Analytical Hierarchy Process Because people choose these three elements: importance, preference and likelihood to evaluate all the possible alternatives to a decision which sometimes is not consistent with every decision situation, the concept of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was developed by Dr. Thomas Saaty. Dr. Saaty described the AHP as a decision making approach based on the "innate human ability to make sound judgments about small problems" AHP transforms complex decision problems into simple decisions for both individuals and groups that employees the use of it to make decision. It is accommodative of intuition, compromise, and consensus structure without narrow-mindedness. The main purpose of this paper is to discuss what the AHP is and some other aspects of it. What is AHP? Saaty suggested AHP as a process that requires structuring the decision problem to demonstrate key elements and relationships that elicits judgments reflecting feelings or emotions, and whose judgments can be represented by meaningful numbers having ratio properties. In the AHP approach, complex decisions are organized and assessed against all possible alternatives using a hierarchy of multifaceted objectives allowing for a better, easier, and more efficient identification of selection criteria. How AHP works AHP is used to first decompose the decision problem into a hierarchy of easily comprehended sub-problems, each of which can be analyzed independently. The elements of the hierarchy can relate to any aspect of the decision problem tangible or intangible, estimated or carefully measured, well or poorly understood. Once that hierarchy is established, the decision maker systematically examines the various elements, comparing them to each other in pairs. In making the comparisons, the decision maker can use his/her judgments about the elements’ relative meaning and importance, or they can use well refined data about the elements. AHP converts the judgments to numerical values that are processed, evaluated and compared over the entire range of the decision problem. A numerical weight or priority vector is derived for each element of the hierarchy, allowing diverse and often incommensurable elements to be compared to one another in a rational and consistent way. This capability distinguishes AHP from other decision making techniques. At the end of the process, numerical priorities are derived for each of the decision alternatives. It is then a simple matter to pick the best alternative, or to rank them in order of relative preference.
The idea and the concept of shared decision making in practice is recent. The principles regarding this specific module were beeing documented since 1982. We could eventually say that shared decision making is a new concept among practitioners. [3]
In order to address the above components, five decision making steps have to be put in place, these are; being attentive, being intelligent, being reasonable, being responsible, and being reflective. The first step, being attentive, involves evaluating the whole situation and coming up with the data and information about the problem at hand. In so doing the following questions are viewed; what facts to bear in mind, what direction to take so as to get the expected solution, and what is the main issue to work on. In the second step, being intelligent, the information is clearly studied to determine whether the collected data is revealing the correct details concerning the problem. Determine the stakeholde...
In everyday real life situations, one keeps on making various decisions depending on a number of factors. Thus, decision-making is an integral tool in human life, and one cannot avoid it. In view of this, experts report that individuals make use of varying decision-making models to arrive at a decision that suits them. Here, the writer presents four decision-making models, namely the classical, behavioral, satisficing, and optimizing models.
...analyze multiple criteria ranking problems based on the proposed case-based distance models is shown in Figure 3.2. It includes the following steps:
The Forrester-Miller and Davis Decision Making Model (1996) has seven steps. These steps are outlined in the subsequent sections (Forrester-Miller & Davis, 1996).
This step depends on defining the right problem at the beginning of the process too create usable alternative to the objectives that will be used to make a decision. Identifying as many alternatives as possible will offer a wide range of possible solutions that can be used to make a decision. The alternatives selected should be the ones that will enable the decision made to achieve the objectives of the decision problem. Joan’s next step in the PrOACT decision making model is to understand the consequences and repercussion of every alternative identified. When she reaches this point of the PrOACT decision making model Joan can map the alternatives she selected for the objectives statement for her decision problem. At this point Joan can use decision matrix to identify the best alternative that can be used to accomplish the objectives of the problems she identified. The final step in Joan’s PrOACT decision making model is wrestling with trade-offs equalizing some alternative in order to apply the same weight when used in the decision making process. This is not a complex process but identifying similar items or process that can be weighted equally should be used when making trade-offs. This step involves identifying what will be given up by choosing one alternative comparatively to what will be given up by choosing another alternative for the decision that is being made.
Multi-Criteria decision Making (MCDM) can be divided into two categories: Multi Attribute Decision Making (MADM) and Multi Objective Decision Making (MODM). During the last few years, the MCDM theory has been applied in many disciplines such as operations research and management science. The theory revolves around ranking a finite number of alternatives based on a set of performance attributes. The decision variables can be quantitative or qualitative. MADM models include discrete variables with a number of pre-specified alternatives and do not require an explicit relation between the input and output variables. As such, most of the MADM models are defined by a decision matrix.
The following is a decision-making model that I have used to arrive at a decision.
When the decision-maker facing a complex problem with multiple conflicting and subjective criteria (for example location or investment selection, projects ranking and so forth), the decision-making method based on multi-criteria is so called the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). AHP is originally proposed by Saaty in 1980[1]. It is based on four steps: problem modeling, weights valuation, weights aggregation and sensitivity analysis. To analysis the problem for the decision making process, it can be divided into three parts: goal, criteria and alternatives. First of all, AHP shows an advantage that it permits a hierarchical structure of the criteria, which provides users with a better focus on specific criteria and sub-criteria when allocating the weights. [1] Secondly, The AHP method uses a ratio scale, so it doesn’t require units in the comparison, and the decision make doesn’t need to make a numerical
Decision making process in place – reflecting the first three principle and giving due weight to the stake holders
The decision makers have made their judgements from comparing criteria and alternatives. The next step is the aggregation of those judgements. There are two main aggregation methods: Aggregation of Individual Judgements (AIJ) and Aggregation of Individual Priorities (AIP).
As previously stated, the third level of analysis encompasses all the possible influences upon the decision making individual. Unlike level one and level two, the third level of analysis can go beyond the assumption of a monolithic state. In addition, it can do so without losing the ability to consider the state as such. Depending on the model used, the level three analysis can either probe into a deeper dimension to seek out the reasons for a state’s behavior by looking at different groups that influence the decision maker (as in the organi...
... deliberations that should affect our selection of a way of action. Having a process for ethical decision creation is extremely effective. When adopted consistently, the method develops into a recognizable system that people can manage to work with automatically in devoid of consulting the precise steps. Although all decisions should be handled equally, balancing act takes precedence as to what options are better because pleasing both sides may at times be untenable.
From a practical point-of-view, of the most important human skills is decision-making. Both at a personal level and in context of organizations, decision-making skill strongly affects the quality of life and success. Decision-making is the process by which a person or group recognizes a choice, gathers information, analyzes the data, and determines the best option to choose. The decision-making process employs high levels of critical thinking skills and problem-solving techniques. Decisions are guided by several factors, primarily the significance of the issue, the impact the decision may have, and the person's or group's morals and cultural norms. For less significant decisions that have little impact, people might not invoke the higher thinking skills that theorists expect (Decision-Making 2015). Flipping a coin, hoping for a miraculous sign, following the crowd, or by passing the responsibility to someone else are all means of making decisions. For more important decisions with greater impact, people often employ more advanced thought processes like those demonstrated in decision-making models by social psychologists and behaviorists.
This paper will focus on the Rational Model for decision-making. The first section will describe the Rational Model for decision-making. It will identify all the steps of the Rational Model and what they entail. The second section will detail a recent job-related issue I was involved with. I will discuss the issue and show how the Rational Model of decision-making was effectively utilized to reach a decision.