TY - JOUR
T1 - A compromise weight for multi-criteria group decision making with individual preference
AU - Wei, Q.
AU - Yan, H.
AU - Ma, J.
AU - Fan, Z.
PY - 2000
Y1 - 2000
N2 - In a multi-criteria group decision making process, it is often hard to obtain a solution due to the possible conflict preferences from different participants and the undeterministic weights assigned to each criterion. This problem can be defined as. to identify a set of weights for the given criteria to achieve a compromise of the conflict on different preferences. When such a compromise weight does not exist, we need to adjust (to reverse or to withdraw) some or all of the preferences from different participants. This paper describes a minimax principle based procedure of preference adjustments with a finite number of steps to find the compromise weight. At each iteration, we either find the weight or identify some 'wrong' preferences. We also define a consistency index for each participant to measure the distance between the individuals' preference and the final group decision. Corresponding theoretical work is referred to in support of the procedure, and numerical examples are provided for illustration. This study is further extended to the case of multiple assessments. ©2000 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved.
AB - In a multi-criteria group decision making process, it is often hard to obtain a solution due to the possible conflict preferences from different participants and the undeterministic weights assigned to each criterion. This problem can be defined as. to identify a set of weights for the given criteria to achieve a compromise of the conflict on different preferences. When such a compromise weight does not exist, we need to adjust (to reverse or to withdraw) some or all of the preferences from different participants. This paper describes a minimax principle based procedure of preference adjustments with a finite number of steps to find the compromise weight. At each iteration, we either find the weight or identify some 'wrong' preferences. We also define a consistency index for each participant to measure the distance between the individuals' preference and the final group decision. Corresponding theoretical work is referred to in support of the procedure, and numerical examples are provided for illustration. This study is further extended to the case of multiple assessments. ©2000 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved.
KW - Compromise weight
KW - Group decision making
KW - Preference order
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033750007&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.scopus.com/record/pubmetrics.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0033750007&origin=recordpage
U2 - 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600911
DO - 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600911
M3 - RGC 21 - Publication in refereed journal
SN - 0160-5682
VL - 51
SP - 625
EP - 634
JO - Journal of the Operational Research Society
JF - Journal of the Operational Research Society
IS - 5
ER -