[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v214y2011i3p703-715.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An innovative orders-of-magnitude approach to AHP-based mutli-criteria decision making: Prioritizing divergent intangible humane acts

Author

Listed:
  • Saaty, Thomas L.
  • Shang, Jennifer S.
Abstract
An innovative Analytic Hierarchy Process-based structure is developed to capture the relationship between various levels of activities contributed by people to society. Physical objects have widespread extension and degrees of importance that often differ by many orders of magnitude. Similarly, mental thoughts and criteria occur in widely heterogeneous entities that have to be sorted and arranged into homogeneous groups of few elements in each group so that one can evaluate the relationships among them accurately, from the smallest to the largest. It is through such a framework for organizing factors with smooth transition that it is possible to derive reliable priorities from expert judgments. The proposed model enables one to make decisions and allocate resources in as detailed and fine a way as possible. In addition to the traditional approach of structuring criteria into multiple clusters, the alternatives of a decision are also organized into the lowest multiple levels of that hierarchy. This arrangement and evaluation of alternatives differs from one criterion to another, which adds to the complexity of the undertaking when the alternatives are heterogeneous. The coherent approach to structuring complex decisions with the Analytic Hierarchy Process enables one to transcend the complexity of dealing in a scientific way with the problem of widespread orders of magnitude of criteria and alternatives in a complex decision. When the magnitudes are actually very small or very large, the accuracy of rating alternatives one at a time instead of comparing them in pairs involves much guessing, and can lead to a questionable outcome. Alternatively, comparisons, which are necessary for the measurement of intangibles, have greater and better justified accuracy.

Suggested Citation

  • Saaty, Thomas L. & Shang, Jennifer S., 2011. "An innovative orders-of-magnitude approach to AHP-based mutli-criteria decision making: Prioritizing divergent intangible humane acts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(3), pages 703-715, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:214:y:2011:i:3:p:703-715
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221711004449
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    3. Ozdemir, Mujgan S. & Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "The unknown in decision making: What to do about it," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 349-359, October.
    4. Tjader, Youxu Cai & Shang, Jennifer S. & Vargas, Luis G., 2010. "Offshore outsourcing decision making: A policy-maker's perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 434-444, November.
    5. Ross M. Starr, 1972. "The Structure of Exchange in Barter and Monetary Economies," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 86(2), pages 290-302.
    6. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    7. Shang, Jen & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 1995. "A unified framework for the selection of a Flexible Manufacturing System," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 297-315, September.
    8. Saaty, Thomas L. & Takizawa, Masahiro, 1986. "Dependence and independence: From linear hierarchies to nonlinear networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 229-237, August.
    9. Saaty, Thomas L., 1994. "Homogeneity and clustering in AHP ensures the validity of the scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 598-601, February.
    10. Millet, Ido & Saaty, Thomas L., 2000. "On the relativity of relative measures - accommodating both rank preservation and rank reversals in the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 205-212, February.
    11. Saaty, Thomas L., 1994. "Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 426-447, May.
    12. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Shang, Jennifer & Chiang, Wen-Chyuan, 2009. "A decision support framework for internal audit prioritization in a rental car company: A combined use between DEA and AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(1), pages 219-231, November.
    13. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "Physics as a decision theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-104, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jianfei Shen & Fengyun Li & Di Shi & Hongze Li & Xinhua Yu, 2018. "Factors Affecting the Economics of Distributed Natural Gas-Combined Cooling, Heating and Power Systems in China: A Systematic Analysis Based on the Integrated Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Labo," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-28, September.
    2. Isabella M. Lami & Stefano Moroni, 2020. "How Can I Help You? Questioning the Role of Evaluation Techniques in Democratic Decision-Making Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    4. Jiachen Sun & Haiyan Wang & Zhimin Cui, 2023. "Alleviating the Bauxite Maritime Supply Chain Risks through Resilient Strategies: QFD-MCDM with Intuitionistic Fuzzy Decision Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-21, May.
    5. Hujun He & Yichen Zhao & Hongxu Tian & Wei Li, 2022. "Risk Evaluation of Overseas Mining Investment Based on a Support Vector Machine," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Koo ,Hyunmo & Kim, Seongcheol & Nam, Changi, 2017. "Speaker Wars begins: Which applications will be the killer content for smart speaker?," 14th ITS Asia-Pacific Regional Conference, Kyoto 2017: Mapping ICT into Transformation for the Next Information Society 168505, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    7. Liu, Fang & Zhang, Wei-Guo & Zhang, Li-Hua, 2014. "Consistency analysis of triangular fuzzy reciprocal preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 718-726.
    8. Pätäri, Eero & Karell, Ville & Luukka, Pasi & Yeomans, Julian S, 2018. "Comparison of the multicriteria decision-making methods for equity portfolio selection: The U.S. evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(2), pages 655-672.
    9. Zhü, Kèyù, 2014. "Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: Fallacy of the popular methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(1), pages 209-217.
    10. Daraboina, Rohini & Cooper, Orrin & Amini, Mehdi, 2024. "Segmentation of organic food consumers: A revelation of purchase factors in organic food markets," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    11. Majid FathiZahraei & Govindan Marthandan & Murali Raman & Azita Asadi, 2015. "Reducing risks in crisis management by GIS adoption," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 76(1), pages 83-98, March.
    12. Hao Wu & Hui Qian & Jie Chen & Chenchen Huo, 2017. "Assessment of Agricultural Drought Vulnerability in the Guanzhong Plain, China," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(5), pages 1557-1574, March.
    13. Rouhani, Omid, 2021. "Transportation Project Evaluation Methods/Approaches- Version 2," MPRA Paper 105729, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Cooper, Orrin & Yavuz, Idil, 2016. "Linking validation: A search for coherency within the Supermatrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(1), pages 232-245.
    15. Seyed Mohammad Haghighi Fard & Naciye Doratli, 2022. "Evaluation of Resilience in Historic Urban Areas by Combining Multi-Criteria Decision-Making System and GIS, with Sustainability and Regeneration Approach: The Case Study of Tehran (IRAN)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-21, February.
    16. Samia Daas & Fares Innal, 2024. "Reliability assessment of emergency safety barriers based on an intuitionistic fuzzy sets aggregation procedure and subjective safety analysis: a case study," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 15(8), pages 4143-4161, August.
    17. Ho, William & Ma, Xin, 2018. "The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 399-414.
    18. Dong, Qingxing & Cooper, Orrin, 2016. "An orders-of-magnitude AHP supply chain risk assessment framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 144-156.
    19. Hsu, Chao-Che & Liou, James J.H., 2013. "An outsourcing provider decision model for the airline industry," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 40-46.
    20. Alicja Lenarczyk & Marcin Jaskólski & Paweł Bućko, 2022. "The Application of a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making for Indication of Directions of the Development of Renewable Energy Sources in the Context of Energy Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-21, December.
    21. Clívia Dias Coelho & Demetrius David da Silva & Ricardo Santos Silva Amorim & Bruno Nery Fernandes Vasconcelos & Ernani Lopes Possato & Elpídio Inácio Fernandes Filho & Pedro Christo Brandão & José Am, 2024. "Development and Application of an Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) for Identifying Priority Restoration Areas in the São Francisco River Basin, Brazil," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    2. Chia-Liang Lin & Jwu-Jenq Chen & Yu-Yu Ma, 2023. "Ranking of Service Quality Solution for Blended Design Teaching Using Fuzzy ANP and TOPSIS in the Post-COVID-19 Era," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, March.
    3. Jalao, Eugene Rex & Wu, Teresa & Shunk, Dan, 2014. "An intelligent decomposition of pairwise comparison matrices for large-scale decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 270-280.
    4. Ardalan Bafahm & Minghe Sun, 2019. "Some Conflicting Results in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 465-486, March.
    5. Milad Bagheri & Zelina Zaiton Ibrahim & Mohd Fadzil Akhir & Wan Izatul Asma Wan Talaat & Bahareh Oryani & Shahabaldin Rezania & Isabelle D. Wolf & Amin Beiranvand Pour, 2021. "Developing a Climate Change Vulnerability Index for Coastal City Sustainability, Mitigation, and Adaptation: A Case Study of Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, November.
    6. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    7. Jicang Xu & Linlin Li & Ming Ren, 2022. "A Hybrid ANP Method for Evaluation of Government Data Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-32, January.
    8. Ho, William & Ma, Xin, 2018. "The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 399-414.
    9. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    10. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2019. "An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Moumita Palchaudhuri & Sujata Biswas, 2016. "Application of AHP with GIS in drought risk assessment for Puruliya district, India," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(3), pages 1905-1920, December.
    12. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    13. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    14. Baghersad, Milad & Zobel, Christopher W., 2015. "Economic impact of production bottlenecks caused by disasters impacting interdependent industry sectors," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 71-80.
    15. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    16. Aniruddh Nain & Deepika Jain & Shivam Gupta & Ashwani Kumar, 2023. "Improving First Responders' Effectiveness in Post-Disaster Scenarios Through a Hybrid Framework for Damage Assessment and Prioritization," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(3), pages 409-437, September.
    17. Fabio De Felice & Laura Petrillo & Luigi Ranieri & Antonella Petrillo, 2019. "Previous Studies and Differences Between Lean Management and World Class Manufacturing," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1941-1966, November.
    18. Gerda Ana Melnik-Leroy & Gintautas Dzemyda, 2021. "How to Influence the Results of MCDM?—Evidence of the Impact of Cognitive Biases," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-25, January.
    19. Iwaro, Joseph & Mwasha, Abrahams & Williams, Rupert G. & Zico, Ricardo, 2014. "An Integrated Criteria Weighting Framework for the sustainable performance assessment and design of building envelope," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 417-434.
    20. P Leskinen & J Kangas, 2005. "Rank reversals in multi-criteria decision analysis with statistical modelling of ratio-scale pairwise comparisons," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(7), pages 855-861, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:214:y:2011:i:3:p:703-715. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.