Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process as a Two-phase Integrated Decision Approach for Large Nominal Groups

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When decision makers who comprise a large nominal group face an unstructured decision problem and no simultaneous interactive communications are available, problem identification and consensus building are difficult, if not impossible. Few tools are available to assist decision makers in this situation. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has typically been used to evaluate a set of alternatives after a decision problem has been structured as a hierarchy with various levels of criteria above the alternatives. With a group of decision makers, AHP has been used to evaluate those alternatives either by consensus building or by combining judgments or priorities using the geometric mean to aggregate their preferences. In this paper, we extend the use of AHP to a situation involving a large nominal group of dispersed decision makers where the entire hierarchy is not defined at the outset. In particular, we use the AHP as an integrative approach to identify the priorities of the various criteria and then use those priorities to screen and consolidate a large set of potential alternatives. This results in considering a reduced set of alternatives that will be affected by the more important criteria. The consolidated set of alternatives is evaluated by each individual in the group using AHP, combined using the geometric mean, and the results are synthesized to obtain the overall priorities of the alternatives. The approach is demonstrated and evaluated in a case study to select an alunmi anniversary gift to the U.S. Coast Guard Academy with a large nominal group of decision-makers dispersed throughout the United States.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aczel, J., and T.L. Saaty. (1983). “Procedures for Synthesizing Ratio Judgments,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27, 93–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apostolou, B.A., and J.M. Hassell. (1993). “An Empirical Examination of the Sensitivity of the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Departures from Recommended Consistency Ratios,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling 17(4/5), 163–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bard, J.F., and S.F. Sousk. (1990). “Tradeoff Analysis for Rough Terrain Cargo Handlers Using the AHP: An Example of Group Decision Making,” IIE Transactions on Engineering Management 37(3), 222–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basak, I. (1988). “When to Combine Judgments and When Not To in the Analytic Hierarchy Process: A New Method,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling 10(6), 395–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basak, I., and T. Saaty. (1993). “Group Decision Making Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling 17(4/5), 101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, H., E. Suh, and C. Suh. (1994). “Analytic Hierarchy Process: It Can Work for Group Decision Support Systems,” Computers and Industrial Engineering, 27(1- 4), 167–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M.A.P. (1994). “A Multicriteria Decision Model Application for Managing Group Decisions,” Journal of the Operational Research Society 45(1), 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decision Support Software (1986). Expert Choice™, Decision Support Software, Inc., McLean, VA.

  • Delbecq, A.L., A.H. Van de Ven, and D.H. Gustafson. (1975). Group Techniques for Program Planning. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctis, G., and R.B. Gallupe. (1987). “A Foundation for the Study of Group Decision Support Systems,” Management Science 33, 589–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctis, G., and G.W. Dickson. (1987). “GDSS Software: A Shell System in Support of a Program of Research,” pp. 431–439 in E.A. Stohr, L. Hoevel, L. Hynes, T. Chu, and A. Speckhard (eds). Proceedings of the 20th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Vol 1 North Hollywood, CA: Western Periodicals Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, R.F., and E.H. Forman. (1992). “Group Decision Support with the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Decision Support Systems, 8(2), 99–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C., and J. Radford. (1990) Tackling Strategic Problems. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankos, D., J. Pet-Edwards, R.L. Armacost, and J.C. Hosseini. (1997). “Structured Approaches to Developing Hierarchies in the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” paper presented at the INFORMS National Meeting, San Diego, CA.

  • Gallupe, R.B., G. DeSanctis, and G.W. Dickson. (1988). “Computer-Based Support for Group Problem-Finding: An Experimental Investigation,” MIS Quarterly 12(2), 277–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavish, B., J. Gerdes Jr., and S.I. Sridhar. (1995). “CM3: A Distributed Group Decision Support System,” IIE Transactions 27, 722–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamalainen, R.P., A.A. Salo, and K. Poysti. (1991). “Observations about Consensus Seeking in a Multiple Criteria Environment,” pp. 190–198 in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Hawaii Conference on System Sciences, Vol. IV, IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harker, P.T. (1987). “The Incomplete Pairwise Comparisons in the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Mathematical Modelling 9(11), 837–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatcher, M. (1992). “A Video Conferencing System for the United States Army,” Decision Support Systems. 8, 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G.P. (1984). “Issues in the Design of Group Decision Support Systems,” MIS Quarterly 8(3), 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iz, P.H., and L.R. Gardiner. (1993). “Analysis of Multiple Criteria Decision Support Systems for Cooperative Groups,” Group Decision and Negotiation 2, 61–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jessup, L.M., and J.S. Valacich. (eds.) (1993). Group Support Systems, New York: Macmilan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R.L., and C.W. Kirkwood. (1975). “Group Decision Making Using Cardinal Social Welfare Functions,” Management Science 22, 430–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R.L., and H. Raiffa. (1976). Decisions with Multiple Objectives. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khorramshahgol, R., and V.S. Moustakis. (1988). “Delphic Hierarchy Process (DHP): A Methodology for Setting Derived from the Delphi Method and Analytical Hierarchy Process,” Journal of Operational Research 37, 347–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linstone, H.A., and M. Turoff. (eds.) (1975). The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nag, B., and R. Ramanathan, R. (1996). “An Application of AHP for Socio-Economic Impact Assessment,” pp. 355–361 in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Vancouver, BC.

  • Ngwenyama, O.K., N. Bryson, and A. Mobolurin. (1996). “Supporting Facilitation in Group Support Systems: Techniques for Analyzing Consensus Relevant Data,” Decision Support Systems 16, 155–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, Jr., J.F., L. Applegate, and B. Konsynski. (1987). “Facilitating Group Creativity: Experience with a Decision Support System,” Journal of Management Information Systems 3(4), 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, Jr., J.F., A.R. Dennis, J.S. Valacich, and D.R. Vogel. (1991). “Information Technology for Groups: Generating Options for Mutual Gain,” Management Science 37(10), 1325–1346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pet-Edwards, J., R.I. Armacost, and N. Nayani. (1996). “Exploratory Analysis of Mean Group Random Indices and Consistency in Group Decision Making Using AHP,” pp. 460–469 in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. (1986). “Axiomatic Foundations of the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Management Science 32(7): 841–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. (1989). “Group Decision Making and the AHP,” pp. 59–67, in B.L. Golden, E.A. Wasil, and P.T. Harker (eds). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. (1994). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. (1996). Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1962). “The Architecture of Complexity,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 106, 467–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turoff, M., S.R. Hiltz, A.N.F. Bahgat, and A.R. Rana. (1993). “Distributed Group Support Systems,” MIS Quarterly 17(4), 399–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A., and A.L. Delbecq. (1971). “Nominal Versus Interacting Group Processes for Committee Decision-Making Effectiveness,” Academy of Management Journal 14(2), 203–212.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, 32816-2450

    Robert L. Armacost & Julie Pet-Edwards

  2. College of Business Administration, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, 53233

    Jamshid C. Hosseini

Authors
  1. Robert L. Armacost
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jamshid C. Hosseini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Julie Pet-Edwards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Armacost, R.L., Hosseini, J.C. & Pet-Edwards, J. Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process as a Two-phase Integrated Decision Approach for Large Nominal Groups. Group Decision and Negotiation 8, 535–555 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008622202638

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008622202638

Search

Navigation