IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v138y2005i1p97-11110.1007-s10479-005-2447-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Decision-Makers Equalizer: A Multiobjective Decision Support System for Multiple Decision-Makers

Author

Listed:
  • Patricia Jaramillo
  • Ricardo Smith
  • JoaquÍn Andréu

Abstract

In this paper we present a decision support system that helps to solve multiobjective decision problems considering a multi decision-makers framework. By an iterative procedure this system looks for a single solution that satisfies all decision-makers equally. The negotiation process requires that each decision-maker trade certain benefits in some of the objectives being analyzed for benefits in others. Finally a compromise solution should be obtained. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Suggested Citation

  • Patricia Jaramillo & Ricardo Smith & JoaquÍn Andréu, 2005. "Multi-Decision-Makers Equalizer: A Multiobjective Decision Support System for Multiple Decision-Makers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 97-111, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:138:y:2005:i:1:p:97-111:10.1007/s10479-005-2447-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-005-2447-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-005-2447-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-005-2447-0?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. Ronald D. Armstrong & Wade D. Cook & Lawrence M. Seiford, 1982. "Priority Ranking and Consensus Formation: The Case of Ties," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 638-645, June.
    2. Samuel E. Bodily, 1979. "Note--A Delegation Process for Combining Individual Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(10), pages 1035-1041, October.
    3. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    4. Sycara, Katia P., 1990. "Negotiation planning: An AI approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 216-234, May.
    5. Various, 1973. "Conference Programs," NBER Chapters, in: The New Realities of the Business Cycle, pages 126-131, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Rudolf Vetschera & Michael Filzmoser & Ronald Mitterhofer, 2014. "An Analytical Approach to Offer Generation in Concession-Based Negotiation Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 71-99, January.
    2. Anderson Kenji Hirose & Cassius Tadeu Scarpin & José Eduardo Pécora Junior, 2020. "Goal programming approach for political districting in Santa Catarina State: Brazil," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 287(1), pages 209-232, April.
    3. Shivam Gupta & Sachin Modgil & Samadrita Bhattacharyya & Indranil Bose, 2022. "Artificial intelligence for decision support systems in the field of operations research: review and future scope of research," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 308(1), pages 215-274, January.
    4. Po-Lung Yu & Yen-Chu Chen, 2012. "Dynamic multiple criteria decision making in changeable spaces: from habitual domains to innovation dynamics," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 201-220, August.
    5. R. Roozbahani & B. Abbasi & S. Schreider & J. Iversen, 2021. "Dam Location-Allocation under Multiple Hydrological Scenarios," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(3), pages 993-1009, February.
    6. Al-Alawi, Baha M. & Coker, Alexander D., 2018. "Multi-criteria decision support system with negotiation process for vehicle technology selection," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 278-296.
    7. R. Roozbahani & B. Abbasi & S. Schreider, 2015. "Optimal allocation of water to competing stakeholders in a shared watershed," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 229(1), pages 657-676, June.
    8. Reza Roozbahani & Babak Abbasi & Sergei Schreider & Zahra Hosseinifard, 2020. "A basin-wide approach for water allocation and dams location-allocation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 287(1), pages 323-349, April.

    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. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
    2. Jiménez, Mariano & Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar, 2021. "Incorporating preferential weights as a benchmark into a Sequential Reference Point Method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 575-585.
    3. Domenech, B. & Ferrer-Martí, L. & Pastor, R., 2015. "Hierarchical methodology to optimize the design of stand-alone electrification systems for rural communities considering technical and social criteria," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 182-196.
    4. Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar & Cañal-Fernández, Verónica & Antomil-Ibias, José, 2014. "Using TOPSIS for assessing the sustainability of government bond funds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-17.
    5. Saaty, Thomas L. & Shang, Jen S., 2007. "Group decision-making: Head-count versus intensity of preference," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 22-37, March.
    6. Rocco S., Claudio M. & Ramirez-Marquez, Jose Emmanuel, 2012. "Innovative approaches for addressing old challenges in component importance measures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 123-130.
    7. 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.
    8. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    9. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    10. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    11. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    12. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    13. Luis Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Alejandro Alvarado-Iniesta & David Luviano Cruz & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "MOORA under Pythagorean Fuzzy Set for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, April.
    14. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    15. Kumar B, Pradeep, 2021. "Changing Objectives of Firms and Managerial Preferences: A Review of Models in Microeconomics," MPRA Paper 106967, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 13 Mar 2021.
    16. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Anirban Mukhopadhyay & Sugata Hazra & Debasish Mitra & C. Hutton & Abhra Chanda & Sandip Mukherjee, 2016. "Characterizing the multi-risk with respect to plausible natural hazards in the Balasore coast, Odisha, India: a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) appraisal," 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. 80(3), pages 1495-1513, February.
    18. Chamoli, Sunil, 2015. "Hybrid FAHP (fuzzy analytical hierarchy process)-FTOPSIS (fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity of an ideal solution) approach for performance evaluation of the V down perforated baffle r," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 432-442.
    19. H. S. C. Perera & W. K. R. Costa, 2008. "Analytic Hierarchy Process for Selection of Erp Software for Manufacturing Companies," Vision, , vol. 12(4), pages 1-11, October.
    20. G. La Scalia & F.P. Marra & J. Rühl & R. Sciortino & T. Caruso, 2016. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology to optimise olive agro-engineering processes based on geo-spatial technologies," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15.

    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:spr:annopr:v:138:y:2005:i:1:p:97-111:10.1007/s10479-005-2447-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.