IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v86y2019icp107-124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection

Author

Listed:
  • Wątróbski, Jarosław
  • Jankowski, Jarosław
  • Ziemba, Paweł
  • Karczmarczyk, Artur
  • Zioło, Magdalena

Abstract

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methods are widely used in various fields and disciplines. While most of the research has been focused on the development and improvement of new MCDA methods, relatively limited attention has been paid to their appropriate selection for the given decision problem. Their improper application decreases the quality of recommendations, as different MCDA methods deliver inconsistent results. The current paper presents a methodological and practical framework for selecting suitable MCDA methods for a particular decision situation. A set of 56 available MCDA methods was analysed and, based on that, a hierarchical set of methods' characteristics and the rule base were obtained. This analysis, rules and modelling of the uncertainty in the decision problem description allowed to build a framework supporting the selection of a MCDA method for a given decision-making situation. The practical studies indicate consistency between the methods recommended with the proposed approach and those used by the experts in reference cases. The results of the research also showed that the proposed approach can be used as a general framework for selecting an appropriate MCDA method for a given area of decision support, even in cases of data gaps in the decision-making problem description. The proposed framework was implemented within a web platform available for public use at www.mcda.it.

Suggested Citation

  • Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:86:y:2019:i:c:p:107-124
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2018.07.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048317308563
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.omega.2018.07.004?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. R. E. Bellman & L. A. Zadeh, 1970. "Decision-Making in a Fuzzy Environment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 141-164, December.
    2. Greco, Salvatore, 1997. "A new PCCA method: IDRA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 587-601, May.
    3. Xu, Bing & Nayak, Amar & Gray, David & Ouenniche, Jamal, 2016. "Assessing energy business cases implemented in the North Sea Region and strategy recommendations," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 360-371.
    4. Macharis, Cathy & De Witte, Astrid & Turcksin, Laurence, 2010. "The Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) application in the Flemish long-term decision making process on mobility and logistics," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 303-311, September.
    5. Constantin Zopounidis & Emilios C. C Galariotis & Michael Doumpos & Stavroula Sarri & Kostas Andriosopoulos, 2015. "Multiple criteria decision aiding for finance: An updated bibliographic survey," Post-Print hal-02879842, HAL.
    6. Buchholz, Thomas & Rametsteiner, Ewald & Volk, Timothy A. & Luzadis, Valerie A., 2009. "Multi Criteria Analysis for bioenergy systems assessments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 484-495, February.
    7. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Popiolek, Nathalie & Thais, Françoise, 2016. "Multi-criteria analysis of innovation policies in favour of solar mobility in France by 2030," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 202-219.
    9. Edwards, Ward & Barron, F. Hutton, 1994. "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 306-325, December.
    10. Chen, Chen-Tung & Lin, Ching-Torng & Huang, Sue-Fn, 2006. "A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 289-301, August.
    11. Streimikiene, Dalia & Baležentis, Tomas & Baležentienė, Ligita, 2013. "Comparative assessment of road transport technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 611-618.
    12. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    13. Fabio De Felice & Antonella Petrillo & Orrin Cooper, 2013. "An integrated conceptual model to promote green policies," International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(4), pages 333-355.
    14. Tsita, Katerina G. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2012. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for the Greek road transport sector using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 677-686.
    15. Bernard Roy, 2005. "Paradigms and Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 3-24, Springer.
    16. Roubens, Marc, 1982. "Preference relations on actions and criteria in multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 51-55, May.
    17. Hinloopen, Edwin & Nijkamp, Peter & Rietveld, Piet, 1983. "Qualitative discrete multiple criteria choice models in regional planning," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 77-102, February.
    18. 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.
    19. Jacquet-Lagreze, Eric & Siskos, Yannis, 2001. "Preference disaggregation: 20 years of MCDA experience," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 233-245, April.
    20. Wang, Xiaoting & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 2008. "Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-63, February.
    21. Stewart, Theodor J., 2010. "Goal directed benchmarking for organizational efficiency," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 534-539, December.
    22. Matarazzo, Benedetto, 1988. "Preference ranking global frequencies in multicriterion analysis ()," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 36-49, July.
    23. Barfod, Michael Bruhn, 2012. "An MCDA approach for the selection of bike projects based on structuring and appraising activities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(3), pages 810-818.
    24. Stewart, Theodor J. & French, Simon & Rios, Jesus, 2013. "Integrating multicriteria decision analysis and scenario planning—Review and extension," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 679-688.
    25. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00874292 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2013. "Multiple Criteria Hierarchy Process with ELECTRE and PROMETHEE," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 820-846.
    27. Jacquet-Lagreze, E. & Siskos, J., 1982. "Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making, the UTA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 151-164, June.
    28. Salminen, Pekka & Hokkanen, Joonas & Lahdelma, Risto, 1998. "Comparing multicriteria methods in the context of environmental problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(3), pages 485-496, February.
    29. Al-Shemmeri, Tarik & Al-Kloub, Bashar & Pearman, Alan, 1997. "Model choice in multicriteria decision aid," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 550-560, March.
    30. Zietsman, Davina & Vanderschuren, Marianne, 2014. "Analytic Hierarchy Process assessment for potential multi-airport systems – The case of Cape Town," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 41-49.
    31. J. H. P. Paelinck, 1976. "Qualitative Multiple Criteria Analysis, Environmental Protection And Multiregional Development," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 59-76, January.
    32. Askoldas Podviezko, 2015. "Use of multiple criteria decision aid methods in case of large amounts of data," International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(2), pages 155-169.
    33. Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Lin, Cheng-Wei & Opricovic, Serafim, 2005. "Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 1373-1383, July.
    34. H Voogd, 1982. "Multicriteria Evaluation with Mixed Qualitative and Quantitative Data," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 9(2), pages 221-236, June.
    35. Doumpos, Michael & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2001. "Assessing financial risks using a multicriteria sorting procedure: the case of country risk assessment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 97-109, February.
    36. Bernard Roy & Roman Slowinski, 2013. "Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method," Post-Print hal-00874292, HAL.
    37. Guitouni, A. & Martel, J.M. & Belanger, M. & Hunter, C., 1999. "Managing a Decision Making Situation in the Context of the Canadian Airspace Protection," Papers 99-021, Laval - Faculte des sciences de administration.
    38. Peter C. Fishburn, 1974. "Exceptional Paper--Lexicographic Orders, Utilities and Decision Rules: A Survey," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(11), pages 1442-1471, July.
    39. Nixon, J.D. & Dey, P.K. & Davies, P.A. & Sagi, S. & Berry, R.F., 2014. "Supply chain optimisation of pyrolysis plant deployment using goal programming," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 262-271.
    40. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    41. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "The analytic hierarchy process with interval preference statements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 177-185.
    42. Sachin K. Patil & Ravi Kant, 2014. "Ranking the barriers of knowledge management adoption in supply chain using fuzzy AHP method," International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 52-75.
    43. Metin Celik & Y. Ilker Topcu, 2009. "Analytical modelling of shipping business processes based on MCDM methods," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(6), pages 469-479, December.
    44. Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1986. "On the problem of weights in multiple criteria decision making (the noncompensatory approach)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 288-294, February.
    45. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    46. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    47. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.
    48. Constantin Zopounidis & Emilios Galariotis & Michael Doumpos & Stavroula Sarri & Kostas Andriosopoulos, 2015. "Multiple criteria decision aiding for finance: An updated bibliographic survey," Post-Print hal-01183389, HAL.
    49. Ferrari, Paolo, 2003. "A method for choosing from among alternative transportation projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(1), pages 194-203, October.
    50. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2017. "A robust ranking method extending ELECTRE III to hierarchy of interacting criteria, imprecise weights and stochastic analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-17.
    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. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    2. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    3. Hatami-Marbini, Adel & Tavana, Madjid, 2011. "An extension of the Electre I method for group decision-making under a fuzzy environment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 373-386, August.
    4. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Eduardo Fernandez & Jorge Navarro & Rafael Olmedo, 2018. "Characterization of the Effectiveness of Several Outranking-Based Multi-Criteria Sorting Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1047-1084, July.
    6. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    7. Liao, Huchang & Wu, Xingli, 2020. "DNMA: A double normalization-based multiple aggregation method for multi-expert multi-criteria decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    8. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    9. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    10. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    11. Arandarenko, Mihail & Corrente, Salvatore & Jandrić, Maja & Stamenković, Mladen, 2020. "Multiple criteria decision aiding as a prediction tool for migration potential of regions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 1154-1166.
    12. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    13. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    14. Roszkowska Ewa & Wachowicz Tomasz, 2019. "The Impact of Decision-Making Profiles on the Consistency of Rankings Obtained by Means of Selected Multiple Criteria Decision-Aiding Methods," Econometrics. Advances in Applied Data Analysis, Sciendo, vol. 23(2), pages 1-14, June.
    15. Arcidiacono, Sally Giuseppe & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2021. "Robust stochastic sorting with interacting criteria hierarchically structured," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(2), pages 735-754.
    16. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    17. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
    18. Katerina Kabassi, 2021. "Comparing Multi-Criteria Decision Making Models for Evaluating Environmental Education Programs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    19. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    20. Martin Kügemann & Heracles Polatidis, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis of Road Transportation Fuels and Vehicles: A Systematic Review and Classification of the Literature," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, 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:eee:jomega:v:86:y:2019:i:c:p:107-124. 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.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.