Skip to main content
Log in

A multiple criteria socio-technical approach for the Portuguese Army Special Forces recruitment

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
4OR Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cat-SD (Categorization by Similarity-Dissimilarity) is a method developed for handling nominal classification problems in the context of Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA). This paper describes the design and implementation of this method and an application dealing with a recruitment and selection process in the Special Forces of the Portuguese Army. Besides, it proposes interaction protocols to elicit the preference parameters of the method to facilitate the construction of a decision model when the analyst guides the decision maker. Cat-SD has been implemented in DecSpace, a user-friendly online platform for supporting decision aiding processes using one or more MCDA methods simultaneously. The study related to the Portuguese Army Special Forces recruitment and selection demonstrates how these protocols and a tool like DecSpace can facilitate the process of applying the method in real-world scenarios.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. DecSpace Pre-Alpha is available at http://app.decspacedev.sysresearch.org.

References

  • Al-Obeidat F, Belacel N, Carretero JA, Mahanti P (2010) Differential evolution for learning the classification method PROAFTN. Knowledge-Based Syst 23(5):418–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amador J, Costa AS, Rodrigues R, Figueira JR, Borbinha J (2018) Exploring MCDA methods with decspace. In: Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the Portuguese Association for Information Systems—Industry 4.0 and information systems. Santarém, Portugal

  • Barbosa A (2017) DecSpace: a multi-criteria decision analysis framework. Master’s thesis, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

  • Belacel N, Boulassel MR (2004) Multicriteria fuzzy classification procedure PROCFTN: methodology and medical application. Fuzzy Sets Syst 141(2):203–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigaret S, Meyer P (2010) Diviz: an MCDA workflow design, execution and sharing tool. Newslett EURO Work Group Multicrit Aid Decis 3(21):10–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottero M, Ferretti V, Figueira JR, Greco S, Roy B (2015) Dealing with a multiple criteria environmental problem with interaction effects between criteria through an extension of the ELECTRE III method. Eur J Oper Res 245(3):837–850

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bottero M, Ferretti V, Figueira JR, Greco S, Roy B (2018) On the choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application. Eur J Oper Res 271(1):120–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrente S, Greco S, Słowiński R (2016) Multiple criteria hierarchy process for ELECTRE TRI methods. Eur J Oper Res 252(1):191–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrente S, Figueira J, Greco S (2020) Pairwise comparison tables within the deck of cards method in multiple criteria decision aiding. Eur J Oper Res 291:738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa AS, Figueira JR, Borbinha J (2018) A multiple criteria nominal classification method based on the concepts of similarity and dissimilarity. Eur J Oper Res 271(1):193–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa AS, Lami IM, Greco S, Figueira JR, Borbinha J (2019) A multiple criteria approach for defining cultural adaptive reuse of abandoned buildings. In: de Almeida A, Geiger HMS (eds) Multiple criteria decision making and aiding: cases on decision making methods and models with computer implementations. Springer, Cham, pp 193–218

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Costa AS, Corrente S, Greco S, Figueira JR, Borbinha J (2020) A robust hierarchical nominal multicriteria classification method based on similarity and dissimilarity. Eur J Oper Res 286(3):986–1001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrgott M, Figueira J, Greco S (eds) (2010) Trends in multiple criteria decision analysis. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenton N, Neil M (2001) Making decisions: using bayesian nets and MCDA. Knowledge-Based Syst 14(7):307–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figueira JR, Roy B (2002) Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos’ procedure. Eur J Oper Res 139(2):317–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figueira JR, Greco S, Roy B (2009) ELECTRE methods with interaction between criteria: an extension of the concordance index. Eur J Oper Res 199(2):478–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filip FG, Suduc AM, Bîzoi M (2014) DSS in numbers. Technolo Econ Dev Econ 20(1):154–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greco A, Ehrgott M, Figueira J (2016) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kabak Ö, Ervural B (2017) Multiple attribute group decision making: a generic conceptual framework and a classification scheme. Knowl-Based Syst 123:13–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Léger J, Martel JM (2002) A multicriteria assignment procedure for a nominal sorting problematic. Eur J Oper Res 138(2):349–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li T, Feng S, Li LX (2001) Information visualization for intelligent decision support systems. Knowl-Based Syst 14(5–6):259–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer P, Bigaret S (2012) Diviz: a software for modeling, processing and sharing algorithmic workflows in MCDA. Intell Decis Technol 6:283–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustajoki J, Marttunen M (2017) Comparison of multi-criteria decision analytical software for supporting environmental planning processes. Environ Modell Softw 93:78–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinto F, Costa A, Figueira J, Marques R (2017) The quality of service: an overall performance assessment for water utilities. Omega Int J Manag Sci 69:115–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy B (1996) Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roy B, Bouyssou D (1993) Aide Multicritère à la Décision: Méthodes et Cas. Economica, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy B, Figueira JR, Almeida-Dias J (2014) Discriminating thresholds as a tool to cope with imperfect knowledge in multiple criteria decision aiding: theoretical results and practical issues. Omega Int J Manag Sci 43:9–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanian A, Milani A, Carson C, Abeyaratne R (2008) A new application of ELECTRE III and revised simos’ procedure for group material selection under weighting uncertainty. Knowl-Based Syst 21(7):709–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siskos E, Tsotsolas N (2015) Elicitation of criteria importance weights through the simos method: a robustness concern. Eur J Oper Res 246(2):543–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thokala P, Madhavan G (2018) Stakeholder involvement in multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 16(1):31–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlahavas I, Stamelos I, Refanidis I, Tsoukiàs A (1999) ESSE: an expert system for software evaluation. Knowl-Based Syst 12(4):183–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voinov A, Kolagani N, McCall MK, Glynn PD, Kragt ME, Ostermann FO, Pierce SA, Ramu P (2016) Modelling with stakeholders-next generation. Environ Modell Softw 77:196–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weistroffer HR, Li Y (2016) Multiple criteria decision analysis software. In: Greco A, Ehrgott M, Figueira J (eds) Multiple criteria decision analysis: sate of art surveys. Springer, New York, pp 1305–1341

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie Y, Wang H, Efstathiou J (2005) A research framework for web-based open decision support systems. Knowl-Based Syst 18(7):309–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zopounidis C, Doumpos M (2002) Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 138(2):229–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) with reference UIDB/GES/00097/2020 and reference UIDB/50021/2020. The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaboration of the Portuguese Army through the Centro de Psicologia Aplicada do Exército (CPAE) in the case study. The authors also acknowledge the graduate students who have been contributed to the implementation of the Cat-SD method in DecSpace. Ana Sara Costa acknowledges the financial support from Universidade de Lisboa, Instituto Superior Técnico, and CEG-IST (PhD Scholarship). José Rui Figueira acknowledges the support from the FCT Grant SFRH/BSAB/139892/2018 under POCH Program and European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under Grant Agreement No. 691895 SHAR-LLM (“Sharing Cities”).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Sara Costa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

DecSpace : Current main features and related functionalities

  • Types of Users There are four types of users with different permissions:

    1. 1.

      Developers They can implement and add new MCDA methods;

    2. 2.

      Administrator She/he manages all users and projects, having permission to modify or delete any object;

    3. 3.

      Anonymous users They can test the platform and explore it with the restriction of having temporary projects (they cannot be saved);

    4. 4.

      Registered users They have an account and their work is persistent, that is, the users can create their own projects, having access to all the features that DecSpace offers.

  • User registration and login To use the platform a user can be registered, providing an e-mail address and a password (a username is created based on the user’ e-mail), or login to access the personal area, if the user is already registered. It is possible to enter as a guest, by clicking on “Try it now!” (see Fig. 10 that displays the DecSpace homepage.

  • My Projects In this area, a registered user can create projects (with a click on the “New Project” button), choose whether the project is public or private, and manage the projects, using a set of functionalities. Each created project has associated the following: Name, Privacy, Last Update, Created, and Actions. Besides the functionality of creating new projects, the following actions are available for each project: Open Project (go to the “Workspace”), Duplicate Project (create a project equal to the selected project), and Delete Project (permanently eliminate the project, after confirmation by the user). In addition, the default order of visualizing the list of projects can be changed by inverting the alphabetical order of the project name, and the number of rows per page can be chosen among the four options (5, 10, 25, and All);

  • Settings In this area, it is possible to change the username and the password (exclusively available in the personal area of registered users);

  • Public Projects This area contains all public projects that are shared by users (available to everyone), with the following information for each project: Name, Owner, Last Update, and Created. The same possible Actions as in “My Projects” are available (open, duplicate, and delete), as well as the possibility of changing the project order by inverting the alphabetical order by “Name” or “Owner”, and choosing the number of rows per page;

  • Methods All the available methods are in this area. Each method has a short description, an example, and a step-by-step explanation, intended to provide some helpful information to the user;

  • FAQ It contains commonly asked questions and the respective answers related to some features of the platform;

  • Workspace This is the area where the users construct workflows by dragging and dropping, and properly connecting MCDA methods modules and data modules (“boxes”) in an intuitive graphical user interface. The following actions are available: Execute Workflow, Save Project, Import Data, Method Selection, Delete Workflow, and Project Menu (see Fig. 9). The data and the preference information can be manually provided in the methods modules. It is possible to import and export CSV and JSON files. A .zip file can also be imported, containing a workflow that was already used. The workflows can be executed, saved, and deleted.

Fig. 10
figure 10

DecSpace homepage (Pre-Alpha Version)

Information needed for building a Cat-SD workflow in DecSpace

  • (a) Data

    • Criteria In this table, seven columns appear by default:

      1. 1.

        Name It is the name of the criterion;

      2. 2.

        Description It is the respective criterion description or some related information (it is not mandatory);

      3. 3.

        Direction It corresponds to the preference direction (the user must choose one of the two possible options: “Maximize” or “Minimize”);

      4. 4.

        Scale Type It is related to the kind of data of the criterion performance levels (the user must choose “Ordinal” or “Cardinal”);

      5. 5.

        Min If the scale type is “Cardinal”, then a minimum value for the performance levels should be provided;

      6. 6.

        Max If the scale type is “Cardinal”, then a maximum value for the performance levels should be provided;

      7. 7.

        Num Levels If the scale type is “Ordinal”, then the total number of scale levels should be provided;

    • Actions Data related to the potential actions only include:

      1. 1.

        Name It is the name of the action;

      2. 2.

        Description It is the respective action description (it is not mandatory);

    • Performance Table The rows correspond to the actions and the columns corresponds to the criteria. Performance levels on each criterion must be provided for each action (the platform verify that they fulfill the criteria scales characteristics);

  • (b) Preference information

    • Reference Actions For each action, the following information is needed: the name of the category to be considered (Category), the name of the reference action (Name), and then the performance levels have to be fulfilled in each criterion column;

    • SD Functions For each criterion a set of rows with a value within the range \([-1,1]\) (SD Value) and the respective performance differences for which the function takes the SD Value must be provided in a form of a mathematical condition (Condition);

    • Weights For each category and each criterion, a value of the criterion weight must be given, i.e., a set of weights per category;

    • Interaction Coefficients Firstly, the user can choose a category among the predefined categories that appear as the possible options (Category). Secondly, for such a category, a first criterion can be chosen among the options, i.e., the previously defined criteria (Criterion 1), and then a second criterion, among the remaining criteria has to be selected (Criterion 2). Thirdly, the type of interaction can be chosen among the three options (Type). Finally, a value for the interaction coefficient must be provided (Value). This procedure has to be followed for all interaction coefficients considered in the model. Alternatively, the data can be previously organized in a file, and then imported and adequately connected, as for the input data and the preference parameters. The platform checks the non-negative condition (see Eq. 2 in Sect. 2.2 and notifies the user, displaying an alert message box, in case of the values do not fulfilled the condition;

    • Likeness Thresholds For each predefined category (Category) a likeness threshold must be defined with a value within the range [0.5, 1] (Value).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Costa, A.S., Figueira, J.R. & Borbinha, J. A multiple criteria socio-technical approach for the Portuguese Army Special Forces recruitment. 4OR-Q J Oper Res 20, 289–331 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10288-021-00481-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10288-021-00481-2

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation