IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v28y1982i6p621-637.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Borda-Kendall Consensus Method for Priority Ranking Problems

Author

Listed:
  • Wade D. Cook

    (York University)

  • Lawrence M. Seiford

    (University of Texas, Austin)

Abstract

This paper investigates the Borda-Kendall method for the determination of a consensus ranking. It is shown that in the case of ties the method does not perform as claimed. A "minimum variance" method for determining the consensus ranking is proposed and its properties examined. It is shown to be equivalent to the Borda-Kendall method if ties are not allowed. An algorithm to determine the "minimum variance" consensus ranking in the case of ties is described. Results obtained from the solution of problems of various sizes are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Wade D. Cook & Lawrence M. Seiford, 1982. "On the Borda-Kendall Consensus Method for Priority Ranking Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 621-637, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:28:y:1982:i:6:p:621-637
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.28.6.621
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. G. Laffond & J. Lainé, 2013. "Unanimity and the Anscombe’s paradox," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 21(3), pages 590-611, October.
    2. Hanna Bury & Dariusz Wagner, 2009. "Group judgement with ties. A position-based approach," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Technology, Institute of Organization and Management, vol. 4, pages 9-26.
    3. Kladroba Andreas, 2000. "Das Aggregationsproblem bei der Erstellung von Rankings. Einige Anmerkungen am Beispiel der Formel 1 Weltmeisterschaft 1998 / The Problem of Aggregation Arising in the Process of Building Rankings. So," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 220(3), pages 302-314, June.
    4. Jorge Alcalde-Unzu & Marc Vorsatz, 2016. "Do we agree? Measuring the cohesiveness of preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 313-339, February.
    5. repec:spr:grdene:v:9:y:2000:i:1:d:10.1023_a:1008744805975 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Rodríguez Alcantud, José Carlos & de Andrés Calle, Rocío & González-Arteaga, Teresa, 2013. "Codifications of complete preorders that are compatible with Mahalanobis disconsensus measures," MPRA Paper 50533, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Edith Elkind & Piotr Faliszewski & Arkadii Slinko, 2015. "Distance rationalization of voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(2), pages 345-377, September.
    8. Hanna Bury & Dariusz Wagner, 2009. "Group judgment with ties. A position-based approach," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Technology, Institute of Organization and Management, vol. 4, pages 7-26.
    9. Cook, Wade D. & Kress, Moshe & Seiford, Lawrence M., 1997. "A general framework for distance-based consensus in ordinal ranking models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 392-397, January.
    10. repec:spr:grdene:v:21:y:2012:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-010-9210-x is not listed on IDEAS
    11. András Farkas, 2011. "Budapest Bridges Benchmarking," Proceedings- 9th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2011), Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    12. Harpreet Kaur & Surya Prakash Singh & Rémy Glardon, 2016. "An Integer Linear Program for Integrated Supplier Selection: A Sustainable Flexible Framework," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 17(2), pages 113-134, June.
    13. repec:spr:annopr:v:253:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-016-2351-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Sun, Bingzhen & Ma, Weimin, 2015. "An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 83-92.
    15. repec:spr:grdene:v:19:y:2010:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-008-9127-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. González-Arteaga, T. & Alcantud, J.C.R. & de Andrés Calle, R., 2016. "A cardinal dissensus measure based on the Mahalanobis distance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 575-585.
    17. Jorge Alcalde-Unzu & Marc Vorsatz, 2008. "The Measurement of Consensus: An Axiomatic Analysis," Working Papers 2008-28, FEDEA.
    18. Michel Truchon, 2005. "Aggregation of Rankings: a Brief Review of Distance-Based Rules," Cahiers de recherche 0534, CIRPEE.
    19. Jorge Alcalde-Unzu & Marc Vorsatz, 2013. "Measuring the cohesiveness of preferences: an axiomatic analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(4), pages 965-988, October.
    20. Saaty, Thomas L. & Shang, Jen S., 2007. "Group decision-making: Head-count versus intensity of preference," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 22-37, March.
    21. András Farkas, 2013. "The Depiction of Advertising Industry in Novels and Their Incorporation in Education," Proceedings- 11th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2013), Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    22. Angappa Gunasekaran & Rameshwar Dubey & Surya Prakash Singh, 2016. "Flexible Sustainable Supply Chain Network Design: Current Trends, Opportunities and Future," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 17(2), pages 109-112, June.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:28:y:1982:i:6:p:621-637. 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: (Mirko Janc). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.