IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i22p10130-d1793258.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Decision-Making in Higher Education: An AHP-NWA Framework for Evaluating Learning Management Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Veljić

    (Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance, University Business Academy in Novi Sad, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
    Faculty of Technical Sciences in Čačak, University of Kragujevac, 32000 Čačak, Serbia)

  • Dejan Viduka

    (Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, University Alfa BK, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Luka Ilić

    (Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance, University Business Academy in Novi Sad, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Darjan Karabasevic

    (Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance, University Business Academy in Novi Sad, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
    Department of Mathematics, Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai 602105, Tamil Nadu, India
    College of Global Business, Korea University, Sejong 30019, Republic of Korea)

  • Aleksandar Šijan

    (Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance, University Business Academy in Novi Sad, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Miloš Papić

    (Faculty of Technical Sciences in Čačak, University of Kragujevac, 32000 Čačak, Serbia)

Abstract

This paper applies a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model that integrates the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for structured weighting of evaluation criteria with the Net Worth Analysis (NWA) method for value-based aggregation of scores. The proposed framework was employed to evaluate Learning Management Systems (LMS) in higher education, involving two independent expert panels representing management and IT perspectives. Results of the AHP analysis show that cost (28%), security (22%), and usability (17%) are the most influential criteria in the decision-making process, reflecting institutional priorities for financial efficiency, safety and ease of use. Based on the combined AHP-NWA model, Moodle 4.3 emerged as the most sustainable choice (0.586), followed by Atutor 2.2.1 (0.541) and Blackboard (SaaS edition) (0.490). The inclusion of sensitivity and scenario analyses confirmed the robustness of the model, demonstrating that the ranking of alternatives remains stable under variations in weighting factors and different strategic priorities. By framing LMS evaluation within the context of sustainable digital transformation, the study emphasizes how transparent and systematic decision-making supports long-term institutional resilience and aligns with the principles of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). In addition, the framework contributes to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education), by guiding higher education institutions toward inclusive, resilient and cost-effective digital solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Veljić & Dejan Viduka & Luka Ilić & Darjan Karabasevic & Aleksandar Šijan & Miloš Papić, 2025. "Sustainable Decision-Making in Higher Education: An AHP-NWA Framework for Evaluating Learning Management Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-18, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:22:p:10130-:d:1793258
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/22/10130/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/22/10130/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:22:p:10130-:d:1793258. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.