Preference Evaluation System for Construction Products Using QFD‐TOPSIS Logic by Considering Trade‐Off Technical Characteristics

Abstract

This paper investigates the feasibility of quality function deployment, technique for the order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (QFD-TOPSIS) in presenting user preferences for multiple alternatives, such as construction technologies, products, systems, and design solutions, with trade-off technical characteristics (TC). The original QFD as house of quality (HOQ) defines the requirements and features as subjective matrix relations, which cause interpretations to vary across users and limit its industrial applications. QFD-TOPSIS is a new model that combines the benefits of QFD with those of TOPSIS, maintains the subjectivity and objectivity evaluation of the technical characteristics (TC), and rates the preferences by considering users' individual propensity for requirements. In addition, QFD-TOPSIS rates the preferences through the reciprocal compensation effects of trade-off TC and filters unsuitable alternatives with predefined restrictive conditions. Trade-off refers to conflicts and/or contradictions between attributes, often arising in multicriteria decision-making. Users or project stakeholder groups define the priorities of trade-off TC that directly influence product preferences and decision-making. In the present study, we have developed a Web system based on the QFD-TOPSIS logic and tested its operation to verify its industrial applicability and viability for automatic quality evaluation.

A Utilitarian Decision—Making Approach for Front End Design—A Systematic Literature Review

“…Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluations (PROMETHEE) has also been used in 3.7% of papers and was developed by Brans, Vincke [76]. It is an outranking MCDM technique that has undergone various conceptual adaptations [74]. Part of the appeal for the TOPSIS is seen in 3.7% of articles and is a technique that aims to evaluate from among the alternatives their distance to the "positive" and "negative" ideal solution [61].…”

“…Part of the appeal for the TOPSIS is seen in 3.7% of articles and is a technique that aims to evaluate from among the alternatives their distance to the "positive" and "negative" ideal solution [61]. The most preference is that which is closest to the ideal solution and vice-versa [74]. In addition to a simple basis of human representation of decision making, TOPSIS is a flexible approach that allows for complementary tools such as ANP/AHP, fuzzy sets, QFD and the like something that gives it its versatility.…”

“…Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluations (PROMETHEE) has also been used in 3.7% of papers and was developed by Brans, Vincke [76]. It is an outranking MCDM technique that has undergone various conceptual adaptations [74]. Part of the appeal for the PROMETHEE is that it can foster confidence through visibility for decision-makers [71] who are able to specify their preference functions [77].…”

“…Part of the PROMETHEE adaptations is to address the inherent cumbersomeness in the application of the decision technique in addition to adding the capability of the technique to accommodate decision making with incomplete information. However, authors such as Navarro, Yepes [74] argue that the detailed nature of the mathematical concepts in PROMETHEE means the decision-maker is unable to take advantage of any vantage points in the decision-making process particularly in complex decision problems when this is needed sometimes to take an overall position of the problem. Other studies have found that the technique is also unable to support consideration for any emergent attributes in the process.…”

“…Other studies have found that the technique is also unable to support consideration for any emergent attributes in the process. Any attempt at this drastically changes the decision-making process [74]. Some of its applications have been in the selection of parameter such in choice of siting of electric vehicle charging points [71] and ranking of technical requirements in product design [77].…”