Theoretical Advances in Hungarian Maximization Models for Multi-Site Human Resource Allocation
Keywords:
Hungarian Maximization Model, Multi-Site Human Resource Allocation, Optimization Algorithms, Workforce Productivity, Assignment Problem ExtensionAbstract
This study presents a theoretical and methodological advancement of the Hungarian maximization model for optimizing multi-site human resource allocation. Traditional Hungarian algorithms focus on single-site, cost-minimization assignments, limiting their applicability in modern workforce environments characterized by distributed operations and diverse employee attributes. To address these gaps, the study reformulates the classical objective function into a maximization framework and incorporates multi-site constraints, multi-criteria employee attributes, and workload balancing requirements. The enhanced model is evaluated through mathematical analysis and simulation-based case studies to assess its performance relative to baseline assignment and heuristic optimization methods. The results demonstrate that the proposed model achieves higher organizational productivity, reduces operational costs, improves staff distribution equity, and significantly accelerates computation time compared with existing approaches. Moreover, the model ensures more consistent alignment between employee capabilities and site-level demands, offering a more robust foundation for strategic workforce deployment. Comparisons with previous studies show that this research provides the first Hungarian-based maximization framework specifically tailored for multi-site HR allocation, overcoming key limitations related to scalability, fairness, and optimality. Overall, this study contributes a rigorous theoretical extension of the Hungarian method and offers practical implications for workforce scheduling, supply-chain staffing, healthcare deployment, and emergency response operations. The findings underscore the potential of deterministic optimization models to support intelligent and equitable human resource decision-making in increasingly complex organizational settings.
Downloads
References
M. K. Lim, K. Tan, and S. C. H. Leung, “Using a multi-agent system to optimise resource utilisation in multi-site manufacturing facilities,” Int. J. Prod. Res., vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 2620–2638, 2013.
C. Vercellis, Business intelligence: data mining and optimization for decision making. John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
G. K. Badhotiya, G. Soni, and M. L. Mittal, “Multi-site planning and scheduling: state-of-the-art review and future research directions,” J. Glob. Oper. Strateg. Sourc., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 17–37, 2020.
E.-J. Berridge, N. J. Mackintosh, and D. S. Freeth, “Supporting patient safety: examining communication within delivery suite teams through contrasting approaches to research observation,” Midwifery, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 512–519, 2010.
T. Said, A. Otman, A. Jaafar, and R. Najat, “A meta-heuristically approach of the spatial assignment problem of human resources in multi-sites enterprise,” arXiv Prepr. arXiv1310.8588, 2013.
A.-T. Nguyen, S. Reiter, and P. Rigo, “A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis,” Appl. Energy, vol. 113, pp. 1043–1058, 2014.
B. Guyaguler and T. Byer, “A new production allocation optimization framework,” in SPE Reservoir Simulation Conference, SPE, 2007, p. SPE-105200.
J. Gong and C. H. Caldas, “Data processing for real-time construction site spatial modeling,” Autom. Constr., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 526–535, 2008.
M. C. Howard, “Investigating the simulation elements of environment and control: Extending the Uncanny Valley Theory to simulations,” Comput. Educ., vol. 109, pp. 216–232, 2017.
I. S. Moreno, P. Garraghan, P. Townend, and J. Xu, “Analysis, modeling and simulation of workload patterns in a large-scale utility cloud,” IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 208–221, 2014.
S. M. Campbell, E. Kontopantelis, K. Hannon, M. Burke, A. Barber, and H. E. Lester, “Framework and indicator testing protocol for developing and piloting quality indicators for the UK quality and outcomes framework,” BMC Fam. Pract., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 85, 2011.
Q. Cao et al., “Multi-scenario simulation of landscape ecological risk probability to facilitate different decision-making preferences,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 227, pp. 325–335, 2019.
A. Beutel et al., “Putting fairness principles into practice: Challenges, metrics, and improvements,” in Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 2019, pp. 453–459.
M. Ham, Y. H. Lee, and J. W. Fowler, “Integer programming-based real-time scheduler in semiconductor manufacturing,” in Proceedings of the 2009 winter simulation conference (WSC), IEEE, 2009, pp. 1657–1666.
T. Driouchi and D. J. Bennett, “Real options in management and organizational strategy: A review of decision?making and performance implications,” Int. J. Manag. Rev., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 39–62, 2012.
M. Afilal, H. Chehade, and F. Yalaoui, “The human resources assignment with multiple sites problem,” Int. J. Model. Optim., vol. 5, no. 2, p. 155, 2015.
E. Sriprasert and N. Dawood, “Genetic algorithms for multi-constraint scheduling: An application for the construction industry,” in 20th International Conference on Construction IT: Construction IT Bridging the Distance, International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction, 2003, pp. 341–353.
W. Hung, D. H. J. M. Dolmans, and J. J. G. Van Merriënboer, “A review to identify key perspectives in PBL meta-analyses and reviews: trends, gaps and future research directions,” Adv. Heal. Sci. Educ., vol. 24, pp. 943–957, 2019.
H. W. Kuhn, “A tale of three eras: The discovery and rediscovery of the Hungarian Method,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 219, no. 3, pp. 641–651, 2012.
L. Coetzee, A Follower-Centric Model for Employee Morale in a Safety-Critical Air Traffic Control Environment. University of South Africa (South Africa), 2020.
H. Schildt, “Big data and organizational design–the brave new world of algorithmic management and computer augmented transparency,” Innovation, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 23–30, 2017.
D. J. Harris, J. M. Bird, P. A. Smart, M. R. Wilson, and S. J. Vine, “A framework for the testing and validation of simulated environments in experimentation and training,” Front. Psychol., vol. 11, p. 605, 2020.
J.-H. Cho, Y. Wang, R. Chen, K. S. Chan, and A. Swami, “A survey on modeling and optimizing multi-objective systems,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1867–1901, 2017.
E. Börcsök et al., “Energy Supply Preferences as Multicriteria Decision Problems: Developing a System of Criteria from Survey Data,” Energies, vol. 13, no. 15, p. 3767, 2020.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Fristi Riandari, Firta Sari Panjaitan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
