Volume 23 , Issue 4 , PP: 405-414, 2024 | Cite this article as | XML | Html | PDF | Full Length Article
Noel Batista Hernández 1 * , Katherine E. Prieto Izquierdo 2 , Denisse M. Valle Rodríguez 3 , Adam Marks 4
Doi: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.230433
The article addresses the importance of capacity development among public administrators to ensure the efficient functioning of the state and the provision of quality services to the citizenry. This entails acquiring legal knowledge, ethical principles, and technical skills in areas such as strategic planning, financial management, and policy evaluation. In addressing the evaluation of public administrators' training programs, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods are employed. The methodology delineates the fundamental concepts and key equations to understand the application of these methods in evaluating public administrators' training programs. The findings underscore the significance of specific competencies in public administrators' training. These competencies, combined with comprehensive training encompassing cognitive, attitudinal, and instrumental dimensions, can equip professionals to confront current governmental challenges effectively. The article emphasizes the relevance of capacity development among public administrators and introduces methods such as AHP and TOPSIS to assess and enhance training programs in this field, aiming to bolster the state's capacity to respond efficiently to societal needs.
Public administration , AHP , TOPSIS , public capabilities.
[1] V. Kondratenko, O. Okopnyk, L. Ziganto, and A. Kwilinski, “INNOVATION DEVELOPMENT AND EFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: MANAGEMENT AND LEGISLATION FEATURES.,” Mark. Manag. Innov., no. 1, pp. 87–94, 2020, [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aleksy-Kwilinski/publication/340892029_Innovation_Development_of_Public_Administration_Management_and_Legislation_Features/links/5ebfefb6a6fdcc90d67a4b8e/Innovation-Development-of-Public-Administration-Management-and-Legislation-Features.pdf?_sg%5B0%5D=started_experiment_milestone&origin=journalDetail&_rtd=e30%3D
[2] G. Žurga, “Contemporary values in public administration and indication of their further development,” Adm. si Manag. Public, no. 29, pp. 108–127, 2017, [Online]. Available: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=728395
[3] C. A. Drolc and L. R. Keiser, “The importance of oversight and agency capacity in enhancing performance in public service delivery,” J. Public Adm. Res. Theory, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 773–789, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://academic.oup.com/jpart/article/31/4/773/6042803?login=false
[4] A. B. Bonilla Rodríguez, M. F. Cueva Moncayo, and F. B. Morocho Quinchuela, “Construction of Sanda Teaching risk assessment index system using neutrosophic AHP method.,” Int. J. Neutrosophic Sci., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 334–343, 2022, [Online]. Available: https://americaspg.com/articleinfo/21/show/1196
[5] M. Abdel-Basset, M. Mohamed, and F. Smarandache, “An extension of neutrosophic AHP–SWOT analysis for strategic planning and decision-making,” Symmetry (Basel)., vol. 10, no. 4, p. 116, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/10/4/116
[6] M. Ramos Argilagos, A. Valencia Herrera, and W. Vayas Valdiviezo, “Evaluation of Nutritional Education Strategies in Schools in Ecuador Using Neutrosophic TOPSIS,” Int. J. Neutrosophic Sci., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 208–217, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.1803018.
[7] S. Alvarez Hernandez, P. P. Jairo Mauricio, and L. Vázquez Maike, “Neutrosophic TOPSIS for prioritization Social Responsibility Projects.,” Int. J. Neutrosophic Sci., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 350–362, 2022, [Online]. Available: https://americaspg.com/articleinfo/21/show/1286%0A
[8] P. Biswas, S. Pramanik, and B. C. Giri, “TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment.,” Neural Comput. Appl., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 727–737, 2016, [Online]. Available: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00521-015-1891-2
[9] S. Opricovic & Tzeng, G. H., “Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS.,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 156, no. 1, pp. 445–455, 2004, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-
[10] Surinder Kaur, Javalkar D. Kumar, Gopal Chaudhary, An innovative multi-criteria decision-making framework for assessing India's airport operating efficiency, Journal of Fusion: Practice and Applications, Vol. 4 , No. 2 , (2021) : 72-85 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/FPA.040204)
[11] R. E. Alvarado Chacón, A. Rodríguez Plasencia, and O. M. Alonzo Pico, “Neutrosophic Analysis of the Nursing Care Process in the Teaching of Nursing,” Neutrosophic Sets Syst., vol. 52, pp. 207–214, 2022, [Online]. Available: http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/22-NeutrosophicAnalysisNursingCare.pdf%0A
