Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A review of selected weighing methods in MCDM with a case study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Decision-making is undeniable and is an integral part of in almost all the processes either in the complex form or as a simple procedure. It often refers to the prioritizing (ranking) the alternatives based on several conflicting criteria. To ensure that the process of decision making runs smoothly with minimum errors, multiple criteria decision-making abbreviated as "MCDM" is used for obtaining the solution. The present work emphasized on the weighing methods, an important aspect in MCDM methods, that accurately determines the relative importance of each criterion. The relative importance of each criterion is determined by a set of preferences, called weights, represented between 0 and 1. The weights of criteria influence the outcome of any decision-making process, so it is essential to highlight the significance of weighing methods in determining the criteria preference. In literature, researchers have reported various weighing methods for calculating the relative weights of criteria used for ranking the alternatives. The present study, provides an overview of the some popular weighing methods applicable to the MCDM process and also shows the performance of these methods through a case study.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdollahzadeh G, Damalas CA, Sharifzadeh MS, Ahmadi-Gorgi H (2016) Selecting strategies for rice stem borer management using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Crop Prot 84:27–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Acharya V, Sharma SK, Gupta SK (2018) Analyzing the factors in industrial automation using analytic hierarchy process. Comput Electr Eng 71:877–886

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad S, Tahar RM (2014) Selection of renewable energy sources for sustainable development of electricity generation system using analytic hierarchy process: a case of Malaysia. Renew Energy 63:458–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad WNKW, Rezaei J, Sadaghiani S, Tavasszy LA (2017) Evaluation of the external forces affecting the sustainability of oil and gas supply chain using Best Worst Method. J Cleaner Prod 153:242–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Almahdi EM, Zaidan AA, Zaidan BB, Alsalem MA, Albahri OS, Albahri AS (2019) Mobile-based patient monitoring systems: a prioritisation framework using multi-criteria decision-making techniques. J Med Syst 43(7):219

    Google Scholar 

  • Aminbakhsh S, Gunduz M, Sonmez R (2013) Safety risk assessment using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) during planning and budgeting of construction projects. J Saf Res 46:99–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Amini S, Asoodar MA (2016) Selecting the most appropriate tractor using analytic hierarchy process—an Iranian case study. Inf Process Agric 3(4):223–234

    Google Scholar 

  • Aragonés-Beltrán P, Chaparro-González F, Pastor-Ferrando JP, Pla-Rubio A (2014) An AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)/ANP (Analytic Network Process)-based multi-criteria decision approach for the selection of solar-thermal power plant investment projects. Energy 66:222–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Aung TS, Luan S, Xu Q (2019) Application of multi-criteria-decision approach for the analysis of medical waste management systems in Myanmar. J Cleaner Prod 222:733–745

    Google Scholar 

  • Borade AB, Kannan G, Bansod SV (2013) Analytical hierarchy process-based framework for VMI adoption. Int J Prod Res 51(4):963–978

    Google Scholar 

  • Breaz RE, Bologa O, Racz SG (2017) Selecting industrial robots for milling applications using AHP. Proc Comput Sci 122:346–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Bui TD, Tsai FM, Tseng ML, Wu KJ, Chiu AS (2020) Effective municipal solid waste management capability under uncertainty in Vietnam: utilizing economic efficiency and technology to foster social mobilization and environmental integrity. J Cleaner Prod 259:120981

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhary P, Chhetri SK, Joshi KM, Shrestha BM, Kayastha P (2016) Application of an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in the GIS interface for suitable fire site selection: a case study from Kathmandu Metropolitan City Nepal. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 53:60–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Jin Q, Fang H, Lei H, Hu J, Wu Y, Wan Y (2019) Analytic network process: Academic insights and perspectives analysis. J Cleaner Prod 235:1276–1294

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheraghalipour A, Farsad S (2018) A bi-objective sustainable supplier selection and order allocation considering quantity discounts under disruption risks: a case study in plastic industry. Comput Ind Eng 118:237–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Chou YC, Yang CH, Lu CH, Dang VT, Yang PA (2017) Building criteria for evaluating green project management: an integrated approach of DEMATEL and ANP. Sustainability 9(5):740

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhir S, Marinov MV, Worsley D (2015) Application of the analytic hierarchy process to identify the most suitable manufacturer of rail vehicles for High Speed 2. Case Stud Transp Policy 3(4):431–448

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinçer H, Yüksel S, Martínez L (2019) Interval type 2-based hybrid fuzzy evaluation of financial services in E7 economies with DEMATEL-ANP and MOORA methods. Appl Soft Comput 79:186–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Dožić S, Kalić M (2014) An AHP approach to aircraft selection process. Transp Res Procedia 3:165–174

    Google Scholar 

  • Durmuşoğlu ZDU (2018) Assessment of techno-entrepreneurship projects by using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Technol Soc 54:41–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Erginel N, Uluskan M, Kuecuek G, Altıntaş M (2018) Evaluation methods for completed Six Sigma projects through an interval type-2 fuzzy ANP. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 35(2):1851–1863

    Google Scholar 

  • Ergu D, Kou G, Peng Y, Shi Y, Shi Y (2013) The analytic hierarchy process: task scheduling and resource allocation in cloud computing environment. J Supercomput 64(3):835–848

    Google Scholar 

  • Erol Ö, Kılkış B (2012) An energy source policy assessment using analytical hierarchy process. Energy Convers Manage 63:245–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Fartaj SR, Kabir G, Eghujovbo V, Ali SM, Paul SK (2019) Modeling transportation disruptions in the supply chain of automotive parts manufacturing company. Int J Prod Econ 222:107511

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyzi S, Khanmohammadi M, Abedinzadeh N, Aalipour M (2019) Multi-criteria decision analysis FANP based on GIS for siting municipal solid waste incineration power plant in the north of Iran. Sustain Cities Soc 47:101513

    Google Scholar 

  • Garg CP, Sharma A (2018) Sustainable outsourcing partner selection and evaluation using an integrated BWM–VIKOR framework. Environ Deve Sustain 22:1529

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghanbarizadeh A, Heydari J, Razmi J, Bozorgi-Amiri A (2019) A purchasing portfolio model for the commercial construction industry: a case study in a mega mall. Prod Plan Control 30(15):1283–1304

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghimire LP, Kim Y (2018) An analysis on barriers to renewable energy development in the context of Nepal using AHP. Renew Energy 129:446–456

    Google Scholar 

  • Giri S, Nejadhashemi AP (2014) Application of analytical hierarchy process for effective selection of agricultural best management practices. J Environ Manage 132:165–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindan K, Shankar KM, Devika K (2019) Achieving sustainable development goals through identifying and analyzing barriers to industrial sharing economy: a framework development. Int J Prod Econ 227:107575

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindan K, Shankar KM, Kannan D (2016) Application of fuzzy analytic network process for barrier evaluation in automotive parts remanufacturing towards cleaner production–a study in an Indian scenario. J Cleaner Prod 114:199–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta H (2018a) Assessing organizations performance on the basis of GHRM practices using BWM and Fuzzy TOPSIS. J Environ Manage 226:201–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta H (2018b) Evaluating service quality of airline industry using hybrid best worst method and VIKOR. J Air Transp Manag 68:35–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta H, Barua MK (2016) Identifying enablers of technological innovation for Indian MSMEs using best–worst multi criteria decision making method. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 107:69–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta H, Barua MK (2017) Supplier selection among SMEs on the basis of their green innovation ability using BWM and fuzzy TOPSIS. J Cleaner Prod 152:242–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta H, Barua MK (2018) A framework to overcome barriers to green innovation in SMEs using BWM and Fuzzy TOPSIS. Sci Total Environ 633:122–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta KP, Chaudhary NS (2017) Prioritizing the factors influencing whistle blowing intentions of teachers in higher education institutes in India. Procedia Comput Sci 122:25–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta P, Anand S, Gupta H (2017) Developing a roadmap to overcome barriers to energy efficiency in buildings using best worst method. Sustain Cities Soc 31:244–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeri SAS, Rezaei J (2019) A grey-based green supplier selection model for uncertain environments. J Cleaner Prod 221:768–784

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafezalkotob A, Hami-Dindar A, Rabie N, Hafezalkotob A (2018) A decision support system for agricultural machines and equipment selection: a case study on olive harvester machines. Comput Electron Agric 148:207–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambali A, Sapuan SM, Ismail N, Nukman Y (2010) Material selection of polymeric composite automotive bumper beam using analytical hierarchy process. J Central South Univ Technol 17(2):244–256

    Google Scholar 

  • Helingo M, Purwandari B, Satria R, Solichah I (2017) The use of analytic hierarchy process for software development method selection: a perspective of e-Government in Indonesia. Procedia Comput Sci 124:405–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu KH, Jianguo W, Tzeng GH (2018) Improving China’s regional financial center modernization development using a new hybrid MADM model. Technol Econ Dev Econ 24(2):429–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems: multiple attribute decision making—methods and appllication. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignatius J, Rahman A, Yazdani M, Šaparauskas J, Haron SH (2016) An integrated fuzzy ANP–QFD approach for green building assessment. J Civ Eng Manag 22(4):551–563

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahan A, Mustapha F, Sapuan SM, Ismail MY, Bahraminasab M (2012) A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 58(1–4):411–420

    Google Scholar 

  • Jayant A, Gupta P, Garg SK, Khan M (2014) TOPSIS-AHP based approach for selection of reverse logistics service provider: a case study of mobile phone industry. Procedia Eng 97:2147–2156

    Google Scholar 

  • Karimi H, Sadeghi-Dastaki M, Javan M (2020) A fully fuzzy best–worst multi attribute decision making method with triangular fuzzy number: a case study of maintenance assessment in the hospitals. Appl Soft Comput 86:105882

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayastha P, Dhital MR, De Smedt F (2013) Application of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study from the Tinau watershed, west Nepal. Comput Geosci 52:398–408

    Google Scholar 

  • Khalil N, Kamaruzzaman SN, Baharum MR (2016) Ranking the indicators of building performance and the users’ risk via Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP): case of Malaysia. Ecol Ind 71:567–576

    Google Scholar 

  • Khoshnava SM, Rostami R, Valipour A, Ismail M, Rahmat AR (2018) Rank of green building material criteria based on the three pillars of sustainability using the hybrid multi criteria decision making method. J Cleaner Prod 173:82–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilinç Y, Özdemir Ö, Orhan C, Firat M (2018) Evaluation of technical performance of pipes in water distribution systems by analytic hierarchy process. Sustain Cities Soc 42:13–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolahi H, Jahangiri M, Ghaem H, Rostamabadi A, Aghabeigi M, Farhadi P, Kamalinia M (2018) Evaluation of respiratory protection program in petrochemical industries: application of analytic hierarchy process. Saf Health Work 9(1):95–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Aswin A, Gupta H (2020) Evaluating green performance of the airports using hybrid BWM and VIKOR methodology. Tour Manag 76:103941

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Sah B, Singh AR, Deng Y, He X, Kumar P, Bansal RC (2017) A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 69:596–609

    Google Scholar 

  • Kursunoglu N, Onder M (2015) Selection of an appropriate fan for an underground coal mine using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 48:101–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Leksono EB, Suparno S, Vanany I (2019) Integration of a balanced scorecard, DEMATEL, and ANP for measuring the performance of a sustainable healthcare supply chain. Sustainability 11(13):3626

    Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Yu S, Chu J (2018) Optimal selection of manufacturing services in cloud manufacturing: a novel hybrid MCDM approach based on rough ANP and rough TOPSIS. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 34(6):4041–4056

    Google Scholar 

  • Liaghat M, Shahabi H, Deilami BR, Ardabili FS, Seyedi SN (2013) A multi-criteria evaluation using the analytic hierarchy process technique to analyze coastal tourism sites. Apcbee Procedia 5:479–485

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin CT, Hung KP, Hu SH (2018) A decision-making model for evaluating and selecting suppliers for the sustainable operation and development of enterprises in the aerospace industry. Sustainability 10(3):735

    Google Scholar 

  • Liou JJ, Tamošaitienė J, Zavadskas EK, Tzeng GH (2016) New hybrid COPRAS-G MADM Model for improving and selecting suppliers in green supply chain management. Int J Prod Res 54(1):114–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo HW, Liou JJ, Wang HS, Tsai YS (2018) An integrated model for solving problems in green supplier selection and order allocation. J Cleaner Prod 190:339–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandal B, Mandal S (2018) Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) based landslide susceptibility mapping of Lish river basin of eastern Darjeeling Himalaya India. Adv Space Res 62(11):3114–3132

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansor MR, Sapuan SM, Zainudin ES, Nuraini AA, Hambali A (2013) Hybrid natural and glass fibers reinforced polymer composites material selection using Analytical Hierarchy Process for automotive brake lever design. Mater Des 51:484–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathiyazhagan K, Diabat A, Al-Refaie A, Xu L (2015) Application of analytical hierarchy process to evaluate pressures to implement green supply chain management. J Cleaner Prod 107:229–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra M, Chatterjee S (2018) Application of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) algorithm to income insecurity susceptibility mapping—a study in the district of Purulia India. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 62:56–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohajeri N, Amin GR (2010) Railway station site selection using analytical hierarchy process and data envelopment analysis. Comput Ind Eng 59(1):107–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Mokarram M, Mokarram MJ, Gitizadeh M, Niknam T, Aghaei J (2020) A novel optimal placing of solar farms utilizing multi-criteria decision-making (MCDA) and feature selection. J Cleaner Prod 261:121098

    Google Scholar 

  • Nahm YE, Ishikawa H, Inoue M (2013) New rating methods to prioritize customer requirements in QFD with incomplete customer preferences. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 65(9–12):1587–1604

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassi CD, da Costa FCDC (2012) Use of the analytic hierarchy process to evaluate transit fare system. Res Transp Econ 36(1):50–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Özceylan E, Erbaş M, Tolon M, Kabak M, Durğut T (2016) Evaluation of freight villages: a GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis. Comput Ind 76:38–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Papadopoulos A, Sioen I, Cubadda F, Ozer H, Basegmez HO, Turrini A, De Henauw S (2015) TDS exposure project: application of the analytic hierarchy process for the prioritization of substances to be analyzed in a total diet study. Food Chem Toxicol 76:46–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Park J, Cho D (2016) Decision methodology for nitrogen removal process in the LNG plant using analytic hierarchy process. J Ind Eng Chem 37:75–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Pathania A, Rasool G (2017) Investigating E tailer’s perceived website quality using analytical hierarchy process technique. Procedia Comput Sci 122:1016–1023

    Google Scholar 

  • Peker I, Baki B, Tanyas M, Murat Ar I (2016) Logistics center site selection by ANP/BOCR analysis: a case study of Turkey. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30(4):2383–2396

    Google Scholar 

  • Petruni A, Giagloglou E, Douglas E, Geng J, Leva MC, Demichela M (2019) Applying analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to choose a human factors technique: choosing the suitable Human Reliability Analysis technique for the automotive industry. Saf Sci 119:229–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed Iran. Nat Hazards 63(2):965–996

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahimdel MJ, Ataei M (2014) Application of analytical hierarchy process to selection of primary crusher. Int J Min Sci Technol 24(4):519–523

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao MS, Pawar PJ (2018) Application of AHP for process parameter selection and consistency verification in secondary steel manufacturing. Mater Today Proc 5(13):27166–27170

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy BP, Kelly MP, Thokala P, Walters SJ, Duenas A (2014) Prioritising public health guidance topics in the National Institute for health and care excellence using the analytic hierarchy process. Public Health 128(10):896–903

    Google Scholar 

  • Ren J, Liang H, Chan FT (2017) Urban sewage sludge, sustainability, and transition for Eco-City: multi-criteria sustainability assessment of technologies based on best-worst method. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 116:29–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J (2015) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53:49–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J, Hemmes A, Tavasszy L (2017) Multi-criteria decision-making for complex bundling configurations in surface transportation of air freight. J Air Transp Manag 61:95–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J, Nispeling T, Sarkis J, Tavasszy L (2016) A supplier selection life cycle approach integrating traditional and environmental criteria using the best worst method. J Cleaner Prod 135:577–588

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J, Wang J, Tavasszy L (2015) Linking supplier development to supplier segmentation using Best Worst Method. Expert Syst Appl 42(23):9152–9164

    Google Scholar 

  • Roig-Tierno N, Baviera-Puig A, Buitrago-Vera J, Mas-Verdu F (2013) The retail site location decision process using GIS and the analytical hierarchy process. Appl Geogr 40:191–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabaei D, Erkoyuncu J, Roy R (2015) A review of multi-criteria decision making methods for enhanced maintenance delivery. Procedia CIRP 37:30–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Samanlioglu F, Ayağ Z (2016) Fuzzy ANP-based PROMETHEE II approach for evaluation of machine tool alternatives. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30(4):2223–2235

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapuan SM, Kho JY, Zainudin ES, Leman Z, Ali BA, Hambali A (2011) Materials selection for natural fiber reinforced polymer composites using analytical hierarchy process. Indian J Eng Mater Sci 18:255–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Seejata K, Yodying A, Wongthadam T, Mahavik N, Tantanee S (2018) Assessment of flood hazard areas using analytical hierarchy process over the lower Yom Basin, Sukhothai Province. Procedia Eng 212:340–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Serrai W, Abdelli A, Mokdad L, Hammal Y (2017) Towards an efficient and a more accurate web service selection using MCDM methods. J Comput Sci 22:253–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh RP, Nachtnebel HP (2016) Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) application for reinforcement of hydropower strategy in Nepal. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 55:43–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Sitorus F, Cilliers JJ, Brito-Parada PR (2019) Multi-criteria decision making for the choice problem in mining and mineral processing: applications and trends. Expert Syst Appl 121:393–417

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutadian AD, Muttil N, Yilmaz AG, Perera BJC (2017) Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process to identify parameter weights for developing a water quality index. Ecol Ind 75:220–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Tadić S, Krstić M, Roso V, Brnjac N (2019) Planning an intermodal terminal for the sustainable transport networks. Sustainability 11(15):4102

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarei PK, Thakkar JJ, Nag B (2018) A hybrid approach for quantifying supply chain risk and prioritizing the risk drivers. J Manuf Technol Manag 29:533

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas L, Saaty A (1977) Scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tsita KG, Pilavachi PA (2012) Evaluation of alternative fuels for the Greek road transport sector using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy 48:677–686

    Google Scholar 

  • Uyan M (2013) GIS-based solar farms site selection using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in Karapinar region, Konya/Turkey. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 28:11–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Velasquez M, Hester PT (2013) An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. Int J Oper Res 10(2):56–66

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal LA, Marle F, Bocquet JC (2011) Measuring project complexity using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Int J Project Manage 29(6):718–727

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal LA, Sahin E, Martelli N, Berhoune M, Bonan B (2010) Applying AHP to select drugs to be produced by anticipation in a chemotherapy compounding unit. Expert Syst Appl 37(2):1528–1534

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan SP, Xu GL, Dong JY (2017) Supplier selection using ANP and ELECTRE II in interval 2-tuple linguistic environment. Inf Sci 385:19–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Wudhikarn R (2016) An efficient resource allocation in strategic management using a novel hybrid method. Manag Decis 54(7):1702–1731. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2015-0380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C, Barnes D (2016) An integrated model for green partner selection and supply chain construction. J Cleaner Prod 112:2114–2132

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu JZ, Santoso CH, Roan J (2017) Key factors for truly sustainable supply chain management. Int J Logist Manag 28:1198

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu Y, Wang Y, Chen K, Xu C, Li L (2017) Social sustainability assessment of small hydropower with hesitant PROMETHEE method. Sustain Cities Soc 35:522–537

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu Y, Zhang B, Xu C, Li L (2018) Site selection decision framework using fuzzy ANP-VIKOR for large commercial rooftop PV system based on sustainability perspective. Sustain Cit Soc 40:454–470

    Google Scholar 

  • Yasmin M, Tatoglu E, Kilic HS, Zaim S, Delen D (2020) Big data analytics capabilities and firm performance: an integrated MCDM approach. J Bus Res 114:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeh CC (2017) Using a hybrid model to evaluate development strategies for digital content. Technol Econ Develop Econ 23(6):795–809

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yusof NAM, Salleh SH (2013) Analytical hierarchy process in multiple decisions making for higher education in Malaysia. Procedia-Soc Behav Sci 81:389–394

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J (2017) Evaluating regional low-carbon tourism strategies using the fuzzy Delphi-analytic network process approach. J Cleaner Prod 141:409–419

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Applied Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Roorkee, Saharanpur Campus, Roorkee, 247667, India

    Meenu Singh & Millie Pant

Authors
  1. Meenu Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Millie Pant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meenu Singh.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singh, M., Pant, M. A review of selected weighing methods in MCDM with a case study. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 12, 126–144 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-01033-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-01033-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation