This paper critically reviews practical difficulties inherent in some of the existing multi-criteria decision-making methods. The paper also emphasizes why a benchmark decision situation is essential in assessing the capabilities of any multi-criteria decision-making method. The capability is in terms of accuracy in modeling the human decision-making process. Most multi-criteria decision-making methods consist of two important steps. The first step involves elicitation of preferences from the decision-maker on various criteria and alternatives of the problem. In the second step, the preferences defined by the decision-maker are aggregated. The overall score generated after aggregation is used in rank order calculation and final selection. However, if the prescriptions of multi-criteria decision-making method do not resemble actual or real decision of the very same decision-maker, then multi-criteria decision-making method failed in either capturing the true preferences of the decision-maker or in aggregating these preferences as per the expectations of the decision-maker. This paper discusses some of the latest theories of decisionmaking and provides three important directions to improve the descriptive aspects of multi-criteria decision analysis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.