Multi-Criteria Decision Making: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayli Adriana Azhar ◽  
Nurul Asyikin Mohamed Radzi ◽  
Wan Siti Halimatul Munirah Wan Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Preference Ranking ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Complex Problems ◽  
Current Implementation ◽  
Network Process ◽  
Complete Survey ◽  
Hierarchy Process

: Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) helps decision makers (DMs) solve highly complex problems. Accordingly, MCDM has been widely used by DMs from various fields as an effective and reliable tool for solving various problems, such as in site and supplier selection, ranking and assessment. This work presents an in-depth survey of past and recent MCDM techniques cited in the literature. These techniques are mainly categorised into pairwise comparison, outranking and distance-based approaches. Some well-known MCDM methods include the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), Analytical Network Process (ANP), Elimination et Choix Traduisant la Realité (ELECTRE), Preference Ranking Organization METHod for Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE), Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR). Each of these methods is unique and has been used in a vast field of interest to support DMs in solving complex problems. For a complete survey, discussions related to previous issues and challenges and the current implementation of MCDM are also presented.

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.

scholarly journals Fusion of BWM and AHP MCDM Methods to Choose the Most Suitable Secondary School for an Individual in the Context of Bangladesh

2019 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. 311-328
Author(s):  
N. S. M. Rezaur Rahman ◽  
Md. Abdul Ahad Chowdhury ◽  
Adnan Firoze ◽  
Rashedur M. Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Secondary School ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
User Preferences ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Final Score ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Best Worst Method

Choosing the best schools from a group of schools is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem. In this paper, we have represented a method that uses the fusion of two multi-criteria decision-making methods, Best–Worst Method (BWM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), to rank some of the user preferred alternatives. The system considers the choice of the user and the quality of the alternatives to rank them. User preferences on the criteria are taken as inputs in the form of best–worst comparison vectors to measure the choice of the user. These values are applied to calculate the numeric weights of each of the criteria. These weights reflect the preference of the user. A dataset of secondary schools in Bangladesh has been compiled and used for automatic quantitative pairwise comparison on the alternatives to calculate the score of each alternative in every criterion, which reflects its quality in that criterion. These scores are calculated using AHP. The weights of the criteria as well as the scores of these alternatives in those criteria are then used to calculate the final score of the alternatives and to rank them accordingly. An extensive experimental analysis and comparative study is reported at the end of this paper.

scholarly journals Perancangan Sistem Kepuasan Masyarakat Terhadap Pelayanan Publik Dengan Metode Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-35
Author(s):  
Petrus Sokibi ◽  
Nurul Bahiyah
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Service ◽  
Analytical Hierarchy Process ◽  
Public Services ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Satisfaction Level ◽  
The Public ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Government Institution

Talun sub-district is a government institution that provides public services to the public, which at this time there is no assessment of service satisfaction from the community so that the District Talun cannot know the assessment or complaints from the public to public services provided. The research aims to determine the level of public satisfaction of Public Service in Talun Sub-district. AHP is a complex multi-criteria decision-making method, in an unstructured situation into sections that are then shaped into functional hierarchies to present problems to be solved and then build a priority sequence for alternatives by pairwise alternative comparisons based on judgments of decision makers against a system. The appraisal application yields the value of the public satisfaction level and the eigenvector ranked according to the highest data as the final value of the AHP calculation so that the eigenvector value obtained can facilitate the Camat to see which elements of service are not good.

Strategic Decision Making for Outsourcing Information Systems with a Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-Making Approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. 6
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Modiri ◽  
Mohammad Dashti
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Network Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Service Support ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Network Process ◽  
Selection Of

Today, IS supplier selection is one of the most critical steps in the outsourcing process; the success of outsourcing is highly dependent on the selection of IS suppliers. This paper proposes a new hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model, which uses decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) technique, analytic network process (ANP), and Vlse Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje(VIKOR) to evaluate four potential suppliers using seven factors and five decision makers using a realistic case study. the results showed that Service support is importance for outsourcing. The proposed model can help practitioners improve their decision making process.

scholarly journals Evaluate and Rank the Smartphone Brand Using Fuzzy AHP and PROMETHEE

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 44-51
Author(s):  
Diana Sirmayunie Mohd Nasir ◽  
Nurshahira Zawawi ◽  
Suzanawati Abu Hasan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Fuzzy Ahp ◽  
Multiple Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Preference Ranking ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
System Memory ◽  
Future Work ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Selection Of

A buying decision process is one of the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problems faced by everyone in daily life. One example is the selection of smartphones brand in the market. Thus, the study is conducted to evaluate the most effective criteria for buying smartphones and to rank the people's preferences on smartphone based on its brand. Six criteria (price, operating system, memory, display, camera and battery) and three alternatives which are the smartphone brands (Oppo, Samsung and Apple) were chosen in the study. Two main processes were involved, which are 1) evaluate the smartphone criteria using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and 2) ranking the brand using Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluations (PROMETHEE). Surveys and questionnaires were conducted and evaluated by decision makers who are the smartphone's users. The result showed storage memory is considered as prominent criteria in choosing a smartphone meanwhile the consumers firstly prefer Oppo, secondly Apple and thirdly Samsung. Future work in this study may use other alternatives to be ranked by considering other top models as well. Keywords: Multiple criteria decision making, smartphone brand, Fuzzy AHP, Fuzzy PROMETHEE  

scholarly journals Predictor Analysis in Group Decision Making

Stats ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-121
Author(s):  
Stan Lipovetsky
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Multiple Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Regression Modeling ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Predictor Importance ◽  
Multiple Experts ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Priority vectors in the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) are commonly estimated as constant values calculated by the pairwise comparison ratios elicited from an expert. For multiple experts, or panel data, or other data with varied characteristics of measurements, the priority vectors can be built as functions of the auxiliary predictors. For example, in multi-person decision making, the priorities can be obtained in regression modeling by the demographic and socio-economic properties. Then the priorities can be predicted for individual respondents, profiled by each predictor, forecasted in time, studied by the predictor importance, and estimated by the characteristic of significance, fit and quality well-known in regression modeling. Numerical results show that the suggested approaches reveal useful features of priority behavior, that can noticeably extend the AHP abilities and applications for numerous multiple-criteria decision making problems. The considered methods are useful for segmentation of the respondents and finding optimum managerial solutions specific for each segment. It can help to decision makers to focus on the respondents’ individual features and to increase customer satisfaction, their retention and loyalty to the promoted brands or products.

scholarly journals ECONOMIC ZONES SITE SELECTION IN BUTUAN CITY USING MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING APPROACH AND GIS TECHNIQUES

2021 ◽  
Vol XLIV-M-3-2021 ◽  
pp. 13-15
Author(s):  
A. G. Cauba Jr. ◽  
P. H. C. Coniato
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Regional Growth ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Comparison Method ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Police Station ◽  
Regional Center ◽  
Huge Impact ◽  
Economic Zones ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Abstract. Development of economic zones has been rapid in recent years and considered as one of the effective ways of promoting regional growth. Butuan City is categorized as a highly urbanized city and a regional center of Caraga which brings a huge impact to the economic growth in the region. Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach (MCDMA) using the pairwise comparison method of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Geographic Information System techniques were integrated to identify the suitable locations for economic zones. There were nine (9) criteria used in this study such as roads, transport hubs, commercial areas, police station, electric post, water bodies, slope, land use and labor force. Suitability map was produced and used as basis for the analysis. The result of the analysis shows that in Butuan City, an area of 32.15 sq. km is considered highly suitable, 365.96 sq. km is moderately suitable, and 248.43 sq. km is low suitable. Most of the areas are considered as moderately suitable for the establishment of economic zones. The information derived from this study would be helpful to the local government of Butuan City and other agencies in determining suitable areas for economic zones. With this information, they may be able to implement solutions in finding the best location for each ecozone which will attract investors and create employment and other opportunities in the city.

scholarly journals Analytical Network Process in Selection of 7PL

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 313-314
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Relative Priority ◽  
Analytical Network Process ◽  
Complex Problems ◽  
Priority Weights ◽  
Network Process ◽  
A Company ◽  
Final Selection ◽  
Selection Of

This article aims in selection and evaluation of a Seventh Party Logistic provider (7PL) which integrates all the functions of a company globally. The procedure for selection is based on the criteria’s and their relative priority weights. Analytical Network Process (ANP) is used in complex problems where Multi-criteria decision making is involved. After identification of criteria using ANP final selection is done. This paper is informatory to researchers to understand and apply ANP to MCDM problems.

scholarly journals MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING FOR SELECTION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Milica Stojanovic
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Analytical Hierarchy Process ◽  
Energy Systems ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Suitable Alternative ◽  
Renewable Energy Systems ◽  
Multi Criteria Analysis ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Multi-criteria analysis involves defining each criterion using attributes, based on a suitable alternative for achieving objectives. The method used in multi-criteria analysis is Analytical Hierarchy Process. Analytical hierarchical process (AHP) is a tool in the analysis of decision making, created in order to assist decision-makers in solving complex decision problems involving large number of decision makers, large number of criteria and in multiple time periods. AHP method is used for selecting the best renewable energy systems. The aim is to, by using the method of AHP, demonstrate which of the analyzed renewable sources of energy is the most convenient to be used in a sustainable system. Key words:energy, multi-criteria decision making, analytical hierarchy process

scholarly journals Comparison of Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Methods for Urban Sewer Network Plan Selection

CivilEng ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen Wu ◽  
Georges Abdul-Nour
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Asset Management ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Preference Ranking ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Promethee Ii ◽  
Sewer Network

Selecting a suitable sewer network plan for a city is a complex and challenging task that requires discussion among a group of experts and the consideration of multiple conflicting criteria with different measurement units. A number of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods have been proposed for analyzing sewer network selection problems, each having their own distinct advantages and limitations. Although many decision-making techniques are available, decision-makers are confronted with the difficult task of selecting the appropriate MCDM method, as each method can lead to different results when applied to an identical problem. This paper evaluates four different multi-criteria decision-making methods, which are the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Elimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité (ELECTRE III) and the Preference Ranking Organization METHods for Enrichment Evaluations II (PROMETHEE II), for one sewer network group decision problem in the early stage of sewer water infrastructure asset management. Moreover, during the implementation of different MCDM methods, the Delphi technique is introduced to organize and structure the discussions among all the decision-makers. The results of the study are examined based on each method’s ability to provide accurate representations of the decision-makers’ preferences and their experience implementing each method. As a conclusion, decision-makers identify PROMETHEE II as their favorite method, AHP is more time and energy consuming and results in a number of inconsistencies, while TOPSIS loses information during vector normalization for multi-dimension criteria, and ELECTRE III’s results are inconclusive.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document