Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Making
resources: Weighting Methods and their Efects
on Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model
Outcomes in Water Resources Management,
Tentative guidelines to help choosing an
appropriate MCDA method
DSS - DWW
Decision-Making Process [1]
DSS - DWW 2
Steps
1. Problem in hand is clearly defned.
2. Some other important requirements are then
listed on which the solution of multi-criteria model
was dependent.
3. Objectives or goals of the multi-criteria problem
are established.
4. deals with the establishment of alternatives
which are going to be considered in a decision-
making process with objective to choose the best
alternative.
DSS - DWW 3
5. Evaluation criteria are decided. The criteria
should satisfy some previously fied standards.
For eiample, the chosen criterion may change its
value in space and time.
6. The siith step of the process is very important
as it involves the selection of an appropriate
multi-criteria decision making method for solving
the problem in hand. Later the chosen MCDM
method is applied to the list of alternatives which
was fnalized in Step 4 of the decision process
DSS - DWW 4
7. Later the chosen MCDM method is
applied to the list of alternatives which was
fnalized in Step 4 of the decision process
8. Final step of the decision-making process
is checking the results of the model and
performing sensitivity analysis test.
DSS - DWW 5
multi-criteria decision making
Defne multi-criteria problem and objectives eiplicitly.
List and describe alternatives for meeting objectives or goals.
Defne criteria/attributes/performance indicators to measure
performance of alternatives.
Carry out studies to gather data and evaluate criteria.
Prepare a decision matrii by arranging alternatives against
criteria.
Elicit criteria subjective or objective weights for criteria.
Rank alternatives and communicate results with interest groups.
Decision-makers make decisions with input of interest group and
get MCDM results.
DSS - DWW 6
began in 1971
The main objective of MCDM is to provide
decision-makers with a tool in order to
enable them to advance in solving a multi-
criteria decision problem, where several
conflicting criteria are taken into account
DSS - DWW 7
DSS - DWW 8
Classifcation of MCDM
AHP: Analytic Hierarchy Process
ANP: Analytic Network Process
ELECTRE: Elimination Et Choii Traduisant la Realite (French)—
(Elimination and Choice Translating Reality) (English)
GP: Goal Programming
MACBETH: Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation
Technique
MAUT: Multi-Attribute Utility Theory
MAVT: Multi-Attribute Value Theory
PROMETHEE: Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment
Evaluation
TOPSIS: Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
WSM: Weighted Sum Model
DSS - DWW 9
Three categories of MCDM
DSS - DWW 10
Elementary
This proposes methods which alternate
calculation steps, giving successive
compromising solutions, and dialog steps,
leading to an eitra source of information on
the decision-maker’s preferences
DSS - DWW 11
Unique synthesis criterion approach
It consists of aggregating the diferent
points-of-view into a unique function which
will be optimized
DSS - DWW 12
Outranking synthesis approach
It consists in the development of a
relationship called an outranking
relationship, which represents the decision-
maker’s preferences, the relationship being
eiplored in order to help the decision-
maker solve his/her problems
DSS - DWW 13
DSS - DWW 14
DSS - DWW 15
Characteristics of MCDM
Not all MCDM methods are recommended for
solving any multi-criteria decision problem.
Some MCDM methods can only take quantitative
data to process with evaluation phase of the
decision-making and some can work with both
types of data (quantitative and qualitative).
There are also some other characteristics of
multicriteria decision-making methods, e.g.
transparency and cost
DSS - DWW 16
DSS - DWW 17
DSS - DWW 18
How to Select an Appropriate
MCDM Method [2]
There is no single MCDM method which
can be superior method for all decision-
making problems
Diferent MCDM methods will yield
diferent recommendations
DSS - DWW 19
DSS - DWW 20
Guideline G1: Determine the stakeholders of the
decision process. If there are many decision
makers (judges), one should think about group
decision making methods or group decision
support systems (GDSS).
Guideline G2: Consider the DM `cognition' (DM
way of thinking) when choosing a particular
preference elucidation mode. If he is more
comfortable with pairwise comparisons, why
using tradeofss and vice versa?
DSS - DWW 21
Guideline G3: Determine the decision
problematic pursued by the DM. If the DM
wants to get an alternatives ranking, then a
ranking method is appropriate, and so on.
Guideline G4: Choose the MCAP that can handle
properly the input information available and for
which the DM can easily provide the required
information; the quality and the quantities of the
information are major factors in the choice of the
method.
DSS - DWW 22
Guideline G5: The compensation degree of the MCAP
method is an important aspect to consider and to
eiplain to the DM. If he refuses any compensation,
then many MCAP will not be considered.
Guideline G6: The fundamental hypothesis of the
method are to be met (veri®ed) otherwise one should
choose another method
Guideline G7: The decision support system coming with
the method is an important aspect to be considered
when the time comes to choose a MCDA method.
DSS - DWW 23
The Role of Weights MCDM
Weights of criteria play an important role for
measuring overall preferences of alternatives.
Because of having diferent aggregation rules,
MCDM methods use these weights in diferent
ways.
diferentvweighting methods have been developed
to use them in diferent MCDM methods.
It is very importance that the decision-maker
(DM) understands the true meaning of these
weights
DSS - DWW 24
the interpretations of criteria
weights in MCDM
DSS - DWW 25
Classifcation of Weighting Methods
Weights assigned to criteria in multi-criteria
evaluation method is an important step as
fnal results of the multi-criteria decision-
making method largely depend on such
weights
The simplest way to assign weights to
criteria is ‘equal weights method’ that
distributes weights equally among all the
criteria
DSS - DWW 26
The main purpose of a weighting method is
to attach cardinal or ordinal values to
diferent criteria to indicate their relative
importance in a multi-criteria decision-
making method.
These values are then used by the MCDM
method in subsequent evaluation of the
alternative
DSS - DWW 27
A classifcation of weighting
methods
DSS - DWW 28
DSS - DWW 29
Subjective Weighting Methods
Criteria weights are derived from the decision- maker’s
judgment on criteria.
This means that the subjective methods are to
determine weights solely according to the preferences of
decision makers.
Criteria weights determined by the subjective weighting
methods reflect the subjective judgment of the decision-
maker, but analytical results or rankings of alternatives
based on the weights can be influenced by the decision
maker due to his/her level of knowledge and eiperience
in the relevant feld
DSS - DWW 30
Objective Weighting Methods
In the objective weighting methods, preferences of
decision maker on multiple criteria are not involved and
the criteria weights are obtained from mathematical
algorithms or models.
The objective methods determine criteria weights by
solving mathematical models automatically without any
consideration of the decision maker’s preferences.
Objective weighting methods determine criteria weights
by making use of the mathematical models, but they
neglect the subjective judgment information of the
decision maker
DSS - DWW 31
Popular subj weighting methods
Direct Rating
Ranking Method
Point Allocation
Pairwise Comparison
Ratio Method
Swing Method
Graphical Weighting
Delphi Method
Simple multi-attribute ranking technique (SMART)
SIMOS Method
DSS - DWW 32
Popular Obj Weighting Methods
Entropy method.
Criteria Importance Through Inter-criteria
Correlation (CRITIC)
Mean Weight.
Standard Deviation.
Statistical Variance Procedure.
DSS - DWW 33
Future Reading
[1] N. H. Zardari, K. Ahmed, S. M. Shirazi, and
Z. B. Yusop, “Literature Review,” in Weighting
Methods and their Efects on Multi-Criteria
Decision Making Model Outcomes in Water
Resources Management, Springer, 2015, pp. 7–67.
[2] A. Guitouni and J.-M. Martel, “Tentative
guidelines to help choosing an appropriate
MCDA method,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 109, no.
2, pp. 501–521, 1998.
DSS - DWW 34