An Evaluation Method for Inconsistency of the AHP Judgment Matrix

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuan Mao Huang ◽  
Hsin-Ni Ho
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Principal Eigenvector ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Judgment Matrix ◽  
Index Value ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Applications of the analytic hierarchy process have been widespread in the field of decision-making for decades. In this process, decision-makers perform pairwise comparisons to form a judgment matrix, and its principal eigenvector is used to represent the priorities. Thus it is important to evaluate the degree of inconsistency in a judgment matrix to ensure the principal eigenvector reflects the true priorities among the alternatives. This study proposes the I3 circuit method, which is based on the graph theory, with a critical inconsistent index value of 3.75 to judge and evaluate consistency or the degree of inconsistency for judgment matrices. In addition, it can also spot the matrix entries that create the most inconsistency. With these advantages of the proposed method, decision-makers can easily evaluate the pairwise comparisons of a matrix and revise some entries of the matrix toward consistency if needed.

A Soft Hierarchical Process Approach for Decision Making in A Supply Chain

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1and2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajeev Dhingra ◽  
Preetvanti Singh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Process Approach ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Conflicting Objectives ◽  
Realistic View ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pair Wise Comparison ◽  
Supplier Selection Problem ◽  
Selection Of

Decision problems are usually complex and involve evaluation of several conflicting criteria (parameters). Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) is a promising field that considers the parallel influence of all criteria and aims at helping decision makers in expressing their preferences, over a set of predefined alternatives, on the basis of criteria (parameters) that are contradictory in nature. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a useful and widespread MCDM tool for solving such type of problems, as it allows the incorporation of conflicting objectives and decision makers preferences in the decision making. The AHP utilizes the concept of pair wise comparison to find the order of criteria (parameters) and alternatives. The comparison in a pairwise manner becomes quite tedious and complex for problems having eight alternatives or more, thereby, limiting the application of AHP. This paper presents a soft hierarchical process approach based on soft set decision making which eliminates the least promising candidate alternatives and selects the optimum(potential) ones that results in the significant reduction in the number of pairwise comparisons necessary for the selection of the best alternative using AHP, giving the approach a more realistic view. A supplier selection problem is used to illustrate the proposed approach.

scholarly journals A Multi-Criteria Decision Support Concept for Selecting the Optimal Contractor

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1660 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Marović ◽  
Monika Perić ◽  
Tomaš Hanak
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Project Performance ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Construction Project Management ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Conflicting Demands ◽  
Decision Making Problem ◽  
Scientific Approach ◽  
Hierarchy Process

A way to minimize uncertainty and achieve the best possible project performance in construction project management can be achieved during the procurement process, which involves selecting an optimal contractor according to “the most economically advantageous tender.” As resources are limited, decision-makers are often pulled apart by conflicting demands coming from various stakeholders. The challenge of addressing them at the same time can be modelled as a multi-criteria decision-making problem. The aim of this paper is to show that the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) together with PROMETHEE could cope with such a problem. As a result of their synergy, a decision support concept for selecting the optimal contractor (DSC-CONT) is proposed that: (a) allows the incorporation of opposing stakeholders’ demands; (b) increases the transparency of decision-making and the consistency of the decision-making process; (c) enhances the legitimacy of the final outcome; and (d) is a scientific approach with great potential for application to similar decision-making problems where sustainable decisions are needed.

Analytic Hierarchy Process Method Based on the Cask Theory

2015 ◽  
Vol 713-715 ◽  
pp. 1610-1614
Author(s):  
Yan Li ◽  
Xiao Dong Mu ◽  
Wei Song ◽  
Hui Wei Shi
Keyword(s):  
Expert System ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
System Performance ◽  
Strong Impact ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Judgment Matrix ◽  
Index Value ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process Method ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Process Method

When using the traditional AHP to evaluate the system,the method of endow with weight is to request expert build the judgment matrix of every hierarchies. The method is over-subjective for its overdependence on expert system. In view of this, this paper puts forward an analytic hierarchy process method based on the cask theory. This method penalizes the index whose index value is too low to having a strong impact on overall system performance. Using this method achieves the goal of reducing the subjectivity. Finally, according to the example, this method’s superiority is proved.

scholarly journals MULTI CRITERIA DECISION MAKING – RANKING AND PROMOTING EMPLOYEES

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 1235-1241
Author(s):  
Marina Badarovska Mishevska
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Problem ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Specific Situation ◽  
Mathematical Tool ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
The Right ◽  
Term Performance ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a structured technique for organizing and analyzing complex decisions, based on mathematics and psychology. The method was developed by Thomas L. Saaty in the 1970s and has been extensively studied and refined since then. It has particular application in group decision making and is used around the world in a wide variety of decision situation. Rather than prescribing a "correct" decision, the AHP helps decision makers choose one that best suits their goal and their understanding of the problem. The technique provides a comprehensive and rational framework for structuring a decision problem, for representing and quantifying its elements, for relating those elements to overall goals, and for evaluating alternative solutions. Decision making is the choice of one alternative, from two or more, to which the course of the activity is directed and the problem is solved. The decision-making process is a rational attempt by the manager to achieve the goals of the organizational unit. The decision-making process can be thought of as a "brain and nervous system" of an enterprise. Decisions are made when a person wants things to be different in the future. Given each specific situation, making the right decisions is probably one of the most difficult challenges for managers. Managers in day-to-day work deliver programmed and unprogrammed decisions that solve simple or complex problems. Simple decisions have an impact on the short-term performance of the enterprise, and complex decisions have an impact on the long-term future and success of the enterprise. Users of the AHP first decompose their decision problem into a hierarchy of more easily comprehended sub-problems, each of which can be analyzed independently. Once the hierarchy is built, the decision makers systematically evaluate its various elements by comparing them to each other two at a time, with respect to their impact on an element above them in the hierarchy. The AHP converts these evaluations to numerical values that can be processed and compared over the entire range of the problem. In this article, it is explained the application of the AHP method in order to evaluate and promote employees in the enterprise "X" with several criteria. The obtained results enable the manager to evaluate the employees in an objective way and make an objective decision for their promotion. Its application for selecting the best among employees, in their assessment and promotion, allows managers to use a specific and mathematical tool to support the decision. This tool not only supports and qualifies decisions, it also allows managers to justify their choice, as well as to simulate possible results.

AN INTEGRATED STRATEGIC APPROACH TO SUPPLIER EVALUATION AND SELECTION

2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 55-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
REZA KHORRAMSHAHGOL
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Supplier Evaluation ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Integrated Methodology ◽  
Strategic Approach ◽  
Index Matrix ◽  
Efficiency And Effectiveness ◽  
Aid Decision ◽  
Hierarchy Process

This paper, using goal programming (GP) and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), proposes an integrated methodology to aid decision makers in (1) evaluating, screening and selecting best suppliers from among an exhaustive list of available suppliers and (2) determining the amount to be purchased from the selected suppliers. Along the supply chain, the suppliers, by being situated at the upstream of the chain, play a crucial role in successful management of the entire (subsequent) members of the chain and can have a significant impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of the activities of the rest of the chain, and ultimately, on the delivery of the desired products/services. Thus supplier selection can certainly contribute greatly to a firm's competitive advantage and its organizational success. This study suggests a screening and evaluation method, named supplier priority index matrix, to eliminate the least qualified suppliers and to choose the most promising ones. The remaining potential suppliers are evaluated and the best are selected from among them. Finally the AHP and GP are used to allocate the firm's total supplies among the chosen/selected suppliers.

Decision-Making Model for Convention Site Selection

2012 ◽  
Vol 538-541 ◽  
pp. 895-900 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Chen Huang
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Site Selection ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
City Image ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Decision Making Model ◽  
Hierarchy Process

A number of factors must be considered when selecting a convention site. Typically, most selections are based on the decision makers’ knowledge and experience, which may lead to biased decisions based on the decision makers’ subjective judgment. This study establishes decision-making evaluation factors and attributes for convention site selection based on a literature review. After surveying experts’ opinions using questionnaires, we employed the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) to analyze the weighting of the factors and attributes. The results show that of the five evaluation factors, site environment is the most important, followed by meeting and accommodation facilities, local support, extraconference opportunities, and costs. Additionally, the five most important attributes among the 20 evaluation attributes are the suitability of convention facilities, suitability and quality of local infrastructure, climate, city image, and political conflict or terrorist threats.

Some Conflicting Results in the Analytic Hierarchy Process

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (02) ◽  
pp. 465-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ardalan Bafahm ◽  
Minghe Sun
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Unexpected Result ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Preference Relations ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been believed to be one of the most pragmatic and widely accepted methods for multi-criteria decision making. However, there have been various criticisms of this method within the last four decades. In this study, the results of AHP contradicting common expectations are examined for both the distributive and ideal modes. Specifically, conflicting priorities, conflicting decisions, and conflicting preference relations are investigated. A decision-making scenario is used throughout the paper and an illustrative example constructed from the decision-making scenario is provided to demonstrate each of the conflicting results recommended by AHP. With a parametric formulation of each unexpected result, the possibility of unexpected results of AHP is generalized irrespective of applying the distributive or ideal mode. The logic and causes of these contradictions are also analyzed. This study shows that AHP is not always reliable, and could lead the decision makers towards incorrect decisions.

FARSJUM, A FUZZY SYSTEM FOR RANKING SPARSE JUDGMENT MATRICES: A CASE STUDY IN SOCCER TOURNAMENTS

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (01) ◽  
pp. 115-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. GHOLAMIAN ◽  
S. M. T. FATEMI GHOMI ◽  
M. GHAZANFARI
Keyword(s):  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Major Constituent ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Ahp Method ◽  
World Cup ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Rank Reversal ◽  
Judgment Matrix ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The establishment of the priorities from pairwise comparison matrices is the major constituent of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). However, the number of pairwise comparisons necessary in real problems often becomes overwhelming. In such cases, generally the experts are not able to answer all questions and consequently sparse judgment matrix is generated which caused "equal ranks" and "rank reversal" based on AHP method. In this paper, a new ranking system (FARSJUM) is developed for such sparse judgment matrix. The system is constructed on fuzzy rules and fuzzy reasoning methods. The numerical example of world cup soccer tournament is brought to clarify the performance of the developed system comparing with AHP method in ranking the sparse judgment matrices.

scholarly journals Evaluación comparativa multifuncional de sistemas agrarios mediante AHP: Aplicación al olivar ecológico, integrado y convencional de Andalucía

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Parra López ◽  
Javier Calatrava Requena ◽  
Tomás De Haro Giménez
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Farming Systems ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Complex Decision Making ◽  
Olive Groves ◽  
Complex Decision ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Even though multifunctionality concept is reflected, implicit or explicitly, in the design of actual agrarian policies, its consideration when analysing and assessing farming systems is relatively limited in the scientific literature. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is proposed with this aim. AHP is a multicriteria discrete decision support technique that is used in complex decision making. This methodology is stated jointly with a proposed procedure to measure relative agreement among decision makers and uniformity of alternatives’ performances in group decision making. Finally AHP is implemented in the assessment of organic, integrated and conventional olive groves in Andalusia considering criteria of a different nature – economic, technical, sociocultural and environmental –. The final purpose is determining the more interesting growing techniques from a holistic point of view for all the society in the medium/long-term on the basis of knowledge of experts on olive.

Group assessment of key indicators of sustainable waste management in developing countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 913-922 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Tot ◽  
Goran Vujić ◽  
Zorica Srđević ◽  
Dejan Ubavin ◽  
Mário Augusto Tavares Russo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Borda Count ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Key Indicators ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Decision makers in developing countries are struggling to solve the present problems of solid waste management. Prioritisation and ranking of the most important indicators that influence the waste management system is very useful for any decision maker for the future planning and implementation of a sustainable waste management system. The aim of this study is to evaluate key indicators and their related sub-indicators in a group decision-making environment. In order to gain insight into the subject it was necessary to obtain the qualified opinions of decision makers from different countries who understand the situation in the sector of waste management in developing countries. An assessment is performed by 43 decision makers from both developed and developing countries, and the applied methodology is based on a combined use of the analytic hierarchy process, from the multi-criteria decision-making set of tools, and the preferential voting method known as Borda Count, which belongs to social choice theory. Pairwise comparison of indicators is performed with the analytic hierarchy process, and the ranking of indicators once obtained is assessed with Borda Count. Detailed analysis of the final results showed that the Institutional–Administrative indicator was the most important one, with the maximum weight as derived by both groups of decision makers. The results also showed that the combined use of the analytic hierarchy process and Borda Count contributes to the credibility and objectivity of the decision-making process, allowing its use in more complex waste management group decision-making problems to be recommended.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document