Search

Selecting emergency suppliers from a wide range of candidates based on their performance under each criterion can be regarded as a multi-criterion decision making (MCDM) problem. Existing MCDM models to solve the emergency supplier selection problem ignored situations where large-scale suppliers exist, the influence of criteria weights on the robustness of ranking results, and the influence of psychology of regret aversion and disappointment aversion on decision results. To make up for these deficiencies, this paper proposes an MCDM model to solve emergency supplier selection problem with large-scale alternatives. Firstly, to avoid the influence of criteria weights on ranking of alternatives, the Robustness, Correlation, and Standard Deviation (ROCOSD) method is introduced to determine objective weights of criteria based on three objectives. Secondly, the τ-balanced clustering method is applied to cluster large-scale alternatives into balanced clusters. Next, considering the psychology of regret aversion and disappointment aversion of decision makers, a two-stage method is proposed to rank alternatives, which identifies the optimal alternative within each cluster and forms a new cluster consisting of these optimal alternatives in the first stage, and selects the optimal alternative from the new-formed cluster in the second stage. A numerical case is given to validate the proposed model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cloud computing has emerged as a transformative technology in the healthcare industry, but selecting the most suitable CV ("cloud vendor") remains a complex task. This research presents a decision framework for CV selection in the healthcare industry, addressing the challenges of uncertainty, expert hesitation, and conflicting criteria. The proposed framework incorporates FFS ("Fermatean fuzzy set") to handle uncertainty and data representation effectively. The importance of experts is attained via the variance approach, which considers hesitation and variability. Furthermore, the framework addresses the issue of extreme value hesitancy in criteria through the LOPCOW ("logarithmic percentage change-driven objective weighting") method, which ensures a balanced and accurate assessment of criterion importance. Personalized grading of CVs is done via the ranking algorithm that considers the formulation of CoCoSo ("combined compromise solution") with rank fusion, providing a compromise solution that balances conflicting criteria. By integrating these techniques, the proposed framework aims to enhance the rationale and reduce human intervention in CV selection for the healthcare industry. Also, valuable insights are gained from the framework for making informed decisions when selecting CVs for efficient data management and process implementation. A case example from Tamil Nadu is presented to testify to the applicability, while sensitivity and comparison analyses reveal the pros and cons of the framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hydrogen is the new age alternative energy source to combat energy demand and climate change. Storage of hydrogen is vital for a nation's growth. Works of literature provide different methods for storing the produced hydrogen, and the rational selection of a viable method is crucial for promoting sustainability and green practices. Typically, hydrogen storage is associated with diverse sustainable and circular economy (SCE) criteria. As a result, the authors consider the situation a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem. Studies infer that previous models for hydrogen storage method (HSM) selection (i) do not consider preferences in the natural language form; (ii) weights of experts are not methodically determined; (iii) hesitation of experts during criteria weight assessment is not effectively explored; and (iv) three-stage solution of a suitable selection of HSM is unexplored. Driven by these gaps, in this paper, authors put forward a new integrated framework, which considers double hierarchy linguistic information for rating, criteria importance through inter-criteria correlation (CRITIC) for expert weight calculation, evidence-based Bayesian method for criteria weight estimation, and combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) for ranking HSMs. The applicability of the developed framework is testified by using a case example of HSM selection in India. Sensitivity and comparative analysis reveal the merits and limitations of the developed framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Transformations in Business & Economics is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Properly designed and installed interior stairs provide safe and convenient access to all residents of the house, including children and elderly people. While safety considerations are paramount for stair design and placement decisions in a two-storey single-family house, sustainability becomes another important factor in these deliberations. Nevertheless, safety and sustainability of the interior stairs can be seen as conflicting objectives in decision-making processes (i.e., while a larger staircase area positively affect residents' climbing ability, it also causes higher energy consumption and material usage). Therefore, increased awareness of stair-project selection processes is required when multi-objective tasks are involved. Seven criteria affecting stair safety and sustainability in a single-family house are identified in this paper. The integrated AHP-MEREC criteria-weighting approach is proposed, to determine their weights in decision-making processes. Four different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches, ARAS, SAW, TOPSIS and PROMETHEE, were used to determine alternative evaluations. Since the selection of the most suitable MCDM method is full of uncertainties, the novel combined-decision-making approach formally called CORST (COmbining MCDM appRoaches using method STability coefficient) is proposed in this paper. The new method stability coefficient is used to determine the stability and reliability of the specific MCDM approach. Nine U-shaped inside-staircase projects dedicated to a single-family house were evaluated, to test the effectiveness of the CORST approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To maximize the effectiveness of a decision, it is necessary to support decision-making with integrated methods. It can be assumed that subjective evaluation (considering only absolute values) is only remotely connected with the evaluation of real processes. Therefore, relying solely on these values in process management decision-making would be a mistake because this might lead to the lack of agreement between the criteria of the process. The absolute values of criteria are required for decision making, while the integrated criteria evaluation is necessary for making consistent decisions, taking into account the relative values of the criteria as well.