Hello,
i have an issue with AHP and SMART and i am not quite sure whether i understand it corrrectly. The question is, which method does better fit for a decision maker if he considers Green Logistics criteria e.g. CO2 efficiency, use of electricity, use of dangerous material and so on..
Why should a decision maker, in this case, should rather chose AHP than SMART or Even Swaps e.g.? I can't find any deeper thoughts on this so it would be very kind if you could help me with this.
Thank you very much!
I would be careful in your use of the analytical hierarchy process as it has known and serious issues with preference rank reversal which change the overall priority ranking when an alternative is added or deleted from the initial set of alternatives. In axiomatic decision analysis and utility theory rank reversal in is related to the concept of irrelevant alternatives as given by the following axiom: Adding new acts (alternatives) to a decision problem under uncertainty, each of which is weakly dominated (preferred) by or is equivalent to some old act, has no effect on the optimality or non-optimality of an old act (Luce and Raiffa 1957, p. 288). In stead I would use a multi-objective value hierarchy such as the one used by Parnell, 2013. I know this does not answer your question, but I believe the use of AHP will result in flawed or sub-optimal preferences.
Hello Andreas K.
I suggest that you not only be a single decision maker, since there are several people involved in making decisions.
I share my article in group decisions
Article Determinación de las Ponderaciones de los Criterios de Suste...
Greetings
Nicholas Shallcross José-Andrés Gómez-Romero Thank you very much! Yes Nicholas you are right, it actually does not answer my question ... I know that AHP has its disadvantages, but i really wanna know if the fit between the criteria and AHP is in this case better than in case of SMART or Even Swaps. Can you give further explanation? Thank you very much.
If I were the decision analyst working this problem and I had to choose between AHP or simple multi-attribute rating technique (SMART) I would choose smart because I can ensure it adheres to axiomatic decision analysis (which AHP does not) and I can use methods such as value focused thinking (VFT) and swing weight matrices to ensure that I am assessing the right objectives and applying weights to the objectives that adhere to the decision maker's preferences. Thus I can use SMART to better model the decision maker's preferences.
Nicholas Shallcross
"Thus I can use SMART to better model the decision maker's preferences. "
- Are you referring to the consistency ratio with which the decision maker should adjust his decision during the process?
- Is pairwise comparison less meaningful than using swing weights to compare attributes/criteria?
- What exactly do you mean by VFT? Do you mean that the values are more important than the alternatives? How would you apply that in this context?
For me the method seems to be very "deep" especially by the use of pairwise comparison. But I would be very grateful if you could still answer my questions. Thank you very much again!
Dear Andreas K.
Very interesting question, and from my point of view I wouldn't use any of those methods, because both use pair-wise comparisons, which is a completely arbitrary system.
In addition, if you are looking to reach a goal for each objective use a MCDM methods that allows for that.
I concur with Nicholas in the sense that if you for whatever reasons needs to choose between AHP and SMART, I would use SMART.