Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Group Decision Processes

  • Ahti Salo
  • Raimo P. Hämäläinen
Part of the Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation book series (AGDN, volume 4)


Important decisions are often taken by groups of decision makers who need to make choices among several alternatives, based on an appraisal of how the alternatives are likely to perform with regard to multiple objectives. Such decision processes can be supported by the methods of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) which help generate decision recommendations and offer process benefits in terms of enhanced decision quality, improved communication, and enhanced commitment to decision implementation. In this chapter, we outline widely used MCDA methods and consider their uses in group decision making. We also review selected case studies and offer guidelines for the design of MCDA-assisted group decision processes. We conclude with thoughts on promising application domains and future research topics.


Analytic Hierarchy Process Group Decision Decision Alternative Decision Context Decision Objective 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 2.
    Arrow KJ, Raynaud H (1986) Social choice and multicriterion decision making. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  2. 3.
    Bana e Costa CA, Fernandes TG, Correia PVD (2006) Prioritisation of public investments in social infrastructures using multicriteria value analysis and decision conferencing: A case study. Int Trans Oper Res 13:279–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 4.
    Barcus A, Montibeller G (2008) Supporting the allocation of software development work in distributed teams with multi-criteria decision analysis. Omega–Int J Manage S 36(3):464–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 5.
    Basak I, Saaty TL (1993) Group decision making using the analytic hierarchy process. Math Comput Model 17(4–5):101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 6.
    Bell ML, Hobbs BF, Ellis H (2003) The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in the integrated assessment of climate change: implications for IA practitioners. Soc Econ Plan Sci 37:289–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 7.
    Belton V, Gear T (1983) On a short-coming of Saaty’s method of analytic hierarchies. Omega–Int J Manage S 11:228–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 8.
    Belton V, Pictet J (1997) A framework for group decision using a MCDA model: sharing, aggregating or comparing. J Decis Syst 6(3):283–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 9.
    Belton V, Ackermann F, Shepherd I (1997) Integrated support from problem structuring through to alternative evaluation using COPE and VISA. J Multi-Crit Decis Anal 6:115–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 10.
    Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 11.
    Bertsch V, Geldermann J (2008) Preference elicitation and sensitivity analysis in multicriteria group decision support for industrial risk and emergency management. Int J Emerg Manage 5(1–2):7–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 12.
    Bose U, Davey AM, Olson DL (1997) Multi-attribute utility methods in group decision making: Past applications and potential for inclusion in GDSS. Omega–Int J Manage S 25(6):691–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 13.
    Brans JP, Macharis C, Kunsch PL, Chevalier A, Schwaninger M (1998) Combining multicriteria decision aid and system dynamics for the control of socio-economic processes. An iterative real-time procedure. Eur J Oper Res 109(2):428–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 14.
    Brummer V, Könnölä T, Salo A (2008) Foresight within ERA-NETs: experiences from the preparation of an international research program. Technol Forecast Soc 75(4):483–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 15.
    Brummer V, Salo A, Nissinen J, Liesiö J (2010) A methodology for the identification of prospective collaboration networks in international R&D Programs. Int J Tech Manage (to appear)Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    Checkland P (1989) The stages of soft systems methodology. In: Rosenhead J, Mingers J (eds) Rational methods for a problematic world revisited, 2nd Ed. Wiley, Chichester; pp 71–100Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Davey A, Olson D (1998) Multiple criteria decision making models in group decision support. Group Decis Negotiation 7:55–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 18.
    Debreu G (1960) Topological methods in cardinal utility theory. In: Arrow KJ, Karlin S, Suppes P (eds), Mathematical methods in the social sciences. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, pp 16–26Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    Dias LC, Clímaco JN (2005) Dealing with imprecise information in group multicriteria decisions: a methodology and a GDSS architecture. Eur J Oper Res 160(2):291–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 20.
    Dyer JS (1990) Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. Manage Sci 36:249–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 21.
    Dyer RF, Forman EH (1992) Group decision support with the AHP. Decis Support Syst 8:99–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 22.
    Eden C (2008) Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems. Eur J Oper Res 159(3):673–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 23.
    Efremov R, Insua DR, Lotov A (2008) A framework for participatory decision support using Pareto frontier visualization, goal identification and arbitration. Eur J Oper Res 199(2):459–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 24.
    Fan ZP, Ma J, Jiang YP, Sun YH, Ma L (2006) A goal programming approach to group decision making based on multiplicative preference relations and fuzzy preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 174(1):311–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 25.
    Forman E, Kirti P (1998) Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 108(1):165–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 26.
    Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (eds) (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art survey. Springer, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  26. 27.
    Friedman AL, Miles S (2006) Stakeholders: theory and practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  27. 28.
    French S (1986) Decision theory: an introduction to the mathematics of rationality. Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
  28. 29.
    French S, Insua DR, Ruggeri F (2007) e-participation and decision analysis. Decis Anal 4(4):211–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 30.
    French S, Maule J, Papamichail N (2009) Decision behaviour, analysis and support. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 31.
    Geldermann J, Bertsch V, Treitz M, French S, Papamichail KN, Hämäläinen RP (2009) Multi-criteria decision support and evaluation of strategies for nuclear remediation management. Omega–Int J Manage S 37(1):238–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 32.
    Gregory R, McDaniels T, Fields D (2001) Decision aiding, not dispute resolution: creating insights through structured environmental decisions. J Policy Anal Manage 20(3):415–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 33.
    Ehtamo H, Hämäläinen RP (2001) Interactive multiple-criteria methods for reaching Pareto optimal agreements in negotiations. Group Decis Negotiation 10:475–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 34.
    Hajkowicz SA (2008) Supporting multi-stakeholder environmental decisions. J Environ Manage 88:607–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 35.
    Hämäläinen RP (1988) Computer assisted energy policy analysis in the parliament of Finland. Interfaces 18(4):12–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 36.
    Hämäläinen RP (2003) Decisionarium–aiding decisions, negotiating and collecting opinions on the web. J Multi-Crit Decis Anal 12(2–3):101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 37.
    Hämäläinen RP (2004) Reversing the perspective on the applications of decision analysis. Decis Anal 1(1):26–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 38.
    Hämäläinen RP, Alaja S (2008) The threat of weighting biases in environmental decision analysis. Ecol Econ 68(1–2): 556–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 39.
    Hämäläinen RP, Kettunen E, Marttunen M, Ehtamo H (2001) Evaluating a framework for multi-stakeholder decision support in water resources management. Group Decis Negotiation 10(4):331–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 40.
    Hämäläinen RP, Lindstedt M, Sinkko K (2000) Multi-attribute risk analysis in nuclear emergency management. Risk Anal 20(4):455–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 41.
    Hämäläinen RP, Mustajoki J, Marttunen M (2010) Web-based decision support–creating a culture of applying multicriteria decision analysis and web-supported participation in environmental decision making? In: French S, Rios-Insua D (eds) e-democracy: a group decision and negotiation perspective (to appear)Google Scholar
  41. 42.
    Hämäläinen RP, Pöyhönen M (1996) On-line group decision support by preference programming in traffic planning. Group Decis Negotiation 5:485–500Google Scholar
  42. 43.
    Hämäläinen RP, Salo A, Pöysti K (1992) Observations about consensus seeking in a multiple criteria environment. Proceedings of the 25th Hawaii international conference on systems sciences, Hawaii, vol. IV, January 1992, 190–198Google Scholar
  43. 44.
    Herrera-Viedma E, Alonso S, Chiclana F, Herrera R (2007) A consensus model for group decision making with incomplete fuzzy preference relations. IEEE T Fuzzy Syst 15(5): 863–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 45.
    Hiltunen V, Kurttila M, Leskinen P, Pasanen K, Pykäläinen J (2009) Mesta: an internet-based decision-support application for participatory strategic-level natural resources planning. Forest Policy Econ 11(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 46.
    Hobbs BF, Meier PM (1994) Multicriteria methods for resource planning. IEEE T Power Syst 9(4):1811–1817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 47.
    Hodgkin J, Belton V, Koulouri A (2005) Supporting the intelligent MCDA user: a case study in multi-person multi-criteria decision support. Eur J Oper Res 160(1):172–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 49.
    Kangas A, Kangas J, Kurttila M (2008) Decision support for forest management. Managing forest ecosystems, vol 16. Springer, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  48. 50.
    Keeney RL, Kirkwood CW (1975) Group decision making using cardinal social welfare functions. Manage Sci 22(4):430–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 51.
    Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Wiley, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  50. 52.
    Keeney RL (1992) Value-focused thinking: a path to creative decisionmaking. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  51. 55.
    Kiker GA, Bridges TS, Varghese A, Seager TP, Linkov I (2005) Application of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental decision making. Integr Environ Assess Manage 1(2):95–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 57.
    Kim S-H, Ahn BS (1997) Group decision making procedure considering preference strength under incomplete information. Comput Oper Res 24(12):1101–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 58.
    Kim JK, Choi SH (2001) A utility bange-based interactive group support system for multiattribute decision making. Comput Oper Res 28(5):485–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 59.
    Kleinmuntz D (2007) Resource allocation decisions. In: Edwards W, Miles Jr RF, von Winterfeldt D (eds) Advances in decision analysis–from foundations to applications. Cambridge University Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  55. 60.
    Könnölä T, Salo A, Brummer V (2010) Foresight for European coordination: developing national priorities for the forest-based sector technology platform. Int J Technol Manage (to appear)Google Scholar
  56. 61.
    Krantz DH, Luce RD, Suppes P, Tversky A (1971) Foundations of measurement, vol. I. Academic, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  57. 62.
    Lahdelma R, Salminen P (2001) SMAA-2: stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making. Oper Res 49(3):444–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 63.
    Lahdelma R, Miettinen K, Salminen P (2005) Reference point approach for multiple decision makers. Eur J Oper Res 164(3):785–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 64.
    Liesiö J, Mild P, Salo A (2007) Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection. Eur J Oper Res 181(3):1488–1505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 65.
    Liesiö J, Mild P, Salo A (2008) Robust portfolio modeling with incomplete cost information and project interdependencies. Eur J Oper Res 190(3):679–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 66.
    Mrmol AM, Monroy K, Rubiales V (2007) An equitable solution for multicriteria bargaining games. Eur J Oper Res 177(3):1523–1534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 67.
    Marttunen M, Hämäläinen RP (2008) The decision analysis interview approach in the collaborative management of a large regulater water course. Environ Manage 42: 1026–1042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 68.
    Matsatsinis NF, Samaras AP (2001) MCDA and preference disaggregation in group decision support systems. Eur J Oper Res 130(2):414–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 69.
    Matsatsinis NF, Tzoannopoulos K-D (2008) Multiple criteria group decision support through the usage of argumentation-based multi-agent systems: an overview. Oper Res 8(2): 185–199Google Scholar
  65. 70.
    Montibeller G, Belton V (2006). Causal maps and the evaluation of decision options–A review. J Oper Res Soc 57:779–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 71.
    Montibeller G, Belton V, Ackermann F, Ensslin L (2008) Reasoning maps for decision aid: an integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation, J Oper Res Soc 59(5):575–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 72.
    Mustajoki J, Hämäläinen RP (2000) Web-HIPRE: global decision support by value tree and AHP analysis. INFOR 38(3):208–220Google Scholar
  68. 73.
    Lindstedt M, Liesiö J, Salo A (2008). Participatory development of a strategic product portfolio in a telecommunication company. Int J Technol Manage 42(3):250–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 74.
    Merrick JRW, Parnell GS, Barnett J, Garcia M (2005) A multiple-objective decision analysis of stakeholder values to identify watershed improvement needs. Decis Anal 2(1): 44–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 75.
    Mustajoki J, Hämäläinen RP, Lindstedt MRK (2006) Using intervals for global sensitivity analysis and worst-case analyses in multiattribute value trees. Eur J Oper Res 174: 278–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 76.
    Mustajoki J, Hämäläinen RP, Sinkko K (2007) Interactive computer support in decision conferencing: two cases on off-site nuclear emergency management. Decis Support Syst 42(4):2247–2260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 78.
    Phillips LD (1984) A theory of requisite decision models. Acta Psychol 56:29–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 79.
    Phillips LD, Bana e Costa CA (2007) Prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis. Ann Oper Res Res. 154(1):51–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 80.
    Pöyhönen M, Vrolijk HCJ, Hämäläinen RP (2001) Behavioral and procedural consequences of structural variation in value trees. Eur J Oper Res 134(1):218–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 81.
    Regan HM, Colyvan M, Markovchick-Nicholls L (2006) A formal model for consensus and negotiation in environmental management. J Environ Manage 80: 167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 83.
    Roy B (1996) Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 84.
    Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15:234–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 85.
    Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  79. 86.
    Salo A (1995) Interactive decision aiding for group decision support. Eur J Oper Res 84(1):134–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 87.
    Salo A, Hämäläinen RP (1992) Preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements. Oper Res 40(6): 1053–1061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 88.
    Salo A, Hämäläinen RP (1997) On the measurement of preferences in the analytic hierarchy process. J Multi-Crit Dec Anal 6:309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 89.
    Salo A, Hämäläinen RP (2001) Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME) - elicitation and decision procedures under incomplete information. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A 31(6):533–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 90.
    Santos SP, Belton V, Howick S (2002) Adding value to performance measurement by using system dynamics and multicriteria analysis. Int J Oper Prod Man 22(11):1246–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 92.
    Slotte S, Hämäläinen RP (2005) Decision structuring dialogue. Helsinki University of Technology, Systems Analysis Laboratory Research Reports E13. Available via Accessed May 5, 2010
  85. 93.
    Sternberg RJ (ed) (1999) Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  86. 95.
    Vetschera R (1990) Group decision and negotiation support a methodological survey. OR Spektrum 12(2): 67–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 96.
    Vetschera R (2000) A multi-criteria agency model with incomplete preference information. Eur J Oper Res 126(1):152–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 97.
    Wallenius J, Dyer JS, Fishburn PC, Steuer RE, Zionts S, Deb K (2008) Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Manage Sci 54(7):1336–1349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 98.
    von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W (1986) Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge University Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  90. 99.
    Yang JB, Yu D-L (2002) On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A 32(3): 289–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Systems Analysis LaboratoryAalto University School of Science and TechnologyAaltoFinland

Personalised recommendations