Hierarchical SAW with AHP-Derived Weights for Mustahik Prioritization: Benchmarking and Validation in Zakat Institutions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32664/j-intech.v14i03.2381Keywords:
Analytic Hierarchy Process, BAZNAS, Decision Support System, Mustahik Prioritization, Multi-Criteria Decision Making, Simple Additive Weighting, Zakat DistributionAbstract
Manual mustahik (zakat beneficiary) selection in Indonesian Zakat Collection Units (UPZ) is prone to transcription errors, recency bias, and poor scalability — undermining the equitability and auditability required under BAZNAS institutional standards. This study proposes a web-based Decision Support System (DSS) integrating a hierarchical Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) model with Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)-derived criterion weights. A five-criterion, eleven-sub-criterion model was developed from BAZNAS assessment standards and validated by three domain experts, yielding a Consistency Ratio of CR = 0.033 (< 0.10). SAW rankings were benchmarked against TOPSIS and VIKOR using Spearman’s ρ and Kendall’s τ on a 15-candidate dataset, indicating strong preliminary agreement (SAW–TOPSIS: ρ = 0.943; SAW–VIKOR: ρ = 0.886), pending larger-dataset replication. Sensitivity analysis confirmed top-3 ranking stability under all ±10% and most ±20% weight perturbations. Performance benchmarking demonstrated linear scalability with sub-100 ms computation at N ≤ 1,000 candidates. Black Box testing across 63 scenarios achieved a 100% pass rate. The system was implemented using the Laravel MVC framework with a role-based three-tier approval workflow (Surveyor → Admin → UPZ Head). Primary limitations include a small expert sample (n = 3), a limited validation dataset (N = 15), and the absence of formal User Acceptance Testing, which constitutes the primary direction for future research.
References
[1] A. Z. Salsabila and A. Sampurna, “Manajemen Badan Amil Zakat Nasional Sumatera Utara dalam Meningkatkan Kesejahteraan Sosial Mustahik,” Jurnal Indonesia : Manajemen Informatika dan Komunikasi, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1279–1287, May 2024, doi: 10.35870/jimik.v5i2.690.
[2] A. Tenri Gading Nurul Azizah, A. Alimuddin, and A. Kusumawati, “Analisis Kinerja Pengumpulan Dana Zakat, Infaq, dan Sedekah (ZIS) pada Badan Amil Zakat Nasional (BAZNAS) Kabupaten Bone,” Akrual: Jurnal Bisnis dan Akuntansi Kontemporer, pp. 24–29, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.26487/akrual.v16i1.22297.
[3] W. S. S. D. Alfarizi, “Penerapan Metode Composite Performance Index Dalam Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Untuk Menentukan Penerima Zakat Studi Kasus Baznas Provinsi Bengkulu,” Jurnal Media Infotama, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 140–149.
[4] A. Febryanti Lestari, N. Imansyah, and Akbar, “IMPLEMENTASI METODE SIMPLE ADDITIVE WEIGHTING (SAWPADA SISTEM PENDUKUNG KEPUTUSAN PEMBERIANBANTUAN UNTUK MUSTAHIK(STUDI KASUS : BAZNAS KOTA BONTANG),” Jurnal Sains dan Sistem Teknologi Informasi, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1–10, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.59811/zjbgpv37.
[5] S. Suprapto, E. Edora, and F. A. Pasaribu, “Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Calon Penerima Program Bantuan Sosial (BANSOS) Menggunakan Metode Simple Additive Weighting (SAW),” MALCOM: Indonesian Journal of Machine Learning and Computer Science, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 188–197, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.57152/malcom.v4i1.1057.
[6] T. Tumiran, B. Siregar, N. R. Agustia, and F. Azhari, “Optimalisasi Kompetensi Guru Melalui Workshop Inovasi Pembelajaran Berbasis Digitalisasi Di Mas Tarbiyah Islamiyah Kecamatan Hamparan Perak Kabupaten Deli Serdang,” Journal Of Human And Education (JAHE), vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 253–260, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.31004/jh.v4i6.1790.
[7] E. K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, and S. Kildienė, “STATE OF ART SURVEYS OF OVERVIEWS ON MCDM/MADM METHODS,” Technological and Economic Development of Economy, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 165–179, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.3846/20294913.2014.892037.
[8] F. Parvaneh and A. Hammad, “Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) to Select the Most Sustainable Power-Generating Technology,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 8, p. 3287, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16083287.
[9] H. Taherdoost and M. Madanchian, “Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods and Concepts,” Encyclopedia, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 77–87, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.3390/encyclopedia3010006.
[10] R. T. N. H. Kurniawan, “Pemodelan Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Untuk Menentukan Mustahik dengan Metode Multi Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT),” JUARA: Jurnal Informatika, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2023.
[11] E. M. Sipayung, E. Lokasurya, and S. Kristina, “Decision Support System for Building Material Supplier Selection using Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method,” Jurnal Algoritma, Logika dan Komputasi, vol. 5, no. 1, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.30813/j-alu.v5i1.3628.
[12] J. D. Bastian and S. Solehatin, “Pengembangan Sistem Informasi Masjid Baiturrahman Banyuwangi Dengan Menerapkan Metode SDLC,” INFORMATICS FOR EDUCATORS AND PROFESSIONAL : Journal of Informatics, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 178, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.51211/itbi.v8i2.2495.
[13] S. P. S. Z. P. N. L. Dinka, “Penerapan Metode Waterfall Dalam Rancang Bangun Sistem Informasi Penggajian Berbasis Web,” Artikel Ilmiah Sistem Informasi Akuntansi (AKASIA), vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 156–166, 2022.
[14] T. L. Saaty, “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process,” International Journal of Services Sciences, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 83, 2008, doi: 10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590.
[15] O. S. Vaidya and S. Kumar, “Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 169, no. 1, pp. 1–29, Feb. 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028.
[16] M. Behzadian, S. Khanmohammadi Otaghsara, M. Yazdani, and J. Ignatius, “A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 39, no. 17, pp. 13051–13069, Dec. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.056.
[17] A. Mardani, E. Zavadskas, K. Govindan, A. Amat Senin, and A. Jusoh, “VIKOR Technique: A Systematic Review of the State of the Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications,” Sustainability, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 37, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.3390/su8010037.
[18] S. H. Zyoud and D. Fuchs-Hanusch, “A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 78, pp. 158–181, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.016.
[19] M. H. P. T. Velasquez, “An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods,” International Journal of Operations Research, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 56–66, 2013.
[20] M. Z. Khan, M. Shoaib, M. S. Husain, K. Ul Nisa, and Mohammad. T. Quasim, “Enhanced mechanism to prioritize the cloud data privacy factors using AHP and TOPSIS: a hybrid approach,” Journal of Cloud Computing, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 42, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1186/s13677-024-00606-y.
[21] G.-H. H. J.-J. Tzeng, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. CRC Press, 2011.
[22] M. F. A. Prasetyo, M. R. Ardiansyah, A. A. Ashari, D. T. Putro, and E. Rahmawati, “Rancang Bangun Tracking Pengiriman Berbasis Website Menggunakan Metode Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) dengan Model Waterfall,” Jurnal JTIK (Jurnal Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi), vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 306–315, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.35870/jtik.v8i2.1387.
[23] E. Triantaphyllou, Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, vol. 44. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2000. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-3157-6.
[24] P. Keenan, “A scientometric analysis of multicriteria decision-making research,” J. Decis. Syst., vol. 33, no. sup1, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1080/12460125.2024.2354642.
[25] B. Kizielewicz, A. Shekhovtsov, and W. Sałabun, “pymcdm—The universal library for solving multi-criteria decision-making problems,” SoftwareX, vol. 22, p. 101368, May 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2023.101368.
[26] A. Alharbi et al., “Selection of data analytic techniques by using fuzzy AHP TOPSIS from a healthcare perspective,” BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak., vol. 24, no. 1, p. 240, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1186/s12911-024-02651-8.
[27] J. Brooke, “SUS: A Quick and Dirty Usability Scale,” in Usability Evaluation in Industry, P. W. T. B. W. B. M. I. L. Jordan, Ed., Taylor & Francis, 1996.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 J-INTECH
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
