Integration of AHP and GTMA to Make a Reliable Decision in Complex Decision-Making Problems: Application of the Logistics Provider Selection Problem as a Case Study (original) (raw)
Related papers
J. for International Business and Entrepreneurship Development, 2005
The use of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for decision making is sometimes marred by the laborious effort of conducting a large number of pairwise comparisons, especially in the presence of a large number of criteria. The present empirical study attempts to investigate the possibility of eliminating insignificant criteria in order to reduce AHP computational time. Using Expert Choice software, findings confirmed that criteria assigned with comparatively lesser weights can be excluded from the hierarchy and thereby the total time required for making pairwise comparisons is reduced. To solve large-scale enterprise multi-criteria decision-making problems (that involve large number of criteria) by AHP, it is proposed that, at the very outset, decision-makers can apply nominal group technique to identify the more significant criteria and drop lesser important criteria from the list. This proposed methodology is expected to enhance the applicability of AHP in solving various kinds of larger sized multicriteria decision-making problems in any enterprise.
A Multicriteria Decision Making Model For Military Logistics Using Analytic Network Process
2013
Decision making for military logistics has an environment in which the circumstances are changing very quickly, the uncertainty is very high and lots of complex criteria affecting the decision are found. The decision makers, who are on such a slippery ground and under the oppression of casualties which will be caused by his decision, have to make right decision at the right time. The military logistics decision making process (MLDMP) has been developed on the purpose of providing to support military logistics. In this study, it is aimed at improving MLDMP by compare and contrasting with the decision making process used at the other civilian institutions. It is concluded that using Analytic Network Process (ANP), one of the methods of Multi-Criteria Decision Making, will provide an important benefit at the phase of compare and contrasting the course of actions for logistics.
Analytic Hierarchy Process Decision Making Algorithm
Decision making in today's world certainly incorporates the consideration of assessment in view of a number of criteria, instead of a favored single criteria. Solving a multi-criteria decision issue offers decision makers suggestions, regarding the best decision choices (Alternatives). At the point when discovering the best decision of alternatives, subject to various distinctive criteria is almost impossible, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has been very instrumental, effective, extraordinary and much of the time utilized strategy in solving problems in much complex decision making processes. This paper briefly discusses MultiCriteria Decision Making (MCDM) and AHP as one of the most popular MCDM methods for group decision making. Also, steps, techniques and formulae used in AHP have been discussed to help handle the problems arising from choosing alternative(s). Finally, the paper offers recommendations to researchers and professionals to apply AHP methodology techniques when analyzing multiple, complicated and conflicting decision making problems.
Analytic Hierarchy Process in multi criteria decision making
This research on technology makes a first approach to the selection of an amphibious landing ship with strategic capabilities, through the implementation of a multi-criteria model using Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP), in which a significant group of alternatives of latest technology has been considered. The variables were grouped at different levels to match design and performance characteristics, which affect the life-cycle as well as the acquisition, maintenance and operational costs. The model yielded an overall measure of effectiveness and an overall measure of cost of each kind of ship that was compared each other inside the model and showed in a Pareto chart. The modelling was developed using the Expert Choice software, based on AHP method.
The Analytic Hierarchy Process in the Supplier Selection Problem
Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 2009
The Supplier Selection Problem (SSP) consists of analyzing and measuring the performance of a set of suppliers in order to rank and select them for improving the competitiveness of the whole supply system. As many conflicting factors should be taken into account in the analysis, the problem can be tackled using multi-criteria models and methods. In this work a careful scrutiny of the papers appeared on international scientific journals in the recent years about SSP is provided. The survey highlights that the most used methodology is the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Thus, an overview view of the current proposals based on AHP and its variants to cope with the SSP is provided. Crucial aspects which arise when the methodology is actually applied in real cases are identified and discussed.
Applied Soft Computing, 2013
This paper proposes a two-stage fuzzy logarithmic preference programming with multi-criteria decisionmaking, in order to derive the priorities of comparison matrices in the analytic hierarchy pprocess (AHP) and the analytic network process (ANP). The Fuzzy Preference Programming (FPP) proposed by Mikhailov and Singh [L. Mikhailov, M.G. Singh, Fuzzy assessment of priorities with application to competitive bidding, Journal of Decision Systems 8 (1999) 11-28] is suitable for deriving weights in interval or fuzzy comparison matrices, especially those displaying inconsistencies. However, the weakness of the FPP is that it obtains priorities of comparison matrices by additive constraints, and generates different priorities by processing upper and lower triangular judgments. In addition, the FPP solves the comparison matrix individually. By using multiplicative constraints, the method proposed in this paper can generate the same priorities from upper and lower triangular judgments with crisp, interval or fuzzy values. Our proposed method can solve all of the matrices simultaneously by multiple objective programming. Finally, five examples are demonstrated to show the proposed method in more detail.
AN APPLICATION OF ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP) WITH MULTI EXPERT AND MULTI ALTERNATIVE
The problem of purchasing a mono type flashlight for all the staff working at a shipyard is a good application for AHP (Analytic hierarchy process) because of its nature. The staff working at site or on board normally do their jobs in a special environment where inside of tanks and blocks are completely dark. Personal preferences, depending on the experiences and habits affect the flashlight choices of the staff. This makes the purchasing problem; a multi criteria and multi attribute decision making (MCMADM) problem which complies with AHP. E. K. Gencsoy from BV Istanbul/Turkey has developed a method to do this as explained in this study.
2020
Everyone makes decisions almost daily about routine purchases. When different items (e.g bread, milk) provide the same quality and quantity then potentially, the purchase decision is based on monetary grounds. However, when the additional criteria like quantity, quality, etc, change, such a situation demands activation of a simplistic form of multi-criteria analysis which is performed by our brain. However, when the purchases are non-routine and have multi-criteria then those become complex which prompts us to consult our friends and sometimes the relevant specialist persons for good guidance. One such example may be a decision to buy a car which in addition to the capital cost, more parameters come into play like fuel economy, availability of spare parts, operation and maintenance cost, safety, and others. The above two situations generally don’t demand any kind of analytical or other processes to address its complexity, however, projects of commercial or communal interest do demand such where conflicts in terms of individual subjectivity surface. To address the subjectivities, Mathematicians and Statisticians have developed various tools and processes. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is a sub discipline of operations research that explicitly evaluates multiple conflicting criteria in decision making (Multiple-criteria decision analysis, 2020). The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a general theory of measurement that has found its widest applications in multi-criteria decision making, planning, and resource allocation, and in conflict resolution (Saatay, 1987). The AHP method makes it possible to assign a value representing the preference degree for a given alternative to each additional alternative. Such values can be used to classify and select alternatives based on a hierarchical structure (Junyi Chai, August 2013). AHP is the most widely used method for evaluating software (Ashu Gupta, 2010). AHP has also been applied to supplier and vendor selection (Maggie C.Y. Tam, April 2001). Recent approaches have combined AHP with other methods (Ahn, March 2017). AHP helps capture both subjective and objective evaluation measures, providing a useful mechanism for checking their consistency relative to considered alternatives, thus reducing bias in decision making (Mann, 1995). The weighting values in the AHP, which reflect the status or role of various factors in the evaluation process, directly affect the decision-making results (S. Prechaverakul, 1995). Consultation is the first step toward designing, execution, and operation of a sustainable project. The same help in conflict resolution, conducting trade-offs, and bringing in objectivity. AHP helps to smoothen the whole process by taking away personal subjectivities. The process is observable and without manipulation but there is an intrinsic challenge. Which is that why a certain weightage is assigned to the component, and its factors and sub-factors? This in-built flaw has derived a considerable amount of objection to it (MCDA or AHP methods for different alternatives, 2020). Given its flaw, it is still a good process and widely used by many professionals across the globe. MCDA is a family of methods whereas AHP is one of the approaches to address the method (MCDA or AHP methods for different alternatives, 2020). In this approach, the following steps are required to successfully conclude the effort (Asim, 2020); 1. Clearly defining the objective 2. Defining criteria for success 3. Assigning weights to criteria and its factors and sub-factors 4. Listing all the potential project options 5. The rating according to a pre-defined scale in a group for more objectivity. I prefer the Likert Scale. 6. Calculate and rank
Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications
European Journal of operational research, 2006
This article presents a literature review of the applications of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). AHP is a multiple criteria decision-making tool that has been used in almost all the applications related with decision-making. Out of many different applications of AHP, this article covers a select few, which could be of wide interest to the researchers and practitioners. The article critically analyses some of the papers published in international journals of high repute, and gives a brief idea about many of the referred publications. Papers are categorized according to the identified themes, and on the basis of the areas of applications. The references have also been grouped region-wise and year-wise in order to track the growth of AHP applications. To help readers extract quick and meaningful information, the references are summarized in various tabular formats and charts.
Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process
Decisions involve many intangibles that need to be traded off. To do that, they have to be measured along side tangibles whose measurements must also be evaluated as to, how well, they serve the objectives of the decision maker. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a theory of measurement through pairwise comparisons and relies on the judgements of experts to derive priority scales. It is these scales that measure intangibles in relative terms. The comparisons are made using a scale of absolute judgements that represents, how much more, one element dominates another with respect to a given attribute. The judgements may be inconsistent, and how to measure inconsistency and improve the judgements, when possible to obtain better consistency is a concern of the AHP. The derived priority scales are synthesised by multiplying them by the priority of their parent nodes and adding for all such nodes. An illustration is included.