Resolving Differences (Step 10)

  • Benjamin F. Hobbs
  • Peter Meier
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 28)


We know of few, if any, applications of MCDM methods that yield completely consistent results. If more than one method has been used in an application, their results generally diverge. Even if the methods are consistent, it is unlikely that all participants will arrive at the same rankings. Indeed, if they do achieve perfect consistency, the group undoubtedly has been poorly selected. We argued earlier that groups should encompass diverse views, including those of NGOs and likely intervenors in subsequent regulatory procedures. In such groups one should expect divergence of results. Finally, a participant applying the same method at the beginning and at the end of the process is very unlikely to arrive at the same result: as noted at the outset, one important purpose of the use of MCDM is to educate, to expose members of a diverse group to each other’s views, and to force people to really think about the issues and problems. The more successfully that objective is attained, the more likely it is that a participant will change some of his initial views.


Rank Order Average Rank Rating Weight Nominal Group Technique Successive Elimination 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benjamin F. Hobbs
    • 1
  • Peter Meier
    • 2
  1. 1.The Johns Hopkins UniversityUSA
  2. 2.International Development and Energy AssociatesUSA

Personalised recommendations