Structure of multi-criteria decision-making

Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) is presented as an eight-stage process of shaping information that satisfies the following criteria. The information should be accessible, differentiable, abstractable, understandable, verifiable, measurable, refinable and usable. For some stages, the decision-advisor should emphasize doing the stage convincingly by carrying out first its technical aspects, then relating to the context of the problem, and finally by taking into account the particular situation of the decision. For others, the decision-advisor should emphasize evincing information from the decision-maker first by relating to the situation of the decision, then seeing it in its context, and finally in its technical aspects. Methods for supporting the first four stages are shown to be personal construct theory for accessing the information, grounded theory for differentiating clusters of constructs, critical realism for abstracting their real meaning, and Nomology to understand how they fit into the criteria tree. An illustration is given.

[1]  León.  Value-Focused Thinking versus Alternative-Focused Thinking: Effects on Generation of Objectives. , 1999, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[2]  D. Bannister,et al.  Inquiring Man: the Theory of Personal Constructs , 1974 .

[3]  Cathal M. Brugha,et al.  The structure of adjustment decision-making , 1998 .

[4]  John Price-Wilkin,et al.  Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed.) , 1991 .

[5]  Roy Murray-Prior,et al.  Modelling farmer behaviour: a personal construct theory interpretation of hierarchical decision models , 1998 .

[6]  J. Simpson,et al.  The Oxford English Dictionary , 1884 .

[7]  Richard Bell,et al.  A manual for repertory grid technique , 1977 .

[8]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[9]  Cathal M. Brugha,et al.  Structuring and Weighting Criteria in Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) , 1998 .

[10]  Freerk A. Lootsma.  Distributed multi-criteria decision making and the role of the participants in the process , 2000 .

[11]  R. Gregory,et al.  Creating policy alternatives using stakeholder values , 1994 .

[12]  I. Kant,et al.  Lectures on Metaphysics , 1997 .

[13]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking , 1992 .

[14]  Gordon F. Pitz,et al.  The content and structure of value tree representations , 1984 .

[15]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[16]  Pamela Jordan.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques , 1994 .

[17]  D. Winterfeldt.  Structuring decision problems for decision analysis , 1980 .

[18]  Cathal M. Brugha.  Decision-maker centred MCDM: Some empirical tests and their implications , 2001 .

[19]  N. Noddings.  Philosophy of education , 1995 .

[20]  Eric W. K. Tsang,et al.  Replication and Theory Development in Organizational Science: A Critical Realist Perspective , 1999 .

[21]  Cathal M. Brugha,et al.  The structure of qualitative decision-making , 1998 .

[22]  Linda Robertson,et al.  Book Review: Inquiring Man — The Psychology of Personal Constructs , 1987 .

[23]  Stanley Zionts,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Making in the New Millennium , 2001 .

[24]  D. Bannister,et al.  The evaluation of personal constructs , 1968 .

[25]  H. L. Mansel,et al.  Lectures on metaphysics and logic , 1859 .

[26]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Identifying and Structuring Values to Guide Integrated Resource Planning at BC Gas , 1999, Oper. Res..

[27]  David J. Will.  A realist theory of science , 1981, Medical History.

[28]  F. B. Vernadat,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1994 .

[29]  Cathal M. Brugha.  The structure of development decision-making , 1998 .

[30]  Hans Vrolijk,et al.  Behavioral and procedural consequences of structural variation in value trees , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[32]  Cathal M. Brugha,et al.  Relative measurement and the power function , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[33]  C. Whitbeck,et al.  A Realist Theory of Science. , 1977 .

[34]  C. Peirce,et al.  Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce , 1936, Nature.

[35]  Cathal M. Brugha,et al.  Phased multicriteria preference finding , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[36]  G. Kelly.  The Psychology of Personal Constructs , 2020 .

[37]  Cathal M. Brugha,et al.  An introduction to the Priority-Pointing Procedure , 2000 .

[38]  Mordechai I. Henig,et al.  SOLVING MCDM PROBLEMS: PROCESS CONCEPTS , 1996 .

[39]  A. Madill,et al.  Objectivity and reliability in qualitative analysis: realist, contextualist and radical constructionist epistemologies. , 2000, British journal of psychology.

[40]  John Mingers,et al.  The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems , 2000, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[41]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Qualitative Analysis For Social Scientists , 1987 .

[42]  Trevor Butt.  Social Action and Personal Constructs , 2001 .

[43]  R. Bhaskar,et al.  Critical Realism , 2011 .

[44]  H. Yeung.  Critical realism and realist research in human geography: a method or a philosophy in search of a method? , 1997, Progress in Human Geography.

[45]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Value-Focused Thinking , 1996 .

[46]  Graham Mathieson,et al.  Best Practice for Using Assessment Hierarchies in Operational Analysis , 2001 .