Virtually combining the analytical hierarchy process and voting methods in order to make group decisions

Srdjević, Bojan; Pipan, Matija; Srdjević, Zorica; Blagojević, Boško; Zoranović, Tihomir

doi:10.1007/s10209-013-0337-9

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The combination of using AHP for evaluating the importance of alternatives (criteria in this study) on the one hand, and using voting procedures for selecting the best of these alternatives, on the other hand, is used in various applications. In the study [18] this approach was used The results shown in Table 3 are interesting because they enable comparing the criteria importance averaged over all the experts and over those of them who are risk-averse. The importance of risk factors has not changed much: 55 and 39 experts that awarded the first place to this group of criteria are, respectively, 30.6% and 30.0% of all experts related to "all experts" and "risk-averse experts".…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using AHP for evaluation of criteria for agro-industrial projects

Din¹,

Yunusova²

2016

IJHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using AHP for evaluation of criteria for agro-industrial projects

Din¹,

Yunusova²

2016

IJHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In terms of the state-of-art in the application of AHP in the related fields, AHP has been used as a selection methodology for the risk assessment of asset maintenance decision making (Chemweno et al, 2015), in real-time monitoring of offshore processes (Khan et al (2016), in distribution system CBM (Shan et al, 2016) and in condition evaluation for power transformer using fuzzy AHP (Sun et al, 2016). Moreover, AHP has been used in combination with fuzzy set in group decision making (Chiao, 2016) and in group decisions (Srdjevic et al, 2015). In addition, it has been incorporated in the assessment of maintainability of desktop software (Pandey and Agrawal, 2016), life cycle impact assessment (Hafizan et al, 2016), used for equipment evaluation in a flexible manufacturing system (Nguyen et al, 2016), and in the evaluation of risk in IT projects (Rodríguez et al, 2016).…”

Section: Ahpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting a condition monitoring system for enhancing effectiveness of power transformer maintenance

Hernandez

Labib²

2017

JQME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose a model for assisting in the decision-making process for acquiring a condition monitoring (CM) system for an oil-immersed power transformer in order to improve its maintainability. Design/methodology/approach The proposed model is based on the analytic hierarchy process. The assessment was performed by pairwise comparisons, and a sensitivity analysis (what-if analysis) was used to identify the implications of changing the criteria weights. In order to select the criteria and alternatives, a search was conducted for the power transformer failure modes, monitored parameters and CM technologies. Findings The proposed model provides a structured solution for a complex problem: deciding the best combination of technologies for CM of power transformers. Research limitations/implications Because the pairwise comparisons were done only by the author, the results may need to be improved with the assessment of more experts. Also, it was done for a specific type of transformer; it might be necessary to customise the alternatives for other cases. Finally, as a future consideration, more levels can be added to the hierarchy to improve the accuracy of the model. Practical implications The power transformer is an asset where the most appropriate maintenance strategy for it is condition-based maintenance. In order to improve its maintainability, it is recommendable to improve its testability and diagnosability. For achieving this goal, the maintenance personnel have to decide the best combination of technologies for CM. The methodology developed can assist the decision makers to select the most appropriate cost-benefit strategy. Originality/value The paper presents a structured and generic method of selecting the most appropriate CM system for power transformers.

show abstract

“…To improve the research methodology researchers could combine the AHP with other group decision-making techniques such as social choice theory (SCT) or the Delphi technique to allow for multiple iterations and agreement of the SMEs. The application of SCT with the AHP could help with group consensus in the final verification phase (Srdjevic, Pipan, Srdjevic, Blagojevic, & Zoranovic, 2013). Vidal, Marle and Bocquet (2011) proposed to use the Delphi technique to determine the complexity of the problem before using the AHP technique while Poompipatpong and Kengpol (2013) proposed to first use the AHP with SMEs followed with the Delphi method to improve consensus.…”

Section: Recommendations For Further Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Oil Sands Environmental Compliance Risk Management

Roux

2016

IJAHP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>In 2013, oil companies in Alberta, Canada invested $32 billion in new oil-sands projects. Despite the size of this investment, there is a demonstrable deficiency in the uniformity and understanding of environmental legislation requirements that translate into increased project compliance risks. In this paper, we applied the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to develop a priority list of environmental regulatory compliance risk criteria for oil-sands projects. AHP belongs to the family of multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques that utilizes a pairwise comparison matrix solicited from subject matter experts (SMEs) in the field as input. The overall methodology itself consisted of 4 phases: (1) identification of the initial list of N potential environmental compliance risk criteria and verification of these criteria via a pilot survey; (2) formation of a pairwise comparison survey in the form of an N(N-1)/2 comparison matrix based on the verified criteria; (3) administration of the pairwise comparison matrix to a sample of 16 industry-specific SME’s; and (4) the application of the AHP method using SuperDecisions as a tool on the collected sample to rank the identified risk criteria. Our demonstrated results can potentially inform Alberta oil sands industry leaders about the ranking and utility of specific compliance risks as understood by experts and enable a more focused environmental compliance action to help increase legislative and public trust.</p>

show abstract

Virtually combining the analytical hierarchy process and voting methods in order to make group decisions

Cited by 12 publications

References 16 publications

Using AHP for evaluation of criteria for agro-industrial projects

Using AHP for evaluation of criteria for agro-industrial projects

Selecting a condition monitoring system for enhancing effectiveness of power transformer maintenance

Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Oil Sands Environmental Compliance Risk Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About