Integration of AHP and GTMA to Make a Reliable Decision in Complex Decision-Making Problems: Application of the Logistics Provider Selection Problem as a Case Study

Abstract

When solving a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making problem of any degree of complexity, many researchers rely on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). To consider mutual connections between criteria and clusters at the same level and not only the hierarchical structure between criteria and subcriteria, researchers often upgrade from AHP to the Analytic Network Process (ANP), which also examines the interdependency of criteria. However, the ANP method requires a large number of pairwise comparisons. In the case of a complex decision-making problem, the authors of this paper suggest upgrading the AHP method with the graph theory and matrix approach (GTMA) for several reasons: (1) The new method is based on digraphs and permanent value computation, which does not require a hypothesis about interdependency; (2) in case of similar alternatives, the distinguishable coefficient of the new method is higher than those computed for AHP and ANP; (3) the new method allows decision makers to rank comparable alternatives and to combine structurally similar methods without increasing the number of comparisons and the understanding of the results. The developed method (AH-GTMA) is validated by a numerical example of a complex decision-making problem based on a symmetrical set of similar alternatives, a third party logistic provider (3PLP) selection problem.

Analysis of barriers intensity for investment in big data analytics for sustainable manufacturing operations in post-COVID-19 pandemic era

“…Cluster analysis (CA), Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and analytic network process (ANP) is the other decision-making approach (GCI). The factor analysis and graph theory hybrid approach are based on digraphs and permanent value computation, which does not require a hypothesis about interdependency (Tuljak-Suban and Bajec, 2020). Figure 1 depicts the research methodology framework adopted for this study and the same is discussed in detail in the following subsections.…”

A Hybrid MCDM Approach in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection

“…Lai et al [52]; Sinkovics and Roath [56]; Knemeyer and Murphy [57]; Sheen and Tai [53]; Yeung [54]; Lai [55] Statistical methods Sremac et al [49] rough SWARA, rough WASPAS, rough SAW, rough EDAS, rough MABAC, rough TOPSIS Zarbakhshnia et al [50] SWARA, COPRAS Jagannath et al [47] interval-valued fuzzy rough approach Tuljak-Suban and Bajec [24] AHP method with the Graph Theory and Matrix Approach (GTMA)…”

“…Jayant and Singh [23] applied an AHP-VIKOR hybrid MCDM approach for 3PL selection. Tuljak-Suban and Bajec [24] upgraded the AHP with the graph theory and matrix approach (GTMA). Aguezzoul and Pache [25] combined the AHP with the ELECTRE I methodology to solve the 3PL selection problem.…”

Model Evaluasi Kinerja Tanggung Jawab Sosial Lingkungan Perusahaan di Kota Bogor

“…Dalam studi ini, penghitungan bobot ketiga kriteria menggunakan metode peringkat seperti yang dikemukakan oleh Malczewski dan Rinner (2015) dan tidak menggunakan metode Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Saaty (1977). Hal ini disebabkan karena AHP memiliki kelemahan dalam mengolah jumlah kriteria kurang dari sembilan [12], yang mengkompilasi dari berbagai referensi bahwa sangat mungkin untuk dicatat bahwa jumlah kriteria yang bisa dievaluasi secara benar oleh AHP adalah 5 sampai 9 kriteria [13].…”