Abstract
The Decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method is used to build and analyze a structural model with causal relationships between different criteria. In this paper, it shows that DEMATEL is the specific case of fuzzy decision maps (FDM) when the threshold function is linear. Both FDM and DEMATEL have the same direct and indirect influence matrix. FDM incorporates the eigenvalue method, the fuzzy cognitive maps, and the weighting equation. In addition two numerical examples are illustrated to demonstrate the proposed results. On the basis of the mathematical proof and numerical results, we can conclude that FDM is a generalization of DEMATEL method.
References
Andreou AS, Mateou NH, Zombanakis GA (2005) Soft computing for crisis management and political decision making: the use of genetically evolved fuzzy cognitive maps. Soft Comput 9(3):194–210
Axelrod R (1976) Structure of decision, the cognitive maps of political elite. Princeton University Press, London
Chen SJ, Hwang CL (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. Springer, Berlin
Chen WH, Yu R, Tzeng GH (2008) Comparison between the DEMATEL methods and fuzzy decision maps: a sensitive analysis approach, International Symposium on Management Engineering 2008. Waseda University, Kitakyushu
Chih YJ, Chen HC, Syzu Joseph Z, Tzeng GH (2006) Marketing strategy based on customer behavior for the LCD-TV. Int J Manag Decis Making 7(2/3):143–165
Fishburn PC (1970) Utility theory for decision-making. Wiley, New York
Fontela E, Gabus A (1976) The DEMATEL observer. Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Geneva
Gabus A, Fontela E (1972) World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Geneva
Grabisch M (1995) Fuzzy integral in multicriteria decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst 69(3):279–298
Hillier FS (2001) Evaluation and decision models: a critical perspective. Kluwer, Boston
Hori S, Shimizu Y (1999) Designing methods of human interface for supervisory control systems. Control Eng Pract 7(11):1413–1419
Huang CY, Tzeng GH (2007) Reconfiguring the innovation policy portfolios for Taiwan’s SIP mall industry. Technovation 27(12):744–765
Kosko B (1988) Hidden patterns in combined and adaptive knowledge networks. Int J Approx Reason 2(4):377–393
Liou James JH, Tzeng GH, Chang HC (2007) Airline safety measurement using a novel hybrid model. J Air Transp Manag 13(4):243–249
Pagageorgiou EI, Groumpos PP (2005) A new hybrid method using evolutionary algorithms to train fuzzy cognitive maps. Appl Soft Comput 5(4):409–431
Sekitani K, Takahashi I (2001) A unified model and analysis for AHP and ANP. J Oper Res Soc Jpn 44(1):67–89
Stylios CD, Groumpos PP (2004) Modeling complex systems using fuzzy cognitive maps. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 34(1):155–162
Tzeng GH, Chiang CH, Li CW (2007) Evaluating intertwined effects in E-learning programs: a novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Syst Appl 32(4):1028–1044
Warfield JN (1976) Social systems, planning and complexity. Wiley, New York
Yu R, Tzeng GH (2006) A soft computing method for multi-criteria decision making with dependence and feedback. Appl Math Comput 180(1):63–75
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1
1.1 Result of the supplier evaluation in DEMATAL for the operation processes of Example 1
1.2 Result of the supplier evaluation in FDM for the operation processes of Example 1
…
Appendix 2
2.1 Result of the customer evaluation in DEMATAL for the operation processes of Example 2
2.2 Result of the customer evaluation in FDM for the operation processes of Example 2
…
Appendix 3
Two extra examples are proposed to reinforce our research results. Example 3 shows how to evaluate the human capital. Example 4 shows how to evaluate the external structure capital.
Example 3
The human capital includes four indices: leadership (LS), turnover of professional employees (TPE), replacement cost of professional employees (RPE), and team work (TW). The grades/degrees of direct influence matrix as follow:
Next, we can obtain the steady-state matrix by calculating Eq. 6 in the FDM method and Eq. 5 in the DEMATEL as follows.
DEMATEL | LS | TPE | RPE | TW |
---|---|---|---|---|
Leadership (LS) | 0.5844 | 1.1515 | 0.6677 | 0.9668 |
Turnover of professional employees (TPE) | 0.4648 | 0.4714 | 0.4015 | 0.4460 |
Replacement cost of professional employees (RPE) | 0.5128 | 0.8462 | 0.3325 | 0.5393 |
Team work (TW) | 0.7039 | 1.0386 | 0.5904 | 0.5355 |
FDM (f(x) = x) | LS | TPE | RPE | TW |
---|---|---|---|---|
Leadership (LS) | 0.5843a | 1.1514a | 0.6677 | 0.9667a |
TPE | 0.4648 | 0.4714 | 0.4014a | 0.4460 |
RPE | 0.5128 | 0.8462 | 0.3325 | 0.5392a |
TW | 0.7039 | 1.0386 | 0.5904 | 0.5355 |
In above table, the numerical results show the DEMATEL method and the FDM method using linear function almost the same. This finding supports the FDM is a general methods of the DEMATEL method.
Example 4
The external structure capital includes five indices: market share (MS), customer satisfaction (CS), market growth rate (MGR), brand loyalty (BL), and future prospective of product market (FP). The grades/degrees of direct influence matrix as follow:
Next, we can obtain the steady-state matrix by calculating Eq. 6 in the FDM method and Eq. 5 in the DEMATEL as follows.
DEMATEL | MS | CS | MGR | BL | FP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Market share (MS) | 0.7212 | 0.8059 | 0.8677 | 0.7831 | 0.7093 |
Customer satisfaction (CS) | 1.0403 | 0.6438 | 0.9494 | 0.8840 | 0.7410 |
Market growth rate (MGR) | 0.5287 | 0.3725 | 0.4425 | 0.3687 | 0.5878 |
Brand loyalty (BL) | 0.9660 | 0.8133 | 0.8048 | 0.5845 | 0.6477 |
Future prospective of product market (FP) | 0.4190 | 0.2895 | 0.6525 | 0.2863 | 0.3221 |
FDM (f(x) = x) | MS | CS | MGR | BL | FP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
MS | 0.7212 | 0.8059 | 0.8677 | 0.7831 | 0.7093 |
CS | 1.0403 | 0.6438 | 0.9494 | 0.8840 | 0.7410 |
MGR | 0.5287 | 0.3725 | 0.4425 | 0.3687 | 0.5878 |
BL | 0.9660 | 0.8133 | 0.8048 | 0.5845 | 0.6477 |
Future prospective of FP | 0.4190 | 0.2895 | 0.6525 | 0.2863 | 0.3221 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tzeng, GH., Chen, WH., Yu, R. et al. Fuzzy decision maps: a generalization of the DEMATEL methods. Soft Comput 14, 1141–1150 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-009-0507-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-009-0507-0