidate to job position of teacher of UPIM.

11/16

Alternatives of solution:

employees of UPIM MTF STU;

contacting employees: questionnaire;

sample 6 random respondents.

12/16


12 key criteria of model: Knowledge of a foreign language; Tolerance (multicultural thinking); Ability to lead of people; Ability to motivate of people; Empathy; Critical thinking; Ability of self-control; Nature and natural intelligence; Diligence; Responsibility; Knowledge of the subject taught; Communication and rhetorical skills;

13/16


Determination the weights of criteria: the most important criterion: Responsibility; the least important criterion: Knowledge of foreign language.

14/16


Figure 8

Evaluation of alternatives: using the pairwise comparisons; the most competent employee: P1; the least competent employee: P3.

15/16


Figure 9

Thank you for your attention.

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

EXPERIENCE WITH THE APPLICATION OF ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS METHOD IN THE EMPLOYEE'S COMPETENCY PROFILE OF INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

Leadership & Management