Raising the bar: strategic multi-criteria decision analysis

This paper discusses the use of multi-criteria decision analysis for supporting strategic decision making in organisations. It begins by exploring the notions of strategic decisions and the strategic decision-making process. We suggest that structuring strategic objectives, dealing with high levels of uncertainty about the future, as well as considering the interconnectedness of strategic options and their long-term consequences are key aspects of strategic decision making support. We then consider the discursive nature of the processes within which strategic decisions are created and negotiated. Our exploration of these concepts leads us to propose a number of adaptations to the standard multi-criteria decision analysis approach, if it were to provide effective strategic decision support, particularly in strategy workshops. We make suggestions on how to implement these proposals, and illustrate their potential with examples drawn from real-world interventions in which we have provided strategic decision support.     

Behavioural decision theory for multi-criteria decision analysis: a guided tour

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) involves asking decision makers difficult questions, and can leave them thinking that their judgements are not as coherent as they might have thought. This experience can be distressing and may even lead to rejection of the analysis. The psychology of preference sheds light both on how people naturally make choices without decision analytic assistance, and on how people think about the MCDA elicitation questions. As such, it can help the analyst to respond helpfully to difficulties which decision makers may face. In this paper, we review research from Behavioural Decision Theory relevant to MCDA. Our review follows the MCDA process, discussing research relevant to the structuring, value elicitation, and weighting phases of the analysis, outlining relevant and important findings, and open questions for research and practice.     

Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis

his paper provides a review of multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) for cases where attribute evaluations are uncertain. The main aim is to identify different tools which can be used to represent uncertain evaluations, and to broadly survey the available decision models that can be used to support uncertain decision making. The review includes models using probabilities or probability-like quantities; explicit risk measures such as quantiles and variances; fuzzy numbers, and scenarios. The practical assessment of uncertain outcomes and preferences associated with these outcomes is also discussed.     

Transparent prioritisation,budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing

Managers in both for-profit and not-for-profit organisations continually face the task of allocating resources by balancing costs, benefits and risks and gaining commitment by a wide constituency of stakeholders to those decisions. This task is complex and difficult because many options are present, benefits and risks are rarely expressed as single objectives, multiple stakeholders with different agendas compete for limited resources, individually optimal resource allocations to organisational units are rarely collectively optimal, and those dissatisfied with the decisions taken may resist implementation. We first explain three current approaches to resource allocation taken from corporate finance, operational research and decision analysis, and we identify a common mistake organisations make in allocating resources. The paper then presents a technical process, multi-criteria portfolio analysis, for balancing the conflicting elements of the problem, and a social process, decision conferencing, which engages all the key players during the modelling process, ensuring their ownership of the model and the subsequent implementation. This socio-technical process improves communication within the organisation, develops shared understanding of the portfolio and generates a sense of common purpose about those projects that will best realise the organisation’s objectives. The paper concludes with lessons we have learned from actual practice. The authors want to thank Allergan and FCT (Portuguese Science Foundation) for their support.     

A VIKOR-based method for hesitant fuzzy multi-criteria decision making

Since it was firstly introduced by Torra and Narukawa (The 18th IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Jeju Island, Korea, 2009, pp. 1378–1382), the hesitant fuzzy set has attracted more and more attention due to its powerfulness and efficiency in representing uncertainty and vagueness. This paper extends the classical VIKOR (vlsekriterijumska optimizacija i kompromisno resenje in serbian) method to accommodate hesitant fuzzy circumstances. Motivated by the hesitant normalized Manhattan distance, we develop the hesitant normalized Manhattan $L_p$ —metric, the hesitant fuzzy group utility measure, the hesitant fuzzy individual regret measure, and the hesitant fuzzy compromise measure. Based on these new measures, we propose a hesitant fuzzy VIKOR method, and a practical example is provided to show that our method is very effective in solving multi-criteria decision making problems with hesitant preference information.     

Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models

This paper presents a simulation approach for high dimensional sensitivity analysis of the weights of multi-criteria decision models. This approach allows simultaneous changes of the weights and generates results that can easily be analyzed statistically to provide insights into multi-criteria model recommendations. In this study we consider three cases: no information, order information, and partial information regarding the weights. Our approach also allows investigation of sensitivity to the form of multi-criteria decision models. The simulation procedures we propose can also be used to aide in the actual decision process, particularly when the task is to select a subset of superior alternatives.     

A new decision support model in multi-criteria decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy sets based on risk preferences and criteria reduction

In this paper, we propose a new model for decision support to address the ‘large decision table’ (eg, many criteria) challenge in intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFSs) multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems. This new model involves risk preferences of decision makers (DMs) based on the prospect theory and criteria reduction. First, we build three relationship models based on different types of DMs’ risk preferences. By building different discernibility matrices according to relationship models, we find useful criteria for IFS MCDM problems. Second, we propose a technique to obtain weights through discernibility matrix. Third, we also propose a new method to rank and select the most desirable choice(s) according to weighted combinatorial advantage values of alternatives. Finally, we use a realistic voting example to demonstrate the practicality and effectiveness of the proposed method and construct a new decision support model for IFS MCDM problems.     

A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement

This paper proposes a new multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) model that uses a series of existing intuitive and analytical methods to systematically capture both objective and subjective beliefs and preferences from a group of decision makers (DMs). A defuzzification method that combines entropy and the theory of displaced ideal synthesizes crisp values from the DMs’ subjective judgments. This approach assists the DMs in their selection process by plotting alternatives in a four quadrant graph and considering their Euclidean distance from the “ideal” choice. A pilot study illustrates the details of the proposed method. The DMs were a group of graduate students from the University of Paderborn in Germany. The pilot study concerned the addition of new members into the European Union (EU), a decision that has profound economic and political effects on both the entering and existing members of the Union. The DMs were required to consider a large number of internal strengths and weaknesses and external opportunities and threats in assessing the decision to enlarge the EU. Although the pilot study was not performed by actual DMs from the EU, it was an excellent platform for testing the proposed model.     

An improved method for ranking alternatives in multiple criteria decision analysis

Scoring rules are an important disputable subject in data envelopment analysis (DEA). Various organizations use voting systems whose main object is to rank alternatives. In these methods, the ranks of alternatives are obtained by their associated weights. The method for determining the ranks of alternatives by their weights is an important issue. This problem has been the subject at hand of some authors. We suggest a three-stage method for the ranking of alternatives. In the first stage, the rank position of each alternative is computed based on the best and worst weights in the optimistic and pessimistic cases, respectively. The vector of weights obtained in the first stage is not a singleton. Hence, to deal with this problem, a secondary goal is used in the second stage. In the third stage of our method, the ranks of the alternatives approach the optimistic or pessimistic case. It is mentionable that the model proposed in the third stage is a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) model and there are several methods for solving it; we use the weighted sum method in this paper. The model is solved by mixed integer programming. Also, we obtain an interval for the rank of each alternative. We present two models on the basis of the average of ranks in the optimistic and pessimistic cases. The aim of these models is to compute the rank by common weights.     

Extension of VIKOR method for multi-criteria group decision making problem with linguistic information

A new method is proposed to solve multi-criteria group decision making problems in which both the criteria values and criteria weights take the form of linguistic information based on the traditional idea of VIKOR method. Firstly, the linguistic criteria weights given by all decision makers are transformed into trapezoidal fuzzy numbers, and then aggregated and defuzzified to crisp values. Secondly, the individual linguistic decision matrix given by each decision maker (DM) is transformed into 2-tuple linguistic decision matrix, and then aggregated into collective 2-tuple linguistic decision matrix by 2-tuple linguistic arithmetic mean operation. Thirdly, the 2-tuple linguistic values (_Si,_αi),$(S_i\text{,}{\alpha }_i)\text{,}$(_Ri,_αi)$(R_i\text{,}{\alpha }_i)$ and (_Qi,_αi)$(Q_i\text{,}{\alpha }_i)$ are calculated by defining the 2-tuple linguistic positive ideal solution (TL-PIS) and 2-tuple linguistic negative ideal solution (TL-NIS). Furthermore, the compromise solution can be obtained. Finally, a numerical example is used to illustrate the application of the proposed approach, and the method is verified by comparing the evaluation result with that of 2-tuple linguistic TOPSIS (TL-TOPSIS) method.     

Numerical scaling of ratio scale utilities in multi-criteria decision analysis with geometric model

The ratio scale measurement of utilities in multi-criteria decision analysis has been criticised due to theoretical and practical interpretation of the required assessments. Compared to the ratio scale models, for example, the ‘0–1-scale’ models based on interval scale have been more generally accepted. On the other hand, under some conditions it has been shown that the results of multi-criteria decision support based on ratio scale comparisons are actually independent of the numerical magnitude of the ratio scale assessments. This paper reviews and interprets these results and proposes new solutions for the remaining problems, for which the numerical magnitude of the ratio scale utilities is required. Moreover, we interpret the scale-independent ratio scale models with respect to some other multi-criteria decision support models. The theoretical analysis is carried out by statistical models and illustrated by numerical examples.     

Rank reversals in multi-criteria decision analysis with statistical modelling of ratio-scale pairwise comparisons

In multi-criteria decision analysis, the overall performance of decision alternatives is evaluated with respect to several, generally conflicting decision criteria. One approach to perform the multi-criteria decision analysis is to use ratio-scale pairwise comparisons concerning the performance of decision alternatives and the importance of decision criteria. In this approach, a classical problem has been the phenomenon of rank reversals. In particular, when a new decision alternative is added to a decision problem, and while the assessments concerning the original decision alternatives remain unchanged, the new alternative may cause rank reversals between the utility estimates of the original decision alternatives. This paper studies the connections between rank reversals and the potential inconsistency of the utility assessments in the case of ratio-scale pairwise comparisons data. The analysis was carried out by recently developed statistical modelling techniques so that the inconsistency of the assessments was measured according to statistical estimation theory. Several type of decision problems were analysed and the results showed that rank reversals caused by inconsistency are natural and acceptable. On the other hand, rank reversals caused by the traditional arithmetic-mean aggregation rule are not in line with the ratio-scale measurement of utilities, whereas geometric-mean aggregation does not cause undesired rank reversals.     

Extending the multi-criteria decision making method DEX with numeric attributes,value distributions and relational models

Central European Journal of Operations Research - DEX is a qualitative multi-criteria decision analysis method. The method supports decision makers in making complex decisions based on multiple,...     

A method for solving fuzzy multicriteria decision problems with dependent criteria

We propose a new multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method based on fuzzy pair-wise comparisons and a feedback between the criteria. The evaluation of the weights of criteria, the variants as well as the feedback between the criteria is based on the data given in pair-wise comparison matrices. Extended arithmetic operations with fuzzy numbers are used as well as ordering fuzzy relations to compare fuzzy outcomes. An illustrating numerical example is presented to clarify the methodology. A special SW-Microsoft Excel add-in named FVK was developed for applying the proposed method. Comparing to other software products, FVK is free, able to work with fuzzy data and utilizes capabilities of widespread spreadsheet Microsoft Excel.     

Progressive methods in multiple criteria decision analysis

This is a summary of the author’s Ph.D. thesis, defended on 8 October 2007 at the University of Luxembourg and the Faculté Polytechnique de Mons, under the joint supervision of Raymond Bisdorff and Marc Pirlot. The thesis is written in English and is available from the author upon request. The work is situated in the field of multiple criteria decision analysis. It mostly deals with what we call progressive methods, i.e., iterative procedures presenting partial conclusions to the decision maker that can be refined at further steps of the analysis. Such progressive methods have been studied in the context of multiattribute value theory and outranking methods.      

Integrating expert weighting and multi-criteria decision making into eco-efficiency analysis: the case of US manufacturing

In this paper, the effect of weighting strategies on sustainability performance assessment is addressed. Eco-efficiency is used as the main metric for sustainability performance evaluation. An integrated input-output life cycle assessment (LCA) and multi criteria decision making (MCDM) approach is employed. The US manufacturing sectors’ LCA results are used in conjunction with the proposed MCDM framework to perform the eco-efficiency evaluation of 276 US manufacturing sectors. Five environmental impact categories are considered as the negative factors, namely: greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, water withdrawal, hazardous waste generation and toxic releases into air and the economic output of each manufacturing sector is considered to be the positive output. To study the overall impact of different weighting strategies; twenty weighting scenarios are designed. Five pairs of weights considered for the overall economic versus environmental impacts along with four specific weighting strategies based on Harvard, SAB, EPP and Equal weighting for each pair. According to the results of the statistical analysis, it is concluded that the weighing strategies applied to the overall environmental impacts and economic outputs cause statistically significant differences in the eco-efficiency scores.     

A DSS for multiple criteria decision analysis with imprecisely specified trade-offs

The paper describes a decision support system (DSS) for multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA). It is assumed that the information about the trade-offs is given in the form of lower and upper bounds. The software helps the user to identify candidate solutions from a finite set of decision alternatives and can be used in an interactive decision process. The choice of the software features is based on the author's experience with an environmental case study, which is discussed.     

The SIR method: A superiority and inferiority ranking method for multiple criteria decision making

In this paper, a superiority and inferiority ranking (SIR) method is proposed. This new method uses two types of information, the superiority and the inferiority information, to derive two types of flows, the superiority flow and the inferiority flow, by which the set of alternatives are ranked partially or completely. Relationships between the SIR method and some of the classical multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods (such as SAW, TOPSIS and PROMETHEE) are explored. It is proved that the SIR method is a significant extension of the well-known PROMETHEE method.     

Dominance and potential optimality in multiple criteria decision analysis with imprecise information

This paper discusses multiple criteria models of decision analysis with finite sets of alternatives. A weighted sum of criteria is used to evaluate the performance of alternatives. Information about the weights is assumed to be in the form of arbitrary linear constraints. Conditions for checking dominance and potential optimality of decision alternatives are presented. In the case of testing potential optimality, the proposed appoach leads to the consideration of a couple of mutually dual linear programming problems. The analysis of these problems gives valuable information for the decision maker. In particular, if a decision alternative is not potentially optimal, then a mixed alternative dominating it is defined by a solution to one of the LP problems. This statement generalizes similar results known for some special cases. The interpretation of the mixed alternative is discussed and compared to its analogue in a data envelopment analysis context.