Even easier multi-issue negotiation through Modified Even-Swaps considering practically dominated alternatives

This study introduces a practical dominance reinforcement.This reinforcement makes the Modified Even-Swaps even easier.This reinforcement is based on SAW method.SAW method helps to identify dominated alternatives more practically. "Modified Even-Swaps" is a mechanism recently developed for multi-issue negotiation, which is highly complicated to realize and therefore more dependent to sophisticated information and communication technologies (ICTs) when compared to single-issue (price-only) negotiation. This mechanism is based on a modified version of Even-Swaps method finding differences among alternatives in terms of negotiable issues and then making use of those differences to assess value of multi-issue offers. A fuzzy-inference system supports this mechanism for bargaining on several issues simultaneously as well. Number of trade-offs performed significantly influences routines of the Modified Even-Swaps mechanism. In this study, a novel approach providing practical dominance reinforcement is introduced to accelerate the mechanism through eliminating unnecessary trade-offs. This approach proposes to use of "Simple Additive Weighting" (SAW) method in order to combine issues which have high variation among consequences of alternatives under consideration. As a result, these issues utilize a combined consequence for each alternative. Phase of the mechanism aiming to identify dominated alternatives is executed by using revised decision-matrix including consequences of issues having high variation as combined. This revision allows the mechanism to identify dominated alternatives more practically. Possible improvements are demonstrated and discussed with some cases in this study.

[1]  Raimo P. Hämäläinen,et al.  A Preference Programming Approach to Make the Even Swaps Method Even Easier , 2005, Decis. Anal..

[2]  Carol Kline,et al.  Modeling tourist and community decision making: The SAVE Market , 2011 .

[3]  Raimo P. Hämäläinen,et al.  Smart-Swaps - A decision support system for multicriteria decision analysis with the even swaps method , 2007, Decis. Support Syst..

[4]  Valentinas Podvezko,et al.  The Comparative Analysis of MCDA Methods SAW and COPRAS , 2011 .

[5]  Burak Keser.  AN INTERACTIVE APPROACH FOR MULTI-CRITERIA , 2005 .

[6]  Eric S. K. Yu,et al.  Comparing alternatives for analyzing requirements trade-offs - In the absence of numerical data , 2012, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[7]  A. Kangas,et al.  Decision Support for Forest Management , 2008, Managing Forest Ecosystems.

[8]  Valentin Robu,et al.  Advances in Agent-Based, Complex Automated Negotiations , 2012 .

[9]  Türkay Dereli,et al.  Development of a framework for customer co-creation in NPD through multi-issue negotiation with issue trade-offs , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[10]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations , 2011, Studies in Computational Intelligence.

[11]  Han-Lin Li,et al.  Using Gower Plots and Decision Balls to rank alternatives involving inconsistent preferences , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[12]  Eric S. K. Yu,et al.  Trust Trade-off Analysis for Security Requirements Engineering , 2009, 2009 17th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference.

[13]  Türkay Dereli,et al.  Modified Even-Swaps: A novel, clear, rational and an easy-to-use mechanism for multi-issue negotiation , 2012, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[14]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Common Mistakes in Making Value Trade-Offs , 2002, Oper. Res..

[15]  Sharmistha Bhattacharjee,et al.  Globalization, Leadership and Education a Study of Rural Child Labour Schools in Agra , 2010 .

[16]  Alireza Afshari,et al.  Simple Additive Weighting approach to Personnel Selection problem , 2010 .

[17]  S. Senthilvel,et al.  Application of Multi Criteria Decision Making Tools and Validation with Optimization Technique-Case Study using TOPSIS, ANN & SAW , 2011 .

[18]  Tomasz Wachowicz,et al.  DECISION SUPPORT IN SOFTWARE SUPPORTED NEGOTIATIONS , 2010 .

[19]  Mathieu M. Geslin.  An argumentation-based approach to negotiation in collaborative engineering design , 2006 .

[20]  J. Dolan.  Multi-Criteria Clinical Decision Support , 2010, The patient.

[21]  J S Hammond,et al.  Even swaps: a rational method for making trade-offs. , 1998, Harvard business review.

[22]  Mikko Kurttila,et al.  Application of even swaps for strategy selection in a rural enterprise , 2001 .

[23]  Han-Lin Li,et al.  Visualizing decision process on spheres based on the even swap concept , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[24]  R. P. Augustin.  MAKING SENSE OF SITE SELECTION , 1999 .

[25]  H. Raiffa,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives , 1993 .

[26]  Bor-Wen Cheng,et al.  Applying Even-Swap Method to Structurally Enhance the Process of Intuition Decision-Making , 2006 .

[27]  R. Gregory,et al.  Bringing stakeholder values into environmental policy choices: a community-based estuary case study , 2001 .

[28]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  MAKING SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DECISIONS , 2002 .