IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v180y2022ics0040162522002451.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Dempster-Shafer-theory-based entry screening mechanism for small and medium-sized enterprises under uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Wu, Xingli
  • Liao, Huchang

Abstract

The evaluation of star-up small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is an important part of ensuring the success of development, but it is not an easy task because of the multiple criteria to be considered and uncertainties caused by incomplete decision information, limited individual perceptions and differences in perceptions of experts. By integrating Dempster-Shafer theory into a probabilistic linguistic setting that takes into account the uncertainties in the evaluation process by combining linguistic terms with subjective probabilities, this study proposes a multi-criteria decision-making model for the management of SMEs. We incorporate different decision factors regarding (a) the risk attitude of decision makers, (b) the relative importance of criteria, (c) the unreliability and incompleteness of evaluation on alternatives in one preference model of multi-criteria decision making. The applicability of the proposed preference model is validated by a case study of the entry screening of SMEs for business incubators. Through comparative analysis and sensitive analysis, the reliability of the proposed model is verified, which can not only express uncertain evaluation information, but also avoid information loss and defuzzification in the aggregation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Wu, Xingli & Liao, Huchang, 2022. "A Dempster-Shafer-theory-based entry screening mechanism for small and medium-sized enterprises under uncertainty," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:180:y:2022:i:c:s0040162522002451
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162522002451
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121719?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. Amoozad Mahdiraji, Hannan & Sedigh, Maryam & Razavi Hajiagha, Seyed Hossein & Garza-Reyes, Jose Arturo & Jafari-Sadeghi, Vahid & Dana, Leo-Paul, 2021. "A novel time, cost, quality and risk tradeoff model with a knowledge-based hesitant fuzzy information: An R&D project application," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    2. Martel, Jean-Marc & D'Avignon, Gilles R. & Couillard, Jean, 1986. "A fuzzy outranking relation in multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 258-271, May.
    3. Machina, Mark J & Schmeidler, David, 1992. "A More Robust Definition of Subjective Probability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 745-780, July.
    4. Yalcin, Ahmet Selcuk & Kilic, Huseyin Selcuk & Delen, Dursun, 2022. "The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in business analytics: A comprehensive literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    5. Huchang Liao & Xiaomei Mi & Zeshui Xu, 2020. "A survey of decision-making methods with probabilistic linguistic information: bibliometrics, preliminaries, methodologies, applications and future directions," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 81-134, March.
    6. Stekelorum, Rebecca & Laguir, Issam & ElBaz, Jamal, 2020. "Can you hear the Eco? From SME environmental responsibility to social requirements in the supply chain," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    7. Ran Fang & Huchang Liao & Jian-Bo Yang & Dong-Ling Xu, 2021. "Generalised probabilistic linguistic evidential reasoning approach for multi-criteria decision-making under uncertainty," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(1), pages 130-144, January.
    8. James R. Lumpkin & R. Duane Ireland, 1988. "Screening Practices of New Business Incubators: The Evaluation of Critical Success Factors," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 12(4), pages 59-81, April.
    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. Yanan Zhang & Xinmin Liu & Liu Fan, 2022. "Understanding Incubated Startups’ Continuance Intention towards Entrepreneurial Incubation Platforms: Empirical Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Zhang, Dongna & Zhao, Zuoxiang & Lau, Chi Keung Marco, 2022. "Sovereign ESG and corporate investment: New insights from the United Kingdom," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    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. Wu, Xingli & Liao, Huchang, 2023. "Value-driven preference disaggregation analysis for uncertain preference information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    2. Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon, 2007. "Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 538-567, November.
    3. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    4. Jewitt, Ian & Mukerji, Sujoy, 2017. "Ordering ambiguous acts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 213-267.
    5. Yaron Azrieli & Christopher P. Chambers & Paul J. Healy, 2020. "Incentives in experiments with objective lotteries," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 1-29, March.
    6. Itzhak Gilboa & Offer Lieberman & David Schmeidler, 2012. "On the Definition of Objective Probabilities by Empirical Similarity," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Case-Based Predictions An Axiomatic Approach to Prediction, Classification and Statistical Learning, chapter 11, pages 259-280, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Wu, Xingli & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "Modeling personalized cognition of customers in online shopping," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    8. Yoram Halevy & Vincent Feltkamp, 2005. "A Bayesian Approach to Uncertainty Aversion," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(2), pages 449-466.
    9. Fleurbaey, Marc & Zuber, Stéphane, 2017. "Fair management of social risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 666-706.
    10. Sungur, Onur & Dulupçu, Murat Ali, 2013. "İşletme Kuluçkaları ve Bölgesel Kalkınma: Kavramsal Çerçeve ve Literatür Bulguları [Business Incubators and Regional Development: Conceptual Framework and Findings from the Literature]," MPRA Paper 51833, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Simone Cerroni & Sandra Notaro & W. Douglass Shaw, 2011. "Do Monetary Incentives and Chained Questions Affect the Validity of Risk Estimates Elicited via the Exchangeability Method? An Experimental Investigation," Department of Economics Working Papers 1110, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    12. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    13. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Mandakovic, Tomislav & Gupta, Sushil K. & Sahay, Sundeep & Hong, Sungwan, 1995. "A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, March.
    14. Riddel, Mary C. & Shaw, W. Douglass, 2006. "A Theoretically-Consistent Empirical Non-Expected Utility Model of Ambiguity: Nuclear Waste Mortality Risk and Yucca Mountain," Pre-Prints 23964, Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    15. Adam Dominiak & Wendelin Schnedler, 2011. "Attitudes toward uncertainty and randomization: an experimental study," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 289-312, October.
    16. John Quiggin, 2022. "Production under uncertainty and choice under uncertainty in the emergence of generalized expected utility theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 717-729, April.
    17. Klaus Nehring, 2006. "Decision-Making in the Context of Imprecise Probabilistic Beliefs," Economics Working Papers 0034, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    18. Grant, S. & Quiggin, J., 2001. "A Model-Free Definition of Increasing Uncertainty," Discussion Paper 2001-84, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    19. Sven Neth, 2023. "Better Foundations for Subjective Probability," Papers 2312.09796, arXiv.org.
    20. Amit Kothiyal & Vitalie Spinu & Peter Wakker, 2014. "An experimental test of prospect theory for predicting choice under ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 1-17, February.

    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:tefoso:v:180:y:2022:i:c:s0040162522002451. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.