The triangle assessment method: A new procedure for eliciting expert judgement

Fernando Pérez-Rodríguez,Alberto Rojo-Alboreca

doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.11.021

Abstract

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the most widely used Multi-Criteria Decision-Making methods worldwide. As such, it is subject to criticisms that highlight some potential weaknesses. In this study, we present a new Multi-Criteria Decision-Making method denominated the “Triangular Assessment Method” (referred to by its Spanish abbreviation, MTC©). The MTC© aims to make use of the potential of AHP while avoiding some of its drawbacks. The main characteristics and advantages of the MTC© can be summarised as follows: (i) evaluation of criteria, and of the alternative options for each criterion, in trios instead of pairs; (ii) elimination of discrete scales and values involved in judgements; (iii) a substantial reduction in the number of evaluations (trios) relative to the corresponding number of pairs which would have to be considered when applying the AHP method; (iv) consistent decision-making; (v) introduction of closed cyclical series for comparing criteria and alternatives; and (vi) the introduction of opinion vectors and opinion surfaces. This new method is recommended for supporting decision-making with large numbers of subjective criteria and/or alternatives and also for group decisions where the consensus must be evaluated. The MTC© provides a different promising perspective in decision-making and could lead to new research lines in the field of information systems.

Highlights

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) (Saaty, 1977, 1980) is one of the best known and most commonly used Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods worldwide (Velasquez, Hester, 2013, Segura, Ray, Maroto, 2014)
We suggest the following future research lines in order to improve the method: (i) study of the user-triangle iteration and how it could be improved to obtain representative judgements from the decision maker; (ii) analysis of the distribution of the opinion judgements -how this varies over time and how one criterion is affected by the others; (iii) study of the different series to show the triangles in the opinion/ judgement procedure; (iv) analysis of the different consensus additions; and (v) development of a simple tool to apply the method and study of the performance of such a tool in an unbiased context
The MTC© method involving decision-making based on the comparison of trios rather than pairs of criteria yields the following advantages over the classical AHP method: (i) capture of consistent judgements, which satisfies the axiom of transitivity, avoiding the disadvantages of common non-reciprocal judgment in AHP; (ii) increased concentration by the decision maker, thereby reducing the influence of the environment and minimizing the cognitive bias that may occur in the repetitive process of the decision; (iii) elimination of scales and discrete values in making judgments

Summary

Introduction

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) (Saaty, 1977, 1980) is one of the best known and most commonly used Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods worldwide (Velasquez, Hester, 2013, Segura, Ray, Maroto, 2014). The AHP is a hierarchical decision-making process comprising the following steps (Forman, Gass, 2001): (i) structuring, i.e. definition of a decision-making hierarchy; (ii) determination of preferences on a scale established for paired comparisons between criteria, and between pairs of alternatives for each criterion; (iii) synthesis; and (iv) selection of the best alternative. Determination of preferences is the most important step because it involves transformation of opinion judgement into a value or weight that is analysed in following steps. This is made possible by using a scale (Saaty, 1980) that has been developed in different studies (e.g. Dong, Xu, Li, Min, 2008, Ishizaka, Labib, 2011, Tsyganok, Kadenko, Andriichuk, 2016 and Cables, Lamata, Verdegay, 2016).

Objectives

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion