DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64539/msts.v1i1.2025.352Keywords:
Decision Support System, Strategic Location, SAW, Café Expansion, Site SelectionAbstract
The rapid development of information technology and artificial intelligence has increased the importance of data-driven decision-making, particularly in competitive industries such as cafés, where branch location significantly affects business success. However, selecting the optimal location remains a challenge due to the variability of local market conditions and the subjectivity of manual assessments, representing a gap in practical, objective evaluation methods. This study aims to determine the most suitable location for Anomali Café’s new branch in Padang City using the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) method, a transparent and effective multi-criteria decision-making approach. The analysis of ten candidate sites reveals that Pantai Air Manis Street achieves the highest overall score, followed closely by Sitebal, Gajah Mada, Raya Lubuk Buaya, and Dr. Sutomo Streets, while the remaining locations are less competitive. These findings provide actionable, data-driven guidance for strategic branch expansion and demonstrate the applicability of SAW in tailoring location decisions to the café industry’s specific context.
References
[1] G. Kou, Y. Shi, and S. Wang, “Multiple criteria decision making and decision support systems — Guest editor’s introduction,” Decis Support Syst, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 247–249, May 2011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.11.027.
[2] V. Funda and E. Francke, “Artificial intelligence-powered decision support system for operational decision-making in the ICT department of a selected African university,” African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 689–701, Jul. 2024, https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2024.2376916.
[3] H. Taherdoost and M. Madanchian, “Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods and Concepts,” Encyclopedia, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 77–87, Jan. 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3010006.
[4] S. A. Shaikh, M. Memon, and K.-S. Kim, “A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Ideal Business Location Identification,” Applied Sciences, vol. 11, no. 11, p. 4983, May 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11114983.
[5] A. Saoud, M. Lachgar, M. Hanine, R. El Dhimni, K. El Azizi, and H. Machmoum, “decideXpert: Collaborative system using AHP-TOPSIS and fuzzy techniques for multicriteria group decision-making,” SoftwareX, vol. 29, p. 102026, Feb. 2025, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2024.102026.
[6] F. Ciardiello and A. Genovese, “A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods,” Ann Oper Res, vol. 325, no. 2, pp. 967–994, Jun. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05339-w.
[7] M. Şahin, “Location selection by multi-criteria decision-making methods based on objective and subjective weightings,” Knowl Inf Syst, vol. 63, no. 8, pp. 1991–2021, Aug. 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-021-01588-y.
[8] S. A. Shaikh, M. Memon, and K.-S. Kim, “A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Ideal Business Location Identification,” Applied Sciences, vol. 11, no. 11, p. 4983, May 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11114983.
[9] H. Taherdoost, “Analysis of Simple Additive Weighting Method (SAW) as a MultiAttribute Decision-Making Technique: A Step-by-Step Guide,” Journal of Management Science & Engineering Research, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 21–24, Feb. 2023, https://doi.org/10.30564/jmser.v6i1.5400.
[10] H. Aulawi, F. Nuraeni, R. Setiawan, W. F. Rianto, A. Surya Pratama, and H. Maulana, “Simple Additive Weighting in the Development of a Decision Support System for the Selection of House Construction Project Teams,” in 2023 International Conference on Computer Science, Information Technology and Engineering (ICCoSITE), IEEE, Feb. 2023, pp. 517–522. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCoSITE57641.2023.10127813.
[11] V. Grybaitė and A. Burinskienė, “Assessment of Circular Economy Development in the EU Countries Based on SAW Method,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 21, p. 9582, Nov. 2024, https://doi.org/10.3390/su16219582.
[12] S. Abadi and M. Gumanti, “Simple Additive Weighting: Determination of The Local Government Officials Tanggamus Region,” bit-Tech, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 421–430, Apr. 2023, https://doi.org/10.32877/bt.v6i3.1559.
[13] B. Ayan, S. Abacıoğlu, and M. P. Basilio, “A Comprehensive Review of the Novel Weighting Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making,” Information, vol. 14, no. 5, p. 285, May 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/info14050285.
[14] Y.-J. Wang, “A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model based on simple additive weighting method and relative preference relation,” Appl Soft Comput, vol. 30, pp. 412–420, May 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.02.002.
[15] K. Aliyeva, A. Aliyeva, R. Aliyev, and M. Özdeşer, “Application of Fuzzy Simple Additive Weighting Method in Group Decision-Making for Capital Investment,” Axioms, vol. 12, no. 8, p. 797, Aug. 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12080797.
[16] N. Vafaei, R. A. Ribeiro, and L. M. Camarinha-Matos, “Selection of Normalization Technique for Weighted Average Multi-criteria Decision Making,” in Technological Innovation for Resilient Systems, 2018, pp. 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78574-5_4.
[17] X. Zuo, M. Akhtar, A. Aslam, F. M. Tawfiq, and S. Kanwal, “Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques to study the behavior of dendrimers using topological indices,” PLoS One, vol. 18, no. 11, p. e0294515, Nov. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294515.
[18] A. R. Krishnan, M. R. Hamid, G. H. Tanakinjal, M. F. Asli, B. Boniface, and M. F. Ghazali, “An investigation to offer conclusive recommendations on suitable benefit/cost criteria-based normalization methods for TOPSIS,” MethodsX, vol. 10, p. 102227, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2023.102227.
[19] S. Malefaki, D. Markatos, A. Filippatos, and S. Pantelakis, “A Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Normalization Techniques in Holistic Sustainability Assessment for Engineering Applications,” Aerospace, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 100, Jan. 2025, https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace12020100.
[20] A. R. Krishnan, “Past efforts in determining suitable normalization methods for multi-criteria decision-making: A short survey,” Front Big Data, vol. 5, Aug. 2022, https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2022.990699.
[21] N. Vafaei, R. A. Ribeiro, and L. M. Camarinha-Matos, “Assessing Normalization Techniques for Simple Additive Weighting Method,” Procedia Comput Sci, vol. 199, pp. 1229–1236, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.01.156.
[22] D. Kurniawati, F. N. Lenti, and R. W. Nugroho, “Implementation of AHP and SAW Methods for Optimization of Decision Recommendations,” Journal of International Conference Proceedings, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 254–265, Jul. 2021, https://doi.org/10.32535/jicp.v4i1.1152.
[23] A. Aytekin, “Comparative Analysis of the Normalization Techniques in the Context of MCDM Problems,” Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1–25, Mar. 2021, https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame210402001a.
[24] Adriyendi, “Multi-Attribute Decision Making Using Simple Additive Weighting and Weighted Product in Food Choice,” International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 8–14, Nov. 2015, https://doi.org/10.5815/ijieeb.2015.06.02.
[25] M. A. Sanjaya and I. G. A. S. Narendra, “Implementation of the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method on the Determination of Scholarship Recipients,” TIERS Information Technology Journal, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 134–143, Dec. 2023, https://doi.org/10.38043/tiers.v4i2.5518.
