Personnel selection in the airline Aviation Security Service by using the threshold aggregation method

The consequences of emergencies in aviation are significant fatalities and considerable material damage. Ensuring the safety of transport infrastructure facilities is an important strategic task for both the State and the operating organizations. The aviation accident statistics show that for the period from 1950 to 2019 there were 614 occurrences (57% of the total number) due to the human factor (from malice to piloting errors), which actualizes the human-factor problem in the operation and safety of aviation transport. According to the ICAO data, 210 accidents occurred and 641 people were killed in the period 2019–2021. The task of the Aviation Security Service (ASS) employees is the proper performance of duties to ensure safety, prevent abnormal and emergency situations. The assigned duties impose special responsibility on the ASS employees and predetermine their compliance with the specified criteria. The personnel work carried out by the personnel departments of the airlines is aimed at selecting the most appropriate candidates for a position. The article considers the problem of selecting candidates as a task of multi-criteria assessment and selection, where the elements are the criteria (qualities) of a candidate, and their weighted assessments are set by experts. The existing methods of personnel selection in the ASS and the issue of choosing the candidates, who are the most balanced in their personal, qualification and other requirements, are considered. A method of selecting personnel in the ASS is proposed by the method of threshold aggregation of a non-compensatory nature, which has significant advantages over common selection methods by summing points and calculating the arithmetic mean. The results of the study are confirmed by the practical personnel selection of candidates for two airlines, as a result of which the group of ASS inspectors in a growing number, selected by using the threshold aggregation method, passed the probation period more successfully than the group selected by using the summation of criteria points. The results presented in the article allow us to consider the threshold aggregation method of candidates for the airline ASS as a promising method of personnel selection, the purpose of which is to improve the quality of air transport safety, which will reduce the risks of accidents, save human lives and prevent significant material damage.

1. Hachikyan, P.P. (2017). About some radioelectronic preflight examination methods of baggage and passengers. Kachestvo i zhizn, no. 2 (14), pp. 111–116. (in Russian)

2. Hachikyan, P.P. (2022). Countering air terrorism. Singapore, Springer, 139 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-19-6172-4

3. Enikeev, R.V., Rybalkina, A.L., Sharov, V.D. et al. (2018). Human factor: lecture texts, in Vorobyov V.V. (Ed.). Moscow: ID Akademii Zhukovskogo, 80 p. (in Russian)

4. Rybalkina, A.L. (2018). Human factor and safety psychology: Tutorial. Moscow: ID Akademii Zhukovskogo, 84 p. (in Russian)

5. Artamonov, B.V., Nikiforova, L.Kh. (2003). Personnel policy in air transport. N. Novgorod: Talam, 144 p. (in Russian)

6. Zubkov, B.V., Iudaev, V.V., Verbitckiy, Yu.A. (2015). The approach tо the assessment of the effectiveness of the aviation security service of airlines using Petri nets. Nauchnyy Vestnik MGTU GA, no. 218 (8), pp. 71–75. (in Russian)

7. Yusupova, N.I., Minasova, N.S. (2014). Information support of personnel management: collection, validation, retraining and professional development. Nauchnyy Vestnik MGTU GA, no. 210, pp. 151–154. (in Russian)

8. Ermakov, K.S., Kusakin, A.M., Mukhamadieva, A.V. (2015). Improving personnel policy in airline enterprises considering adverse factors. Nauchnyy Vestnik MGTU GA, no. 222 (12), pp. 213–219. (in Russian)

9. Butcher, J.N. (2010). Minnesota multiphasic personality. In book: Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. DOI: 10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0573 (accessed: 17.08.2023).

10. Buss, A.H., Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 452–459. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452

11. Webster, G.D. et al. (2015). The brief aggression questionnaire: Structure, validity, reliability, and generalizability. Journal of Personality Assessment, vol. 97, no. 6, pp. 1–12. DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2015.1044093

12. Zimonyi, S. et al. (2021). Hungarian validation of the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire – is the short form more adequate? Brain and Behavior, vol. 11, no. 5. DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2043 (accessed: 17.08.2023).

13. Maslow, A.H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harpaer and Row, 411 p.

14. Eysenck, H.J. (1953). The structure of human personality, Routledge, 476 p.

15. Lüscher, M. (1972). The Lüscher Colour Test, Remarkable Test That Reveals Your Personality Through Color, Pan Books, 472 p.

16. Berezin, F.B., Miroshnikov, M.P., Rozhanets, R.V. (1976). Methodology for multilateral personality research: structure, basics of interpretation, some areas of application. Moscow: Meditsina, 186 p. (in Russian)

17. Sobchik, L.N. (2007). Standardized multifactor personality survey (MMPI): A Practical Guide. Moscow: Rech, 224 p. (in Russian)

18. Leonhard, K. (1992). Das wissenschaftliche Werk in Zeitschriften und Sammelwerken. Berlin, 292 p. (in German)

19. Podinovski, V., Potapov, M. (2013). Weighted sum method in the analysis of multicriterial decisions: Pro Et Contra. Biznesinformatika, no. 3 (25), pp. 41–48. (in Russian)

20. Figueira, J., Salvatore, G., Matthias, E. (2016). Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys. New York: Springer Science, 1347 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4

21. Tannenbaum, P., Arnold, R. (1992). Excursions in modern mathematics. New York: Prentice Hall, 559 p.

22. Lefebrve, V.A., Smolian, G.L. (1968). Algebra of Conflict. 1st ed. Moscow: Znaniye, 64 p. (in Russian)

23. Lefebrve, V.A. (1991). Human formula: Outlines of fundamental psychology. Translated from English. Moscow: Progress, 108 p. (in Russian)

24. Aleskerov, F.T., Kataeva, E.S., Pislyakov, V.V., Yakuba, V.I. (2013). Evaluation of scientists' output using the method of threshold aggregation. Upravleniye bolshimi sistemami, no. 44, pp. 172–189. (in Russian)

25. Aleskerov, F.T., Yuzbashev, D.A., Yakuba, V.I. (2007). Threshold aggregation of the three-graded rankings. Automation and Remote Control, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 133–138. DOI: 10.1134/S0005117907010122

26. Aleskerov, F.T., Chistyakov, V.V., Kalyagin, V.A. (2010). The threshold aggregation. Economics letters, vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 261–262.

27. Aleskerov, F.T., Chistyakov, V.V., Kalyagin, V.A. (2010). Social threshold aggregations. Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 627–646. DOI: 10.1007/s00355-010-0454-9

28. Aleskerov, F.T., Khabina, E.L., Shvarts, D.A. (2012). Binary relations, graphs and collective decisions. 2nd ed., revised and expanded edition. Moscow: FIZMATLIT, 344 p. (in Russian)

29. Kaliagin, V.A., Chistiakov, V.V. (2009). An axiomatic model of non-compensatory aggregation: Preprint WP7/2009/01. Moscow: Izd. dom GU VShE, 76 p. (in Russian)

30. Aleskerov, F.T., Kataeva, E.S., Pisliakov, V.V., Iakuba, A.I. (2013). Evaluation of scientists' output using the method of threshold aggregation. Large-Scale Systems Control, no. 44, pp. 172–189. (in Russian)

31. Goncharov, A.A., Chistiakov, V.V. (2011). Non-compensatory aggregation and rating of students. In: XI Mezhdunarodnaya nauchnaya konferentsiya po problemam razvitiya ekonomiki i obshchestva: v 3 kn. Moscow: Izd. dom Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, pp. 89–99. (in Russian)

32. Razumnikov, S.V. (2018). Noncompensatory aggregation and rating of cloud service providers. Proceedings of the Tusur University, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 63–69. DOI: 10.21293/1818-0442-2018-21-4-63-69 (in Russian)

33. Prankevich, D.A. (2020). Rating оf providers оf cloud service by the threshold arrangement method. Nauchnyye zapiski molodykh issledovateley, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 59–67. (in Russian)