IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/oprepe/v5y2018icp357-370.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selection of discrete multiple criteria decision making methods in the presence of risk and uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Haddad, Malik
  • Sanders, David

Abstract

This paper presents a new methodology to recommend the most suitable Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method from a subset of candidate methods when risk and uncertainty are anticipated. A structured approach has been created based on an analysis of MCDM problems and methods characteristics. Outcomes of this analysis provide decision makers with a suggested group of candidate methods for their problem. Sensitivity analysis is applied to the suggested group of candidate methods to analyze the robustness of outputs when risk and uncertainty are anticipated. A MCDM method is automatically selected that delivers the most robust outcome. MCDM methods dealing with discrete sets of alternatives are considered. Numerical examples are presented where some MCDM methods are compared and recommended by calculating the minimum percentage change in criteria weights and performance measures required to alter the ranking of any two alternatives. A MCDM method will be recommended based on a best compromise in minimum percentage change required in inputs to alter the ranking of alternatives. Different cases are considered and some new propositions are presented based on potential generalized scenarios of MCDM problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Haddad, Malik & Sanders, David, 2018. "Selection of discrete multiple criteria decision making methods in the presence of risk and uncertainty," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 357-370.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:oprepe:v:5:y:2018:i:c:p:357-370
    DOI: 10.1016/j.orp.2018.10.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214716018302288
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.orp.2018.10.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Bernard Roy & Roman Slowinski, 2013. "Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method," Post-Print hal-00874292, HAL.
    2. Wolters, W. T. M. & Mareschal, B., 1995. "Novel types of sensitivity analysis for additive MCDM methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 281-290, March.
    3. Scholten, Lisa & Schuwirth, Nele & Reichert, Peter & Lienert, Judit, 2015. "Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – An application to water supply infrastructure planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 243-260.
    4. Poyhonen, Mari & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 569-585, March.
    5. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    6. Grechuk, Bogdan & Zabarankin, Michael, 2018. "Direct data-based decision making under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 200-211.
    7. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2011. "An experimental study of the effect of uncertainty representation on decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 380-392, October.
    8. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    9. Miettinen, Kaisa & Salminen, Pekka, 1999. "Decision-aid for discrete multiple criteria decision making problems with imprecise data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 50-60, November.
    10. Simon French, 2003. "Modelling, making inferences and making decisions: The roles of sensitivity analysis," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 11(2), pages 229-251, December.
    11. Theodor J Stewart, 2005. "Dealing with Uncertainties in MCDA," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 445-466, Springer.
    12. Ahti A. Salo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 1992. "Preference Assessment by Imprecise Ratio Statements," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 1053-1061, December.
    13. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid, 2018. "Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 462-471.
    14. Butler, John & Jia, Jianmin & Dyer, James, 1997. "Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 531-546, December.
    15. K. Srinivasa Raju & D. Nagesh Kumar, 2004. "Irrigation Planning using Genetic Algorithms," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 18(2), pages 163-176, April.
    16. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00874292 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Pasura Aungkulanon & Walailak Atthirawong & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2023. "Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process for Strategic Decision Making in Electric Vehicle Adoption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    2. Thi Yen Pham & Gi-Tae Yeo, 2019. "Evaluation of Transshipment Container Terminals’ Service Quality in Vietnam: From the Shipping Companies’ Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, March.
    3. Magdalena Krysiak & Aldona Kluczek, 2021. "A Multifaceted Challenge to Enhance Multicriteria Decision Support for Energy Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.
    4. Kuzyutin, Denis & Smirnova, Nadezhda & Gromova, Ekaterina, 2019. "Long-term implementation of the cooperative solution in a multistage multicriteria game," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    5. Majumdar, Abhijit & Tiwari, Manoj Kumar & Agarwal, Aastha & Prajapat, Kanika, 2021. "A new case of rank reversal in analytic hierarchy process due to aggregation of cost and benefit criteria," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    6. Vaida Zemlickienė & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "Determination of Importance of Key Decision Points in the Technology Commercialization Process: Attitude of the US and German Experts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-13, November.
    7. Shahryar Sorooshian, 2022. "Formulation of a Grey Sequence and an Optimization Solution to Present Multi-Layer Family Networks," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Dayo-Olupona, Oluwatobi & Genc, Bekir & Onifade, Moshood, 2020. "Technology adoption in mining: A multi-criteria method to select emerging technology in surface mines," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    9. Tohidi, Amirhossein & Ghorbani, Mohammad & Karbasi, Ali-Reza & Asgharpourmasouleh, Ahmadreza & Hassani-Mahmooei, Behrooz, 2020. "Comparison of Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods to Rank Business Strategies and Marketing Resources," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 10(3), September.
    10. Vaida Zemlickienė & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "Performance Measurement in R&D Projects: Relevance of Indicators Based on US and German Experts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-15, September.
    11. Arjomandi, Amin & Mortazavi, Seyed Abolghasem & Khalilian, Sadegh & Garizi, Arash Zare, 2021. "Optimal land-use allocation using MCDM and SWAT for the Hablehroud Watershed, Iran," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    12. Haddad, M. & Sanders, D. & Tewkesbury, G., 2020. "Selecting a discrete multiple criteria decision making method for Boeing to rank four global market regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    13. Johanna Vásquez & Sergio Botero, 2020. "Hybrid Methodology to Improve Health Status Utility Values Derivation Using EQ-5D-5L and Advanced Multi-Criteria Techniques," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    14. Betul Yagmahan & Hilal Yılmaz, 2023. "An integrated ranking approach based on group multi-criteria decision making and sensitivity analysis to evaluate charging stations under sustainability," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 96-121, January.
    15. Omrani, Hashem & Valipour, Mahsa & Emrouznejad, Ali, 2021. "A novel best worst method robust data envelopment analysis: Incorporating decision makers’ preferences in an uncertain environment," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    16. Renan Favarão da Silva & Marjorie Maria Bellinello & Gilberto Francisco Martha de Souza & Sara Antomarioni & Maurizio Bevilacqua & Filippo Emanuele Ciarapica, 2021. "Deciding a Multicriteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Method to Prioritize Maintenance Work Orders of Hydroelectric Power Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.

    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. Haddad, M. & Sanders, D. & Tewkesbury, G., 2020. "Selecting a discrete multiple criteria decision making method for Boeing to rank four global market regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    2. Scholten, Lisa & Schuwirth, Nele & Reichert, Peter & Lienert, Judit, 2015. "Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – An application to water supply infrastructure planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 243-260.
    3. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Eduardo Fernandez & Jorge Navarro & Rafael Olmedo, 2018. "Characterization of the Effectiveness of Several Outranking-Based Multi-Criteria Sorting Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1047-1084, July.
    5. Mustajoki, Jyri & Hamalainen, Raimo P. & Lindstedt, Mats R.K., 2006. "Using intervals for global sensitivity and worst-case analyses in multiattribute value trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 278-292, October.
    6. Ram, Camelia, 2020. "Scenario presentation and scenario generation in multi-criteria assessments: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    7. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "A comparison of simplified value function approaches for treating uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 456-464.
    8. Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Passador, João Luiz, 2022. "On the choice of public or private management models in the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    9. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    10. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    11. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    12. Durbach, Ian N., 2014. "Outranking under uncertainty using scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 98-108.
    13. Valentin Bertsch & Wolf Fichtner, 2016. "A participatory multi-criteria approach for power generation and transmission planning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 177-207, October.
    14. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    15. Ichiro Nishizaki & Hideki Katagiri & Tomohiro Hayashida, 2010. "Sensitivity analysis incorporating fuzzy evaluation for scaling constants of multiattribute utility functions," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 18(3), pages 383-396, September.
    16. Roszkowska Ewa & Wachowicz Tomasz, 2019. "The Impact of Decision-Making Profiles on the Consistency of Rankings Obtained by Means of Selected Multiple Criteria Decision-Aiding Methods," Econometrics. Advances in Applied Data Analysis, Sciendo, vol. 23(2), pages 1-14, June.
    17. Kangas, Annika S. & Kangas, Jyrki, 2004. "Probability, possibility and evidence: approaches to consider risk and uncertainty in forestry decision analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 169-188, March.
    18. Haag, Fridolin & Chennu, Arjun, 2023. "Assessing whether decisions are more sensitive to preference or prediction uncertainty with a value of information approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    19. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    20. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.

    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:oprepe:v:5:y:2018:i:c:p:357-370. 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.journals.elsevier.com/operations-research-perspectives .

    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.