IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

A flexible approach to ranking with an application to MBA Programs

Listed author(s):
  • Köksalan, Murat
  • Büyükbasaran, Tayyar
  • Özpeynirci, Özgür
  • Wallenius, Jyrki

We develop a model for flexibly ranking multi-dimensional alternatives/units into preference classes via Mixed Integer Programming. We consider a linear aggregation model, but allow the criterion weights to vary within pre-specified ranges. This allows the individual alternatives/units to play to their strengths. We illustrate the use of the model by considering the Financial Times Global MBA Program rankings and discuss the implications. We argue that in many applications neither the data nor the weights or the aggregation model itself is precise enough to warrant a complete ranking, providing an argument for sorting or what we call flexible ranking.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal European Journal of Operational Research.

Volume (Year): 201 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
Pages: 470-476

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:201:y:2010:i:2:p:470-476
Contact details of provider: Web page:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

in new window

  1. Ralph E. Steuer, 1976. "Multiple Objective Linear Programming with Interval Criterion Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 305-316, November.
  2. Arbel, Ami & Vargas, Luis G., 1993. "Preference simulation and preference programming: robustness issues in priority derivation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 200-209, September.
  3. Katrin Borcherding & Thomas Eppel & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1991. "Comparison of Weighting Judgments in Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(12), pages 1603-1619, December.
  4. Cook, Wade D., 2006. "Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(2), pages 369-385, July.
  5. Zopounidis, Constantin & Doumpos, Michael, 2002. "Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 229-246, April.
  6. Adler, Nicole & Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2002. "Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 249-265, July.
  7. Zopounidis, Constantin, 2002. "MCDA methodologies for classification and sorting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 227-228, April.
  8. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
  9. Ray, Subhash C. & Jeon, Yongil, 2008. "Reputation and efficiency: A non-parametric assessment of America's top-rated MBA programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 245-268, August.
  10. Mustajoki, Jyri & Hamalainen, Raimo P. & Lindstedt, Mats R.K., 2006. "Using intervals for global sensitivity and worst-case analyses in multiattribute value trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 278-292, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:201:y:2010:i:2:p:470-476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.