Local Government Project Assessment Application Using Group Decision Support System (GDSS) Model

  • Herri Setiawan Universitas Indo Global Mandiri, Indonesia
  • Dhamayanti Dhamayanti Universitas Indo Global Mandiri, Indonesia
  • Tasmi Tasmi Universitas Indo Global Mandiri, Indonesia
Keywords: project, GDSS, MCDM, local government


The assessment process is an important step in the evaluation, as it underlies the successful evaluation of a project. One solution to make the project assessment more objective is to apply the concept of a Group Decision Support System (GDSS), which in the decision process uses computing. This research tries to implement the concept by building an application for project evaluation and providing recommendations on project performance in local government agencies. The proposed Decision Makers (DMs) are involved: Executives of Government Institutions, Project Management Work Units, Business Process Owner Units, and Communities represented by the DPRD. The computational process uses the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method, and the Copeland scores voting method ranks the project of all DMs. The results of application computing in implementing GDSS and MCDM indicate that the process of determining project rankings will be faster and more accurate.


Download data is not yet available.


Lembaga Administrasi Negara Republik Indonesia, “Pedoman Penyusunan Pelaporan Akuntabilias Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah,” 2003.

C. L. Hwang and M.-J. Lin, Group Decision Making under Multiple Criteria: Method and Applications, vol. 281, no. 0. Springer-Verlag, 1987.

D. Turban, E; Sharda, R; Delen, Decision Support Systems and Intelligent Systems. Boston: Prentice Hall, 2011.

T. Bakshi, A. Sinharay, and B. Sarkar, “Exploratory Analysis of Project Selection through MCDM,” in ICOQM-10, 2011, pp. 128–133.

S. M. Kazemi, S. M. M. Kazemi, and M. Bahri, “Six Sigma project selections by using a Multi Criteria Decision making approach: a Case study in Poly Acryl Corp.,” in Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2011, pp. 502–507.

H. Ismaili, “Multi-Criteria Decision Support for Strategic Program Prioritization at Defence Research and Development Canada,” University of Ottawa, 2013.

E. W. N. Bernroider, N. Obwegeser, and V. Stix, “Dissemination and impact of multi-criteria decision support methods for IT project evaluation,” Proc. Annu. Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci., pp. 1103–1112, 2014.

J. Żak and M. Kruszyński, “Application of AHP and ELECTRE III/IV Methods to Multiple Level, Multiple Criteria Evaluation of Urban Transportation Projects,” Transp. Res. Procedia, vol. 10, no. July, pp. 820–830, 2015.

A. Rabbani, M. Zamani, A. Yazdani-Chamzini, and E. K. Zavadskas, “Proposing a new integrated model based on sustainability balanced scorecard (SBSC) and MCDM approaches by using linguistic variables for the performance evaluation of oil producing companies,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 41, no. 16, pp. 7316–7327, 2014.

H. S. Shih, H. J. Shyur, and E. S. Lee, “An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making,” Math. Comput. Model., vol. 45, no. 7–8, pp. 801–813, 2007.

R. McLeod and G. P. Schell, Management Information System, 10rd ed. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2007.

H. Setiawan, J. Eko, R. Wardoyo, and P. Santoso, “The Group Decision Support System to Evaluate the ICT Project Performance Using the Hybrid Method of AHP, TOPSIS and Copeland Score,” Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 334–341, 2016.

Saaty, T. L., “How to make a decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. European journal of operational research, 48 (1990) 9-26 North-Holland, 1990

Cheng, S.K., “Development of a Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Support System for Municipal Solid Waste Management”, A Thesis. University of Regina, 2000.

Abstract views: 1248 times
Download PDF: 805 times
How to Cite
Setiawan, H., Dhamayanti, D., & Tasmi, T. (2022). Local Government Project Assessment Application Using Group Decision Support System (GDSS) Model. Journal of Information Systems and Informatics, 4(4), 1053-1062. https://doi.org/10.51519/journalisi.v4i4.410