Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Decisional Power in Group Decision Making: A Note on the Allocation of Group Members' Weights in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART

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

Abstract

Many complex decisions are made in a group environment, where the decision is made jointly by a committee or group structure. The individual group members are often not equally qualified to contribute equitably to the decision process, or may have different saliences (desires) to influence the decision. A quantitative knowledge of the players' decisional power is useful for better understanding of the group decision process, and could even be used in weighted voting within the group structure. We adapt the REMBRANDT suite of decision models (multiplicative AHP and SMART) to measure decisional power in groups, and we generalise this to cater for the case where power itself is deemed to be multidimensional in nature, and the case of uncertain subjective judgements of power amongst group members.

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

  • Barzilai, J., and F. A. Lootsma. (1997). “Power Relations and Group Aggregation in theMultiplicative AHP and SMART, ” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 6, 155–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodily, S. E.(1979). “A Delegation Process for Combining Individual Utility Functions, ” Management Science 25, 1035–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. (1992). “A Note on Conflict Resolution and Truthtelling, ” European Journal of OperationalResearch 60, 109–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feller, W. (1971). An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications, Vol.II. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambarelli, G. (1990). “A New Approach for Evaluating the Shapley Value, ”Optimization 21, 445–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambarelli, G. (1992). “Political and Financial Applications of the PowerIndices, ” in G. Ricci (ed.), Decision Processes in Economics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 84–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holler, M. J., and X. Li. (1995). “From Public Good Index to Public Value: An Axiomatic Approach andGeneralization, ” Control and Cybernetics 24, 257–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holubiec, J. W., and J. W. Mercik. (1994).Inside Voting Procedures. Accedo Verlag, Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lootsma, F. A. (1993). “Scale sensitivity in themultiplicative AHP and SMART, ” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 2, 87–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lootsma, F. A.(1997). Fuzzy Logic for Planning and Decision Making. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lootsma, F. A.(1999). Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis via Ratio and Difference Judgement. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan, R., and L. S. Ganesh. (1994). “Group preference aggregation methodsemployed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members’ weightages, ” European Journal of Operational Research 79, 249–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, A. E. (ed.). (1988). The Shapley Value: Essays in Honour ofLloyd S. Shapley. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic HierarchyProcess: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnovec, F. (1995). “ThePolitical System and Economic Transition, ” in The Czech Republic and Economic Transition in Eastern Europe. Academic Press, New York, 47–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnovec, F. (1996). “Weights and Votes in the European Union:Extension and Institutional Reform, ” Prague Economic Papers 2, 161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnovec, F. (1998). “Monotonicity of Power Indices, ” in T. J. Stewart and R. C. Van den Honert (eds.), Trends in Multicriteria Decision Making. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 199–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Honert, R. C. (1998). “StochasticPairwise Comparative Judgements and Direct Ratings of Alternatives in the REMBRANDT System, ” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Making 7, 87–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Winterfeldt, D., and W. Edwards. (1986). Decision Analysis andBehavioural Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widgrén, M. (1994). “Voting Power in the ECand the Consequences of Two Different Enlargements, ” European Economic Review 38, 1153–1170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widgrén, M. (1995). “Probabilistic Voting Power in the EU Council: the Cases of Trade Policy and SocialRegulation, ” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 97, 345–356.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, 7701, South Africa

    R.C. Van den Honert

Authors
  1. R.C. Van den Honert
    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

Van den Honert, R. Decisional Power in Group Decision Making: A Note on the Allocation of Group Members' Weights in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART. Group Decision and Negotiation 10, 275–286 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011201501379

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011201501379

Search

Navigation