IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i6p2315-d333072.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selecting a Public Service Outsourcer Based on the Improved ELECTRE II Method with Unknown Weight Information under a Double Hierarchy Hesitant Linguistic Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Zhengmin Liu

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Xiaolan Zhao

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Lin Li

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Xinya Wang

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Di Wang

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Peide Liu

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

Abstract

In present-day society, government public service outsourcing has become an irreversible trend due to the gradually increasing public pursuit of service quality and efficiency. To better meet the needs of the public and effectively improve the quality of service, it has been a crucial issue for government departments to choose the most desirable one from a series of public service outsourcers (PSOs) with distinct characteristics. In this paper, to deal with such decision problems, we propose the improved elimination and choice translating reality (ELECTRE) II method with unknown weight information under the double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic (DHHFL) environment to accurately and effectively select the best PSO. Firstly, aiming at the shortcomings of the original comparison method for double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic elements (DHHFLEs), we define the hesitant deviation degree (HDD) for DHHFLEs and, based on this, further propose a new comparison method for comparing DHHFLEs more reasonably. Secondly, inspired by the classical power average (PA) operator proposed by Yager, a new method is introduced to determine the weights of experts with respect to each attribute, based on the support degree between attributes. Afterwards, an improved ELECTRE II method is proposed to address the problem of PSO selection. A numerical case about e-government outsourcer selection is given to demonstrate the enforceability of the method. Finally, comparisons between previous methods and our method are carried out to illustrate the effectiveness and strengths of the proposed method.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhengmin Liu & Xiaolan Zhao & Lin Li & Xinya Wang & Di Wang & Peide Liu, 2020. "Selecting a Public Service Outsourcer Based on the Improved ELECTRE II Method with Unknown Weight Information under a Double Hierarchy Hesitant Linguistic Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-34, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2315-:d:333072
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2315/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2315/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gunjan Yadav & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Sunil Luthra & Suresh Jakhar, 2018. "Hybrid BWM-ELECTRE-based decision framework for effective offshore outsourcing adoption: a case study," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(18), pages 6259-6278, September.
    2. Hassan Hashemi & Seyed Meysam Mousavi & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Alireza Chalekaee & Zenonas Turskis, 2018. "A New Group Decision Model Based on Grey-Intuitionistic Fuzzy-ELECTRE and VIKOR for Contractor Assessment Problem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Rosa Micale & Antonio Giallanza & Giuseppe Russo & Giada La Scalia, 2017. "Selection of a Sustainable Functional Pasta Enriched with Opuntia Using ELECTRE III Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Chun-Chin Wei & Yung-Lung Cheng & Kuo-Liang Lee, 2019. "How to select suitable manufacturing information system outsourcing projects by using TOPSIS method," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(13), pages 4333-4350, July.
    5. JinHyo Joseph Yun & DongKyu Won & KyungBae Park, 2018. "Entrepreneurial cyclical dynamics of open innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 1151-1174, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Spaniol, Matthew J. & Rowland, Nicholas J., 2022. "Business ecosystems and the view from the future: The use of corporate foresight by stakeholders of the Ro-Ro shipping ecosystem in the Baltic Sea Region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Ye Jin Lee & Kwangsoo Shin & Eungdo Kim, 2019. "The Influence of a Firm’s Capability and Dyadic Relationship of the Knowledge Base on Ambidextrous Innovation in Biopharmaceutical M&As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    4. Dávid Szakos & László Ózsvári & Gyula Kasza, 2020. "Perception of Older Adults about Health-Related Functionality of Foods Compared with Other Age Groups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Runhui Lin & Yuan Gui & Zaiyang Xie & Lu Liu, 2019. "Green Governance and International Business Strategies of Emerging Economies’ Multinational Enterprises: A Multiple-Case Study of Chinese Firms in Pollution-Intensive Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-32, February.
    6. Huanhuan Zhao & Yunbo Yu & Sunping Qu & Yong Liu, 2022. "A Grey Incidence Based Group Decision-Making Approach and Its Application," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-13, March.
    7. Zydrune Morkunaite & Romualdas Bausys & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2019. "Contractor Selection for Sgraffito Decoration of Cultural Heritage Buildings Using the WASPAS-SVNS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-25, November.
    8. JinHyo Joseph Yun & Xiaofei Zhao & KwangHo Jung & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2020. "The Culture for Open Innovation Dynamics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, June.
    9. Rudimar Caricimi & Géremi Gilson Dranka & Dalmarino Setti & Paula Ferreira, 2022. "Reframing the Selection of Hydraulic Turbines Integrating Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Fuzzy VIKOR Multi-Criteria Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-26, October.
    10. Roman Roaljdovich Sidorchuk & Anastasia Vladimirovna Lukina & Sergey Vladimirovich Mkhitaryan & Irina Ivanovna Skorobogatykh & Anastasia Alexeevna Stukalova, 2021. "Local Resident Attitudes to the Sustainable Development of Urban Public Transport System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    11. Yun, JinHyo Joseph & Ahn, Heung Ju & Lee, Doo Seok & Park, Kyung Bae & Zhao, Xiaofei, 2022. "Inter-rationality; Modeling of bounded rationality in open innovation dynamics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Lei Huang & Yandong Zhao & Liang Mei & Peiyi Wu & Zhihua Zhao & Yijun Mao, 2019. "Structural Holes in the Multi-Sided Market: A Market Allocation Structure Analysis of China’s Car-Hailing Platform in the Context of Open Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-20, October.
    13. van de Kaa, G. & Fens, T. & Rezaei, J. & Kaynak, D. & Hatun, Z. & Tsilimeni-Archangelidi, A., 2019. "Realizing smart meter connectivity: Analyzing the competing technologies Power line communication, mobile telephony, and radio frequency using the best worst method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 320-327.
    14. Wu, Qun & Liu, Xinwang & Zhou, Ligang & Qin, Jindong & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "An analytical framework for the best–worst method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    15. Christina Moulogianni & Thomas Bournaris, 2017. "Biomass Production from Crops Residues: Ranking of Agro-Energy Regions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, July.
    16. Adriana DIMA, 2021. "The Importance of Innovation in Entrepreneurship for Economic Growth and Development. A Bibliometric Analysis," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(1), pages 120-131, January.
    17. Asad Mahmoudian Azar Sharabiani & Seyed Meysam Mousavi, 2023. "A Web-Based Decision Support System for Project Evaluation with Sustainable Development Considerations Based on Two Developed Pythagorean Fuzzy Decision Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-31, December.
    18. Luca Grilli & Sergio Mariotti & Riccardo Marzano, 2024. "Artificial intelligence and shapeshifting capitalism," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 303-318, April.
    19. Yubo Guo & Igor Martek & Chuan Chen, 2019. "Policy Evolution in the Chinese PPP Market: The Shifting Strategies of Governmental Support Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2315-:d:333072. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.