Comparison of multi-criteria decision methods through a ranking stability index
by Mbarka Selmi; Tarek Kormi; Nizar Bel Hadj Ali
International Journal of Operational Research (IJOR), Vol. 27, No. 1/2, 2016

Abstract: Various multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) procedures have been developed over the last few decades to help decision-making in complex and seemingly intractable decision tasks. A major criticism of various MCDM methods is that they may yield different results when applied to the same problem. A comparative study is proposed here to identify similarities and divergences between the most used MCDM methods. Compared approaches include: ELECTRE III, PROMETHEE I and II, TOPSIS, AHP and PEG. Two multi-criteria case studies are presented. Studied methods are employed to establish an arrangement of a number of alternatives based on two and eight conflicting criteria, respectively. A Gini index is used to quantify rankings dispersion of Pareto optima obtained through studied MCDM methods. Results highlight the sensitivity of the Pareto-compromise design and ranking to the applied MCDM method.

Online publication date: Mon, 22-Aug-2016

The full text of this article is only available to individual subscribers or to users at subscribing institutions.

 
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.

Pay per view:
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.

Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Operational Research (IJOR):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:

Username:        Password:          Forgotten your password?

Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.

If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com