IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v35y2007i4p384-388.html

Applying consistent fuzzy preference relations to partnership selection

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Tien-Chin
  • Chen, Yueh-Hsiang

Abstract

Partnership selection has been important to the formation of a virtual enterprise. Based on the fuzzy preference programming (FPP) method proposed by Mikhailov [Fuzzy analytical approach to partnership selection in formation of virtual enterprises. Omega 2002;30:393-401], this investigation presents a consistent fuzzy preference relations method to select partners. Human thoughts are full of uncertainty, so the decision-makers cannot make exact pairwise comparisons. The FPP method solves this problem using an interval value instead of Saaty's 1-9 scale. In this study, the FPP method is reviewed, and then the consistent fuzzy preference relations method is elucidated. Finally, the presented method is applied to the example addressed by Mikhailov [Fuzzy analytical approach to partnership selection in formation of virtual enterprises. Omega 2002;30:393-401]. This study reveals that the proposed method yields consistent decision rankings from only n-1 pairwise comparisons--the same number as in Mikhailov's research. Briefly, the presented consistent fuzzy preference relations method is an easy and practical way to provide rankings of partnership in making decision.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Tien-Chin & Chen, Yueh-Hsiang, 2007. "Applying consistent fuzzy preference relations to partnership selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 384-388, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:35:y:2007:i:4:p:384-388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(05)00097-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mikhailov, L., 2002. "Fuzzy analytical approach to partnership selection in formation of virtual enterprises," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 393-401, October.
    2. L Mikhailov, 2000. "A fuzzy programming method for deriving priorities in the analytic hierarchy process," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(3), pages 341-349, March.
    3. Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F. & Chiclana, F. & Luque, M., 2004. "Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(1), pages 98-109, April.
    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. Tsuen-Ho Hsu & Li-Chu Hung & Jia-Wei Tang, 2012. "An analytical model for building brand equity in hospitality firms," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 355-378, May.
    2. Johanna Vásquez & Sergio Botero, 2020. "Hybrid Methodology to Improve Health Status Utility Values Derivation Using EQ-5D-5L and Advanced Multi-Criteria Techniques," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Raman Kumar Goyal & Sakshi Kaushal, 2018. "Deriving crisp and consistent priorities for fuzzy AHP-based multicriteria systems using non-linear constrained optimization," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 195-209, June.
    4. Alessandro Marra & Vittorio Carlei & Cristiano Baldassari, 2020. "Exploring networks of proximity for partner selection, firms' collaboration and knowledge exchange. The case of clean‐tech industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1034-1044, March.
    5. Yu, Jing-Rung & Cheng, Sheu-Ji, 2007. "An integrated approach for deriving priorities in analytic network process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(3), pages 1427-1432, August.
    6. Jia-Wei Tang & Tsuen-Ho Hsu, 2018. "Utilizing the Hierarchy Structural Fuzzy Analytical Network Process Model to Evaluate Critical Elements of Marketing Strategic Alliance Development in Mobile Telecommunication Industry," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 251-284, April.
    7. Bice Cavallo, 2019. "Coherent weights for pairwise comparison matrices and a mixed-integer linear programming problem," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 143-161, September.
    8. Pasura Aungkulanon & Walailak Atthirawong & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon & Wirachchaya Chanpuypetch, 2024. "Navigating Supply Chain Resilience: A Hybrid Approach to Agri-Food Supplier Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-42, May.
    9. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Paul Tae-Woo Lee & Cheng-Wei Lin & Yi-Shih Chung, 2014. "Comparison analysis for subjective and objective weights of financial positions of container shipping companies," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 241-250, May.
    12. Llamazares, Bonifacio & Pérez-Asurmendi, Patrizia, 2013. "Triple-acyclicity in majorities based on difference in support," MPRA Paper 52218, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Zhou-Jing Wang & Yuhong Wang & Kevin W. Li, 2016. "An Acceptable Consistency-Based Framework for Group Decision Making with Intuitionistic Preference Relations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 181-202, January.
    14. Lundy, Michele & Siraj, Sajid & Greco, Salvatore, 2017. "The mathematical equivalence of the “spanning tree” and row geometric mean preference vectors and its implications for preference analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 197-208.
    15. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2016. "Hesitant analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 602-614.
    16. Fu, Chao & Yang, Shanlin, 2012. "An evidential reasoning based consensus model for multiple attribute group decision analysis problems with interval-valued group consensus requirements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 167-176.
    17. Olga Porro & Francesc Pardo-Bosch & Núria Agell & Mónica Sánchez, 2020. "Understanding Location Decisions of Energy Multinational Enterprises within the European Smart Cities’ Context: An Integrated AHP and Extended Fuzzy Linguistic TOPSIS Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-29, May.
    18. Hamed Nozari & Esmaeil Najafi & Mohammad Fallah & Farhad Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, 2019. "Quantitative Analysis of Key Performance Indicators of Green Supply Chain in FMCG Industries Using Non-Linear Fuzzy Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-19, October.
    19. Wang, Ying-Ming & Parkan, Celik, 2008. "Optimal aggregation of fuzzy preference relations with an application to broadband internet service selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 1476-1486, June.
    20. Yulan Wang & Huayou Chen & Ligang Zhou, 2013. "Logarithm Compatibility of Interval Multiplicative Preference Relations with an Application to Determining the Optimal Weights of Experts in the Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 759-772, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:eee:jomega:v:35:y:2007:i:4:p:384-388. 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.