SummaryMulticriteria decision making (MCDM) refers to screening, prioritizing, ranking or selecting the alternatives based on human judgment from among a finite set of ` alternatives in terms of the multiple usually conflicting criteria. A very significant role in MCDM models plays the weights of criteria which usually provide the information about the relative importance of the considered criteria. Several different methods are developed to take criteria priorities into account.The aim of the paper is a comparative overview on several rank ordering weights methods which are considered to convert the ordinal ranking of a number of criteria into numerical weights. Using ranks to elicit weights by some formulas is more reliable than just directly assigning weights to criteria because usually decision makers are more confident about the ranks of some criteria than their weights, and they can agree on ranks more easily. The great advantage of those methods is the fact that they rely only on ordinal information about attribute importance. They can be used for instance in situations of time pressure, quality nature of criteria, lack of knowledge, imprecise, incomplete information or partial information, decision maker's limited attention and information processing capability. The equal weights, rank sum, rank exponent, rank reciprocal as well centroid weights technique are presented. These methods have been selected for their simplicity and effectiveness.

No abstract

No abstract

The main purpose of this paper is to investigate the application potential of ordered fuzzy numbers (OFN) to support evaluation of negotiation offers. The Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) and the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods are extended to the case when linguistic evaluations are represented by OFN. We study the applicability of OFN for linguistic evaluation negotiation options and also provide the theoretical foundations of SAW and TOPSIS for constructing a scoring function for negotiation offers. We show that the proposed framework allows us to represent the negotiation information in a more direct and adequate way, especially in ill-structured negotiation problems, allows for holistic evaluation of negotiation offers, and produces consistent rankings, even though new packages are added or removed. An example is presented in order to demonstrate the usefulness of presented fuzzy numerical approach in evaluation of negotiation offers.

The main purpose of this paper is to provide a brief overview of the rational choice approach, followed by an identification of several of the major criticisms of RCT and its conceptual and empirical limitations. It goes on to present a few key initiatives to develop alternative, more realistic approaches which transcend some of the limitations of Rational Choice Theory (RCT). Finally, the article presents a few concluding reflections and a table comparing similarities and differences between the mainstream RCT and some of the initial components of an emerging choice theory. Our method has been to conduct a brief selective review of rational choice theoretical formulations and applications as well as a review of diverse critical literature in the social sciences where rational choice has been systematically criticized. We have focused on a number of leading contributors (among others, several Nobel Prize Recipients in economics, who have addressed rational choice issues). So this article makes no claim for completeness. The review maps a few key concepts and assumptions underpinning the conceptual model and empirical applications of RCT. It reviews also a range of critical arguments and evidence of limitations. It identifies selected emerging concepts and theoretical revisions and adaptations to choice theory and what they entail. The results obtained, based on our literature reviews and analyses, are the identification of several major limitations of RCT as well as selected modifications and adaptations of choice theory which overcome or promise to overcome some of the RCT limitations. Thus, the article with Table 1 in hand provides a point of departure for follow-up systematic reviews and more precise questions for future theory development. The criticisms and adaptations of RCT have contributed to greater realism, empirical relevance, and increased moral considerations. The developments entail, among other things: the now well-known cognitive limitations ("bounded rationality") and, for instance, the role of satisficing rather than maximizing in decision-making to deal with cognitive T. Burns, E. Roszkowska 196 complexity and the uncertainties of multiple values; choice situations are re-contextualized with psychology, sociology, economic, and material conditions and factors which are taken into account explicitly and insightfully in empirical and theoretical work. Part of the contextualization concerns the place of multiple values, role and norm contradictions, and moral dilemmas in much choice behavior. In conclusion, the article suggests that the adaptations and modifications made in choice theory have led to substantial fragmentation of choice theory and as of yet no integrated approach has appeared to simply displace RCT.

From the perspective of each evaluation criterion, any decision alternative is evaluated by means of trapezoidal ordered fuzzy numbers (TrOFN). This approach is justified in the way that some criteria are linguistically evaluated. In this paper, decision alternatives are evaluated using oriented fuzzy Simple Additive Weighting (OF-SAW) scoring function. The ranking of alternatives may be defined by means of a nonincreasing sequence of defuzzified values of a scoring function. Any defuzzification procedure distorts ordered fuzzy numbers in a way that information on imprecision and orientation is lost. This undermines the credibility of the determined alternatives' ranking. The main purpose of this paper is to avoid the defuzzification stage in the OF-SAW method. Thus, the OF-SAW method is equipped with fuzzy scoring order. This OF-SAW method is described as a negotiation scoring system. We study an empirical example of the OF-SAW application and rank some negotiation offers. Here, we focus on the effects of replacing the defuzzified scoring function by a fuzzy one. The obtained conclusions are generalized for the case of any decision alternatives.

Sustainability is a holistic and complex multi-dimensional concept comprising economic, social and environmental issues. The EU Sustainable Development Goals' indicator set, developed by European Commission, is implemented online in Eurostat's database and constitutes the basis for assessing the level of sustainability assessment in different areas. The integration of the sustainability indicators was carried out in many studies by using the multi-criteria techniques. This work proposes a new methodological framework based on extended TOPSIS procedure, which takes into account EU targets and/or national targets in building positive ideal solution and negative ideal solution. This algorithm allows compensatory and non-compensatory approach in integrated sustainability assessment from the target point of view. This framework has been applied to measure sustainable development in the area of education in 28 EU countries in 2015. The results of this research also illustrate the complexity of measuring sustainable development, where multiple sustainability criteria and targets are considered.

No abstract