Using FITradeoff for Supporting a Decision Process of a Multicriteria Decision Problem

  • Eduarda Asfora FrejEmail author
  • Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
  • Danielle Costa Morais
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 274)


In the scope of MAVT (Multi-Attribute Value Theory), one of the most difficult tasks is the elicitation of criteria scaling constants of an additive model for the aggregation of criteria. That might be the reason why there are so many MCDM/A (Multi-Criteria Decision Making/Aiding) methods, among which is the FITradeoff (Flexible and Interactive Tradeoff) method, which has been developed precisely to meet this challenge. One of its advantages is that it uses partial information about the preferences of a Decision Maker (DM). This requires less effort from the DM, since this method makes comparisons of consequences (or outcomes) based on strict preference rather than on indifference, which is what the traditional tradeoff procedure does. Two case studies are presented using the FITradeoff method: a supplier selection problem and a facility location problem. Using a Decision Support System of FITradeoff for the decision process, the flexibility of this process is analyzed, in order to determine the best one in a specified set of alternatives, or even to rank them.



This work had partial support from the Brazilian Research Council (CNPq).


  1. Belton, V., & Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borcherding, K., Eppel, T., & Von Winterfeldt, D. (1991). Comparison of weighting judgments in multiattribute utility measurement. Management Science, 37, 1603–1619. Scholar
  3. Bouyssou, D. (1986). Some remarks on the notion of compensation in MCDM. European Journal of Operational Research, 26(1), 150–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de Almeida, A. T., & Roselli, L. R. P. (2017). Visualization for decision support in FITradeoff method: exploring its evaluation with cognitive neuroscience. In: I. Linden, C. Liu, C. Colot (Eds.), Decision Support Systems VII. Data, Information and Knowledge Visualization in Decision Support Systems. LNBIP 282 (pp. 61–73). Heidelberg: Springer. doi: Google Scholar
  5. de Almeida, A. T., Cavalcante, C. A. V., Alencar, M. H., Ferreira, R. J. P., Almeida-Filho, A. T., & Garcez, T. V. (2015). Multicriteria and multiobjective models for risk, reliability and maintenance decision analysis, International series in operations research & management science (Vol. 231). New York: Springer. Scholar
  6. de Almeida, A. T., de Almeida, J. A., Costa, A. P. C. S., & de Almeida-Filho, A. T. (2016). A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoff. European Journal of Operational Research, 250, 179–191. Scholar
  7. de Almeida-Filho, A. T., de Almeida, A. T., & Costa, A. C. S. (2017). A flexible elicitation procedure for additive model scale constants. Annals of Operations Research, 259, 65–83. Scholar
  8. Dell’Ovo, M., Frej, E. A., Oppio, A., Capolongo, S., Morais, D. C., & de Almeida, A. T. (2017). Multicriteria decision making for healthcare facilities location with visualization based on FITradeoff method. In: I. Linden, C. Liu, C. Colot (Eds.), Decision Support Systems VII. Data, Information and Knowledge Visualization in Decision Support Systems. LNBIP 282 (pp. 32–44). Heidelberg: Springer. doi: Google Scholar
  9. Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2006). Where next for problem structuring methods. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 766–768. Scholar
  10. Edwards, W., Miles, R. F., & von Winterfeldt, D. (2007). Advances in decision analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frej, E. A., Roselli, L. R. P., de Almeida, J. A., & de Almeida, A. T. (2017). A multicriteria decision model for supplier selection in a food industry based on FITradeoff method. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2017, 1–9. Scholar
  12. Greco, S., Figueira, J., & Ehrgott, M. (2016). Multiple criteria decision analysis. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Keeney, R. L. (2009). Value-focused thinking: A path to creative decision making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decision analysis with multiple conflicting objectives. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Salo, A. A., & Hämäläinen, R. P. (1992). Preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements. Operations Research, 40, 1053–1061. Scholar
  16. Weber, M. (1987). Decision making with incomplete information. European Journal of Operational Research, 28, 44–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Weber, M., & Borcherding, K. (1993). Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 67, 1–12. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eduarda Asfora Frej
    • 1
    Email author
  • Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
    • 1
  • Danielle Costa Morais
    • 1
  1. 1.CDSID - Center for Decision Systems and Information DevelopmentUniversidade Federal de PernambucoRecifeBrazil

Personalised recommendations