Reasoning maps for decision aid: an integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation

Abstract

This paper proposes a tool for multi-criteria decision aid to be referred to as a reasoning map. It is motivated by a desire to provide an integrated approach to problem structuring and evaluation, and in particular, to make the transition between these two processes a natural and seamless progression. The approach has two phases. In the first one, the building of a reasoning map supports problem structuring, capturing a decision maker's reasoning as a network of means and ends concepts. In the second phase, this map is enhanced, employing a user-defined qualitative scale to measure both performances of decision options and strengths of influence for each means-end link. This latter phase supports the decision maker in evaluating the positive and negative impacts of an action through synthesis of the qualitative information. A case study, which investigates the use of the method in practice, is also presented

Structuring an MCDA model using SSM: A case study in energy efficiency

“…Previous work (Belton et al, 1997;Bana e Costa et al, 1999;Montibeller et al, 2008) has shown that mapping-based PSMs can be helpful for this purpose. On the other hand, Daellenbach (1997) proposed the use of MCDA to bring about compromise solutions at one of the stages of SSM, whereas Petkov at al.…”

Qualitative operators for reasoning maps: Evaluating multi-criteria options with networks of reasons

“…A detailed description of the approach is presented in Montibeller et al (2007a) and examples of its use in supporting real-world decision-making processes can be found in Montibeller et al (2007a;2007b).…”

“…In a Reasoning Map, the strength of perceived influence seeks to capture, in qualitative terms, the decision-makers' perception of the extent to which an increase in the performance of an action on a means concept may lead to an increase in its performance on an end concept. However, it should be recognised that, no matter how theoretically well-defined the model is, it is always difficult, in practice, to make sure that decision-makers use the pre-defined theoretical framework consistently throughout the process (see Montibeller et al, 2007a).…”

“…We indicate whether the operator is available in the set of Excel macros we developed to analyse Reasoning Maps (for more details see Montibeller et al, 2007a).…”

“…An evaluation of options that is based on such a reasoning process may therefore be helpful. It is this type of reasoning process that the recently developed Reasoning Maps method (Montibeller et al, 2007a) intends to represent.…”