IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pkk/meb011/235-246.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Budapest Bridges Benchmarking

Author

Listed:
  • András Farkas

    (Óbuda University Keleti Károly Faculty of Business and Management)

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the comparison of different scaling methods which are applied to a complex bridge evaluation problem. It is shown that both tangible and intangible data and satisfaction of multiple criteria are essential to the success of such projects. Some new inconsistency measures for the matrices emerging in the decision making process are also used. A detailed numerical analysis of the results is presented.

Suggested Citation

  • András Farkas, 2011. "Budapest Bridges Benchmarking," Proceedings- 9th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2011),, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:pkk:meb011:235-246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://kgk.uni-obuda.hu/sites/default/files/17%20Farkas%20Andras.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan Horsky & M. R. Rao, 1984. "Estimation of Attribute Weights from Preference Comparisons," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(7), pages 801-822, July.
    2. Wade D. Cook & Lawrence M. Seiford, 1982. "On the Borda-Kendall Consensus Method for Priority Ranking Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 621-637, June.
    3. Thomas L. Saaty, 1990. "An Exposition of the AHP in Reply to the Paper "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 259-268, March.
    4. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    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. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    2. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
    3. Hsu-Shih Shih, 2016. "A Mixed-Data Evaluation in Group TOPSIS with Differentiated Decision Power," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 537-565, May.
    4. Entani, Tomoe & Sugihara, Kazutomi, 2012. "Uncertainty index based interval assignment by Interval AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(2), pages 379-385.
    5. Calderon-Monge, Esther & Pastor-Sanz, Iván & Sendra-García, Javier, 2021. "How to select franchisees: A model proposal," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 676-684.
    6. Deb Kumar Maity & Sujit Mandal, 2019. "Identification of groundwater potential zones of the Kumari river basin, India: an RS & GIS based semi-quantitative approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 1013-1034, April.
    7. Elliott, Michael A., 2010. "Selecting numerical scales for pairwise comparisons," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 750-763.
    8. Ewa Roszkowska, 2020. "The extention rank ordering criteria weighting methods in fuzzy enviroment," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(2), pages 91-114.
    9. Paul J. Componation & Dawn R. Utley & Robert L. Armacost, 1999. "Prioritizing components of concurrent engineering programs to support new product development," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 168-176.
    10. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Influence of aggregation and measurement scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 700-710, April.
    11. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    12. Rajib Tarani Das & Swades Pal, 2018. "Delineation of potential ground water-bearing zones in the Barind tract of West Bengal, India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 543-567, April.
    13. Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro Gomes & Luís Alberto Duncan Rangel & Gisele Dos Santos, 2016. "An AHP-based asset allocation model," International Journal of Business and Systems Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 78-99.
    14. L. Sun & B. S. Greenberg, 2006. "Multicriteria Group Decision Making: Optimal Priority Synthesis from Pairwise Comparisons," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 317-339, August.
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. Yedla, Sudhakar & Shrestha, Ram M., 2003. "Multi-criteria approach for the selection of alternative options for environmentally sustainable transport system in Delhi," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 717-729, October.
    18. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2008. "A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 1422-1428, June.
    19. Liu, Qizhi, 2022. "Identifying and correcting the defects of the Saaty analytic hierarchy/network process: A comparative study of the Saaty analytic hierarchy/network process and the Markov chain-based analytic network ," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    20. Bentes, Alexandre Veronese & Carneiro, Jorge & da Silva, Jorge Ferreira & Kimura, Herbert, 2012. "Multidimensional assessment of organizational performance: Integrating BSC and AHP," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(12), pages 1790-1799.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pkk:meb011:235-246. 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: Alexandra Vécsey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gkbmfhu.html .

    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.