A Handbook on Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods

4Analytic Network Process (ANP)

4.1 Introduction

Quite often real‐world decision‐making problems can be described as situations in which the stakeholders’ interests can only be portrayed through a set of evaluation criteria, while the decision‐maker is faced with a set of viable, feasible, alternatives, which cannot fully outperform and dominate one another. Multiattribute decision‐making (MADM) can provide the decision‐makers with elaborate frameworks composed of logically supported instruments and mathematically expressed procedures to deal with the aforementioned circumstances. In light of MADM, one should first attempt to assess the feasible alternatives with regard to the predefined evaluation criteria using measuring scales. Note that these measuring scales could be defined both explicitly, where exists a standard and generally approved scale (i.e. direct measurements) or implicitly, where the decision‐makers’ subjective judgments would form an arbitrarily defined measuring scale (i.e. relative measurements; Saaty 1977). Thus, this would be where the decision‐makers’ expertise and experience on the matter at hand can help the whole decision‐making process to arrive at a reliable conclusion (Saaty 1980). The challenge behind such a procedure, as it happens in most practical, real‐world cases of decision‐making, is where the stakeholders’ interest is represented by some intangible criteria. This is where employing relative measurements have proven to be beneficial for the ...