IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v12y2024i5p680-d1346158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Approach Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets for Considering Stakeholders’ Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and Hesitation in Software Features Prioritization

Author

Listed:
  • Vassilis C. Gerogiannis

    (Department of Digital Systems, University of Thessaly, 41500 Larissa, Greece)

  • Dimitrios Tzimos

    (Department of Digital Systems, University of Thessaly, 41500 Larissa, Greece)

  • George Kakarontzas

    (Department of Digital Systems, University of Thessaly, 41500 Larissa, Greece)

  • Eftychia Tsoni

    (Department of Informatics, Open Hellenic University, 26335 Patras, Greece)

  • Omiros Iatrellis

    (Department of Digital Systems, University of Thessaly, 41500 Larissa, Greece)

  • Le Hoang Son

    (VNU Information Technology Institute, Vietnam National University, Hanoi 03000, Vietnam)

  • Andreas Kanavos

    (Department of Informatics, Ionian University, 49100 Corfu, Greece)

Abstract

This paper introduces a semi-automated approach for the prioritization of software features in medium- to large-sized software projects, considering stakeholders’ satisfaction and dissatisfaction as key criteria for the incorporation of candidate features. Our research acknowledges an inherent asymmetry in stakeholders’ evaluations, between the satisfaction from offering certain features and the dissatisfaction from not offering the same features. Even with systematic, ordinal scale-based prioritization techniques, involved stakeholders may exhibit hesitation and uncertainty in their assessments. Our approach aims to address these challenges by employing the Binary Search Tree prioritization method and leveraging the mathematical framework of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets to quantify the uncertainty of stakeholders when expressing assessments on the value of software features. Stakeholders’ rankings, considering satisfaction and dissatisfaction as features prioritization criteria, are mapped into Intuitionistic Fuzzy Numbers, and objective weights are automatically computed. Rankings associated with less hesitation are considered more valuable to determine the final features’ priorities than those rankings with more hesitation, reflecting lower indeterminacy or lack of knowledge from stakeholders. We validate our proposed approach with a case study, illustrating its application, and conduct a comparative analysis with existing software requirements prioritization methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Vassilis C. Gerogiannis & Dimitrios Tzimos & George Kakarontzas & Eftychia Tsoni & Omiros Iatrellis & Le Hoang Son & Andreas Kanavos, 2024. "An Approach Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets for Considering Stakeholders’ Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and Hesitation in Software Features Prioritization," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-36, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:5:p:680-:d:1346158
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/5/680/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/5/680/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ye, Jun, 2010. "Fuzzy decision-making method based on the weighted correlation coefficient under intuitionistic fuzzy environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(1), pages 202-204, August.
    2. Ma, Jian & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Huang, Li-Hua, 1999. "A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 397-404, January.
    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. Xu, Xiaozhan, 2004. "A note on the subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 530-532, July.
    2. Wen Fan & Qing Liu & Mingyu Wang, 2021. "Bi-Level Multi-Objective Optimization Scheduling for Regional Integrated Energy Systems Based on Quantum Evolutionary Algorithm," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-15, August.
    3. Armando Silva & Zbigniew Korzeb & Pawe? Niedzió?ka, 2021. "Impact of the COVID-19 crisis on the Portuguese banking system. Linear ordering method," Estudios Gerenciales, Universidad Icesi, vol. 37(159), pages 226-241, June.
    4. Cheng Peng & Xunbo Wu & Yelin Fu & Kin Keung Lai, 2017. "Alternative approaches to constructing composite indicators: an application to construct a Sustainable Energy Index for APEC economies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 747-759, October.
    5. Audrius Čereška & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ina Tetsman & Irina Grinbergienė, 2016. "Sustainable Assessment of Aerosol Pollution Decrease Applying Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-12, June.
    6. Pei Dang & Zhanwen Niu & Shang Gao & Lei Hou & Guomin Zhang, 2020. "Critical Factors Influencing the Sustainable Construction Capability in Prefabrication of Chinese Construction Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Wang, Yujie & Chen, Hong & Long, Ruyin & Liu, Bei & Jiang, Shiyan & Yang, Xingxing & Yang, Menghua, 2021. "Evaluating green development level of mineral resource-listed companies: Based on a “dark green” assessment framework," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Rađenović Žarko & Veselinović Ivana, 2017. "Integrated AHP-TOPSIS Method for the Assessment of Health Management Information Systems Efficiency," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 55(1), pages 121-142, March.
    9. Elzbieta Ociepa-Kicinska & Rafal Czyzycki & Piotr Szklarz & Rafal Kloska, 2021. "Impact of EU Funds on the Level of Regional Socio-Economic Development: The Case of Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2B), pages 328-362.
    10. Saeid Alaei & Seyed Hossein Razavi Hajiagha & Hannan Amoozad Mahdiraji & Jose Arturo Garza-Reyes, 2023. "Unveiling the role of sustainable supply chain drivers toward knowledge-based economy via a novel permutation approach: implications from an emerging economy," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 1231-1250, September.
    11. Zehai Gao & Yang Liu & Nan Li & Kangjie Ma, 2022. "An Enhanced Beetle Antennae Search Algorithm Based Comprehensive Water Quality Index for Urban River Water Quality Assessment," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 36(8), pages 2685-2702, June.
    12. Feng, Jianghong & Xu, Su Xiu & Xu, Gangyan & Cheng, Huibing, 2022. "An integrated decision-making method for locating parking centers of recyclable waste transportation vehicles," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    13. Yi Zhang & Yao Xu & Hao Kong & Gang Zhou, 2022. "Spatial-Temporal Evolution of Coupling Coordination between Green Transformation and the Quality of Economic Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Yang, Chih-Ching, 2016. "Correlation coefficient evaluation for the fuzzy interval data," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 2138-2144.
    15. Shouzhen Zeng, 2013. "Some Intuitionistic Fuzzy Weighted Distance Measures and Their Application to Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 281-298, March.
    16. Zhang, Zhi-Gang & Hu, Xiao & Liu, Zhao-Ting & Zhao, Lu-Tao, 2021. "Multi-attribute decision making: An innovative method based on the dynamic credibility of experts," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 393(C).
    17. Marianela Carrillo, 2022. "Measuring Progress towards Sustainability in the European Union within the 2030 Agenda Framework," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-23, June.
    18. Alaa Alden Al Mohamed & Sobhi Al Mohamed & Moustafa Zino, 2023. "Application of fuzzy multicriteria decision-making model in selecting pandemic hospital site," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, December.
    19. Hassan Hashemi & Jalal Bazargan & S. Mousavi, 2013. "A Compromise Ratio Method with an Application to Water Resources Management: An Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(7), pages 2029-2051, May.
    20. Apichit Maneengam, 2023. "Multi-Objective Optimization of the Multimodal Routing Problem Using the Adaptive ε-Constraint Method and Modified TOPSIS with the D-CRITIC Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, August.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:5:p:680-:d:1346158. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.