Group Preference Aggregation Based on ELECTRE Methods for ERP System Selection

  • Suzana de França Dantas Daher
  • Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 139)


The ability of enterprise information systems, such as enterprise resource planning (ERP), manufacturing executive systems (MES) and customer relation management (CRM), to improve production and business performance are demanding more attention from enterprises, since increase in competitive advantages is a goal to be reached. Integration of all the information flowing through a company is a key characteristic of ERP systems. Enterprise systems are not developed in-house and so, in order to implement an ERP project successfully, organizations must purchase ERP systems which can be aligned with their needs. In a group decision context where all opinions and preferences must be taken into account, choosing the most suitable alternative may be a hard work. In this study, a group preference aggregation approach based on a combination of ELECTRE II and ELECTRE IV method is presented within the context of ERP project selection.


Group preferences multicriteria decision aid ELECTRE II ELECTRE IV ERP selection 


  1. 1.
    Wei, C.-C., Chien, C.-F., Wang, M.-J.J.: An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection. Int. J. Production Economics 96, 47–62 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chou, S.-W., Chang, Y.-C.: The implementation factors that influence the ERP (enterprise resource planning) benefits. Decision Support Systems 46(1), 149–157 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nah, F.F.-H., Lau, J.L.-S., Kuang, J.: Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems. Business Process Management Journal 7(3), 285–296 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davenport, T.: Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system. Harvard Business Review 76(4), 121–131 (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liang, C., Li, Q.: Enterprise information system project selection with regard to BOCR. International Journal of Project Management 26, 810–820 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jadhav, A.S., Sonar, R.M.: Evaluating and selecting software packages: A review. Information and Software Technology 51, 555–563 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee, J.W., Kim, S.H.: An integrated approach for interdependent information system project selection. International Journal of Project Management 19, 111–118 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yazgan, H.R., Boran, S., Goztepe, K.: An ERP software selection process with using artificial neural network based on analytic network process approach. Expert Systems with Applications 36, 9214–9222 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karsak, E.E., Ozogul, C.O.: An integrated decision making approach for ERP system selection. Expert Systems with Applications 36, 660–667 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee, H., Shen, P., Chih, W.: A fuzzy multiple criteria decision making model for software selection. In: IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, pp. 1709–1713 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Huiqun, H., Guang, S.: ERP software selection using the rough set and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment. Advances in Information Sciences and Service Sciences 4(3), 111–118 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lall, V., Teyarachakul, S.: Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System Selection: A Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) Approach. Journal of Computer Information Systems 47(1), 123–128 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu, J.-H., Tai, W.-C., Tsai, R.J., Lu, I.-Y.: Using multiple variables decision-making analysis for ERP selection. International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management 18(2), 228–241 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rao, R.V., Rajesh, T.S.: Software Selection in Manufacturing Industries Using a Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making Method, PROMETHEE. Intelligent Information Management 1, 159–165 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Olson, D.L., Johansson, B., de Carvalho, R.A.: A Combined Method for Evaluating Criteria When Selecting ERP Systems. In: Møller, C., Chaudhry, S. (eds.) CONFENIS 2011. LNBIP, vol. 105, pp. 64–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haddara, M., Zach, O.: ERP Systems in SMEs: A Literature Review. In: Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Daher, S.F.D., Almeida, A.T.: The use of ranking veto concept to mitigate the compensatory effects of additive aggregation in group decisions on a water utility automation investment. Group Decision and Negotiation 21(2), 185–204 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alencar, L.H., Almeida, A.T., Morais, D.C.: A Multicriteria Group Decision Model Aggregating the Preferences of Decision-Makers Based on ELECTRE Methods. Pesquisa Operacional 30(3), 687–702 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brito, A.J., de Almeida-Filho, A.T., de Almeida, A.T.: Multi-criteria Decision Model for Selecting Repair Contracts by applying Utility Theory and Variable Interdependent Parameters. IMA Journal of Management Mathematics 21(4), 349–361 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Daher, S.F.D., Almeida, A.T.: A combination of ranking veto concept and distance measures to minimize conflicts in a group decision problem. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (IEEE SMC 2011), pp. 3195–3200 (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Morais, D.C., Almeida, A.T.: Group decision making on water resources based on analysis of individual rankings. Omega (Oxford) 40, 42–52 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leyva-López, J.C., Fernández-Gonzalez, E.: A new method for group decision support based on ELECTRE III methodology. European Journal of Operational Research 26(3) (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roy, B.: The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory and Decision 31(1), 49–73 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M.: Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vincke, P.: Multicriteria decision-aid. John Wiley & Sons, Bruxelles (1992)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Suzana de França Dantas Daher
    • 1
  • Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
    • 1
  1. 1.Management Engineering DepartmentFederal University of PernambucoRecifeBrazil

Personalised recommendations