Journal of Information Organization


Vol No. 10 ,Issue No. 3 2020

Decision Making Process and its Methods: The Issues and Prospects
Jorge Ivan Romero-Gelvez, Felix Antonio Cortes-Aldana, Monica Garcia-Melon, Jorge Aurelio Herrera Cuartas, Olmer Garcia Bedoya
Universidad Nacional de Colombia,Universitat Politecnica de Valencia, Universidad de Bogota Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Bogota
Abstract: In this work we presented an enhanced group decision making issue. The study addressed the efforts in this direction which is important to all decision makers. In the work we introduced a method to assign different levels of importance to every decision-maker according to their perceived importance in the group. Basically, the judgments are collected by an html form and use a proposed method based on SNA and DEMATEL to assign weights to decision makers according to their reputation in the decision-group. Finally, we fix the problem using AHP in order to rank the alternatives.
Keywords: Influence, SNA, Consensus, Group-Decision-Making, MCDA, DEMATEL Decision Making Process and its Methods: The Issues and Prospects
DOI:https://doi.org/10.6025/jio/2020/10/3/86-99
Full_Text   PDF 1.19 MB   Download:   3  times
References:

[1] BaykasogLu, A., KaplanogLu, V., Durmu¸sOgLu, Z.D., S¸ Ahin, C. (2013). Integrating fuzzy dematel and fuzzy hierarchical topsis methods for truck selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(3), 899–907.
[2] Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., Johnson, J. C. Analyzing social networks. Sage.
[3] Cabrerizo, F. J., P´erez, I. J., Herrera-Viedma, E. (2010). Managing the consensus in group decision making in an unbalanced fuzzy linguistic context with incomplete information. Knowledge-Based Systems, 23(2), 169–181.
[4] Cabrerizo, F. J., Chiclana, F., Urena, M., Herrera-Viedma, E. (2013). Challenges and open questions in soft consensus models. In: 2013 Joint IFSA World Congress and NAFIPS Annual Meeting (IFSA/NAFIPS). p 944–949. IEEE.
[5] Dalalah, D., Hayajneh, M., Batieha, F. (2011). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for supplier selection. Expert systems with applications, 38(7), 8384–8391.
[6] DeGroot, M. H. (1974). Reaching a consensus. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69 (345), 118–121.
[7] Fontela, E., Gabus, A. (1974). Dematel, innovative methods.
[8] Fontela, E., Gabus, A. (1976). The dematel observer (1976)
[9] Friedkin, N. E. (2006). A structural theory of social influence, vol. 13. Cambridge University Press (2006)
[10] Friedkin, N. E., Johnsen, E.C. (1990). Social influence and opinions. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 15(3-4), 193– 206.
[11] Friedkin, N. E., Johnsen, E. C. (2011). Social influence network theory: A sociological examination of small group dynamics, vol. 33. Cambridge University Press.
[12] Gelvez, J., Aldana, F. C., Sep´ulveda, G. (2014). Mining method selection methodology by multiple criteria decision analysis—case study in colombian coal mining. In: International Symposium of the Analytic Hierarchy Process,Washington DC, USA.
[13] Harary, F. (1959). A criterion for unanimity in french’s theory of social power.
[14] Johnsen, E. Studies in multiobjective decision models. Studentlitteratur Lund.
[15] Kamis, N. H., Chiclana, F., Levesley, J. (2019). An influence-driven feedback system for preference similarity network clustering based consensus group decision making model. Information Fusion, 52, 257–267.
[16] Katz, L. (1953). A new status index derived from sociometric analysis. Psychometrika, 18(1), 39–43.
[17] KerÇsuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (swara). Journal of business economics and management, 11(2), 243–258.
[18] Khan, G. F. (2015). Seven Layers of Social Media Analytics: Mining Business Insights from Social Media Text, Actions, Networks, Hyperlinks, Apps, Search Engines, and Location Data. Gohar Feroz Khan.
[19] Levine, J. M., Moreland, R. L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual review of psychology, 41(1), 585–634.
[20] Lin, C. J., Wu, W. W. (2008). A causal analytical method for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(1), 205–213.
[21] Newcomb, T. M. (1951). Social psychological theory: integrating individual and social approaches.
[22] Romero Gelvez, J. I. (2012). Selecci´on de m´etodos extractivos y su impacto en la productividad minera. estudio de caso en la miner´1a de carb´on colombiana (Diciembre 2012)
[23] Romero-Gelvez, J. I., Cortes-Aldana, F. A., Franco-Sepulveda, G. (2015). Compromise solutions in mining method selection - case study in colombian coal mining. DYNA, 82, 127–136 (06 2015)
[24] Romero-Gelvez, J. I., Garcia-Melon, M. (2016). Influence analysis in consensus search—a multi criteria group decision making approach in environmental management. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 15(04), 791–813.
[25] Saaty, T. L. (1998). What is the analytic hierarchy process? In: Mathematical models for decision support, p 109–121. Springer.
[26] Saaty, T. L., Peniwati, K. (2012). Group decision making: drawing out and reconciling differences. RWS publications.
[27] Sabidussi, G. (1966). The centrality index of a graph. Psychometrika, 31(4), 581–603.
[28] Shannon, C. E., Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication (urbana, il)
[29] Simos, J. (1990). Evaluer l’impact sur l’environnement: Une approche originale parl’analyse multicrit‘ere et la n´egociation. In: Evaluer l’impact sur l’environnement: une approche originale par l’analyse multicrit‘ere et la n´egociation. Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes.