Project Prioritization Using Fuzzy AHP (FAHP) And 4c Diamond Marketing Model In Digital Wallet Application Development
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47709/ijmdsa.v4i3.6592Keywords:
Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, 4C Diamond Model, Project Prioritization, Digital WalletAbstract
The rapid growth of digital wallet applications in the financial technology sector has created increasing complexity in strategic decision-making for development project prioritization. This research addresses the challenge of systematically evaluating and prioritizing multiple development projects by implementing the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) method combined with the 4C diamond model framework. The study focuses on a digital wallet application development case, where ten projects were evaluated against four main criteria: Customer, Company, Competitor, and Change, along with their respective sub-criteria. The methodology employs triangular fuzzy numbers to handle uncertainty and subjectivity inherent in expert judgments, while the 4C diamond model provides a comprehensive framework for strategic analysis. Data collection was conducted through structured interviews with industry experts and stakeholders involved in digital wallet development. The FAHP method was applied to calculate criteria weights and project scores, followed by comprehensive sensitivity analysis to validate the prioritization model's robustness. Results demonstrate that customer-centric factors dominate the decision-making process with the highest weight of 0.425, followed by company considerations (0.323), change adaptability (0.206), and competitive factors (0.046). The final prioritization identified five top-priority projects based on their strategic alignment and value potential. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the model's stability, with ±10% weight variations showing minimal impact on ranking consistency. The research contributes to technology project management by providing a structured, quantitative approach to strategic decision-making in digital financial services. The proposed framework demonstrates applicability beyond digital wallet development, serving as a replicable model for multi-criteria decision-making in technology project prioritization.
References
AFTECH. (2024). Annual Members Survey 2024.
Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia. (2024). Survei Internet APJII. https://survei.apjii.or.id/survei
Bank Indonesia. (2019). Blueprint Sistem Pembayaran Indonesia 2025: Bank Indonesia: Menavigasi Sistem Pembayaran Nasional di Era Digital.
Bank Indonesia. (2025). Statistik Sistem Pembayaran dan Infrastruktur Pasar Keuangan (SPIP). https://www.bi.go.id/id/statistik/ekonomi-keuangan/spip/Default.aspx
Badan Pusat Statistik Republik Indonesia. (2020). Persentase Penduduk Daerah Perkotaan Hasil Proyeksi Penduduk menurut Provinsi, 2015–2035. https://www.bps.go.id/id/statistics-table/1/MTI3NiMx/persentase-penduduk-daerah-perkotaan-hasil-proyeksi-penduduk-menurut-provinsi--2015---2035.html
Badan Pusat Statistik Republik Indonesia. (2024). Jumlah Pelanggan Telepon Indonesia menurut Jenis Penyelenggaraan Jaringan, 2022–2023. https://www.bps.go.id/id/statistics-table/2/OTgzIzI=/jumlah-pelanggan-telepon-indonesia-menurut-jenis-penyelenggaraan-jaringan.html
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on FAHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3), 649–655.
International Monetary Fund (IMF) & World Bank. (2019). Fintech: The experience so far (Policy Paper No. 2019/024). Washington, DC: IMF and World Bank.
Juniper Research. (2024). Top 10 Fintech & Payments Trends 2025.
Klier, T., & Testa, W. (2002). Location trends of large company headquarters during the 1990s. Economic Perspectives – Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, 26(2), 12–26.
Kotler, P., & Hooi, D. H. (2021). Markplus, Inc: Winning the Future: Marketing and Entrepreneurship in Harmony.
Kredivo & Katadata. (2024). Laporan Perilaku Pengguna Paylater Indonesia 2024 Kredivo.
Porter, M. E., & Advantage, C. (1985). Creating and sustaining superior performance. Competitive Advantage, 167, 167–206.
Saaty, T. L. (1988). Multicriteria decision making: The analytic hierarchy process. Beccles Suffolk Printed and Bound.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98.
Saaty, T. L. (2012). Decision making for leaders: The analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world (3rd rev. ed.). RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2012). Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process (2nd ed.). Springer.
Sehra, S. K., Brar, Y. S., & Kaur, N. (2016). Applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Making in software engineering. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 7(7), 491–496.
Shyamal, A. K., & Pal, M. (2007). Triangular fuzzy matrices. Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics, 15(2), 389–400.
World Bank. (2021). Global Financial Inclusion (Global Findex) Database 2021.
Zan, W. (2024). Emerging Trends in FinTech: A Comprehensive Analysis. Prosiding International Conference on Financial Innovation and Economic Development (ICFIED) 2024.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Tomy Aulia Alfianto, Bustanul Arifin Noer, Jerry Dwi Trijoyo Purnomo

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.










