
This study aims to determine positions with many criteria . In determining positions often appear the probability of every possible improper, because of the many factors that influence the assessment of existing options . In the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) obtained uncertainty assessment is too subjective for qualitative data. Problems in determining the positions can be solved by Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP ), which uses valuation in the interval , so that qualitative data can provide a more objective assessment. The criteria used in this study is obedience, performance, responsibility, honesty, cooperation and leadership with three alternatives A, B and C. Based on this research can be concluded, performance becomes the highest criterion weighs 6.95 priority, then the priority weight 6.76 obedience, responsibility weighs 6.63 priority , honesty with weights 6.27 priorities , cooperation with priority weight 6.12 and the latter 's leadership with priority weights 6.2 . While the preferred alternative, Alternative C to get the highest score with 21.65 weight which is an alternative to the two weights B with 21.44 and the last alternative A 20.25 by weight
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
