IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v316y2022i1d10.1007_s10479-020-03927-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to determine the consensus threshold in group decision making: a method based on efficiency benchmark using benefit and cost insight

Author

Listed:
  • Xiangrui Chao

    (Sichuan University)

  • Yucheng Dong

    (Sichuan University)

  • Gang Kou

    (Southwestern University of Finance and Economics)

  • Yi Peng

    (University of Electronic Science and Technology of China)

Abstract

In the past 10 years, a large number of consensus-reaching approaches for group decision making (GDM) have been proposed. While these methods either focus on the cost of the consensus reaching or the convergency of the consensus process, the consensus efficiency has long been ignored. Meanwhile, the measurements of consensus threshold are often determined by some subjective and intuitive judgements, such as management experience and estimations for the degree of satisfaction, which lack a theoretical foundation. In management applications, how to measure consensus and how to evaluate a consensus reaching method are also ambiguous. To tackle these questions, we introduce efficiency measures into the consensus reaching process of GDM and achieve a comprehensive evaluation of current consensus methods through an efficiency analysis of consensus costs and consensus improvement. From the perspective of efficiency, we propose a benchmark in consensus reaching by data envelopment analysis without explicit input benchmark models, and then present an objective method for consensus threshold determination in GDM. Finally, we use numerical examples to illustrate the usability of our method.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiangrui Chao & Yucheng Dong & Gang Kou & Yi Peng, 2022. "How to determine the consensus threshold in group decision making: a method based on efficiency benchmark using benefit and cost insight," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(1), pages 143-177, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:316:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03927-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-020-03927-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-020-03927-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-020-03927-8?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. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    2. Fan, Zhi-Ping & Ma, Jian & Jiang, Yan-Ping & Sun, Yong-Hong & Ma, Louis, 2006. "A goal programming approach to group decision making based on multiplicative preference relations and fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 311-321, October.
    3. Liu, W.B. & Zhang, D.Q. & Meng, W. & Li, X.X. & Xu, F., 2011. "A study of DEA models without explicit inputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 472-480, October.
    4. Cook, Wade D. & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada & Zhu, Joe, 2017. "Within-group common benchmarking using DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 901-910.
    5. Zhang, Huanhuan & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi, 2019. "Soft consensus cost models for group decision making and economic interpretations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(3), pages 964-980.
    6. Bowen Zhang & Yucheng Dong & Enrique Herrera-Viedma, 2019. "Group Decision Making with Heterogeneous Preference Structures: An Automatic Mechanism to Support Consensus Reaching," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 585-617, June.
    7. Zhang, Hengjie & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Yu, Shui, 2019. "Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 580-598.
    8. Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2016. "Common benchmarking and ranking of units with DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-9.
    9. Cook, Wade D. & Ramón, Nuria & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada & Zhu, Joe, 2019. "DEA-based benchmarking for performance evaluation in pay-for-performance incentive plans," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 45-54.
    10. Yong Liu & Ting Zhou & Jeffrey Yi-Lin Forrest, 2020. "A Multivariate Minimum Cost Consensus Model for Negotiations of Holdout Demolition," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 871-899, October.
    11. Chao, Xiangrui & Kou, Gang & Li, Tie & Peng, Yi, 2018. "Jie Ke versus AlphaGo: A ranking approach using decision making method for large-scale data with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 239-247.
    12. Wang, Ying-Ming & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2007. "A chi-square method for obtaining a priority vector from multiplicative and fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 356-366, October.
    13. Kou, Gang & Ergu, Daji & Shang, Jennifer, 2014. "Enhancing data consistency in decision matrix: Adapting Hadamard model to mitigate judgment contradiction," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(1), pages 261-271.
    14. Ruiz, José L. & Segura, José V. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2015. "Benchmarking and target setting with expert preferences: An application to the evaluation of educational performance of Spanish universities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 594-605.
    15. Cook, Wade D. & Tone, Kaoru & Zhu, Joe, 2014. "Data envelopment analysis: Prior to choosing a model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-4.
    16. Yucheng Dong & Jiuping Xu, 2016. "Consensus Building in Group Decision Making," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-981-287-892-2, December.
    17. Gong, Zaiwu & Xu, Xiaoxia & Zhang, Huanhuan & Aytun Ozturk, U. & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique & Xu, Chao, 2015. "The consensus models with interval preference opinions and their economic interpretation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 81-90.
    18. Gong, Zaiwu & Zhang, Huanhuan & Forrest, Jeffrey & Li, Lianshui & Xu, Xiaoxia, 2015. "Two consensus models based on the minimum cost and maximum return regarding either all individuals or one individual," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 183-192.
    19. Chao, Xiangrui & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Viedma, Enrique Herrera, 2021. "Large-scale group decision-making with non-cooperative behaviors and heterogeneous preferences: An application in financial inclusion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 271-293.
    20. Herrera, F. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Chiclana, F., 2001. "Multiperson decision-making based on multiplicative preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(2), pages 372-385, March.
    21. Liu, Bingsheng & Zhou, Qi & Ding, Ru-Xi & Palomares, Iván & Herrera, Francisco, 2019. "Large-scale group decision making model based on social network analysis: Trust relationship-based conflict detection and elimination," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 737-754.
    22. Yucheng Dong & Cong-Cong Li & Yinfeng Xu & Xin Gu, 2015. "Consensus-Based Group Decision Making Under Multi-granular Unbalanced 2-Tuple Linguistic Preference Relations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 217-242, March.
    23. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    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. Zhou, Yu & Zheng, Ran, 2024. "Capacity-based daily maintenance optimization of urban bus with multi-objective failure priority ranking," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    2. Nikita Moiseev & Alexey Mikhaylov & Hasan Dinçer & Serhat Yüksel, 2023. "Market capitalization shock effects on open innovation models in e-commerce: golden cut q-rung orthopair fuzzy multicriteria decision-making analysis," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.
    3. Wolfgang Kuhle, 2023. "Latency arbitrage and the synchronized placement of orders," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Jana Goers & Graham Horton, 2024. "On the Combinatorial Acceptability Entropy Consensus Metric for Multi-Criteria Group Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 1247-1268, October.

    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. Zhang, Bowen & Dong, Yucheng & Zhang, Hengjie & Pedrycz, Witold, 2020. "Consensus mechanism with maximum-return modifications and minimum-cost feedback: A perspective of game theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(2), pages 546-559.
    2. Chao, Xiangrui & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Viedma, Enrique Herrera, 2021. "Large-scale group decision-making with non-cooperative behaviors and heterogeneous preferences: An application in financial inclusion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 271-293.
    3. Cook, Wade D. & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada & Zhu, Joe, 2017. "Within-group common benchmarking using DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 901-910.
    4. Ramón, Nuria & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2020. "Cross-benchmarking for performance evaluation: Looking across best practices of different peer groups using DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    5. Cheng, Dong & Yuan, Yuxiang & Wu, Yong & Hao, Tiantian & Cheng, Faxin, 2022. "Maximum satisfaction consensus with budget constraints considering individual tolerance and compromise limit behaviors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 221-238.
    6. Monge, Juan F. & Ruiz, José L., 2023. "Setting closer targets based on non-dominated convex combinations of Pareto-efficient units: A bi-level linear programming approach in Data Envelopment Analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 1084-1096.
    7. Du, Junliang & Liu, Sifeng & Liu, Yong, 2022. "A limited cost consensus approach with fairness concern and its application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 261-275.
    8. Li, Yanhong & Kou, Gang & Li, Guangxu & Peng, Yi, 2022. "Consensus reaching process in large-scale group decision making based on bounded confidence and social network," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(2), pages 790-802.
    9. Cook, Wade D. & Ramón, Nuria & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada & Zhu, Joe, 2019. "DEA-based benchmarking for performance evaluation in pay-for-performance incentive plans," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 45-54.
    10. Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2019. "Performance evaluation through DEA benchmarking adjusted to goals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 150-157.
    11. Gong, Zaiwu & Guo, Weiwei & Słowiński, Roman, 2021. "Transaction and interaction behavior-based consensus model and its application to optimal carbon emission reduction," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    12. Wu, Zhibin & Huang, Shuai & Xu, Jiuping, 2019. "Multi-stage optimization models for individual consistency and group consensus with preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 182-194.
    13. Zhang, Hengjie & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Yu, Shui, 2019. "Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 580-598.
    14. Jana Goers & Graham Horton, 2024. "On the Combinatorial Acceptability Entropy Consensus Metric for Multi-Criteria Group Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 1247-1268, October.
    15. Benítez-Peña, Sandra & Bogetoft, Peter & Romero Morales, Dolores, 2020. "Feature Selection in Data Envelopment Analysis: A Mathematical Optimization approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    16. Sha Fan & Hengjie Zhang & Huali Tang, 2019. "A Linguistic Hierarchy Model with Self-Confidence Preference Relations and Its Application in Co-Regulation of Food Safety in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-21, August.
    17. Peng Wu & Jinpei Liu & Ligang Zhou & Huayou Chen, 2022. "An Integrated Group Decision-Making Method with Hesitant Qualitative Information Based on DEA Cross-Efficiency and Priority Aggregation for Evaluating Factors Affecting a Resilient City," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 293-316, April.
    18. Xiao Tan & Jianjun Zhu & Tong Wu, 2022. "Dynamic Reference Point-Oriented Consensus Mechanism in Linguistic Distribution Group Decision Making Restricted by Quantum Integration of Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 491-528, April.
    19. Guo, Weiwei & Gong, Zaiwu & Zhang, Wei-Guo & Xu, Yanxin, 2023. "Minimum cost consensus modeling under dynamic feedback regulation mechanism considering consensus principle and tolerance level," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(3), pages 1279-1295.
    20. Ji, Zhiyong & Wu, Xianhua & Chen, Xueli & Zhou, Wenzhuo & Song, Malin, 2023. "Finding green performance targets globally closest to management goals for ports experiencing similar circumstances," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).

    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:316:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03927-8. 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.