Open Access
Table 2
Comparative table of attributes to decision support tools, based on quantitative criteria.
| Attributes | Tool | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||
| AHP | Delphi | Brainstorming | Nominal Group Technique | AHP-Delphi | |
| Transparency and reliability |
Systematic and consistent. It is able to assemble the decision-making process orderly and foster transparent judgments |
It may generate controversy, according to Goodman (1987), due to anonymity. The lack of accuracy can create a mistrust of the stakeholders |
It is transparent, however, due to difficulty of objectivity may generate criticisms regarding its reliability |
It is transparent, however, due to difficulty of objectivity may generate criticisms regarding its reliability |
Systematic and consistent. It is able to assemble the decision-making process orderly and foster transparent judgments. Delphi technique reduces the AHP inconsistencies |
| Low level of subjectivity |
It turns quantitative data into qualitative. It reduces the problem of subjectivity |
It addresses both quantitative and qualitative data. It is able to reduce subjectivity |
High level of subjectivity |
High level of subjectivity |
It turns quantitative data into qualitative. It reduces the problem of subjectivity |
| Supporting for decision making prone to updating |
If there is no change in the weights of criteria, it is possible to re-apply the technique to obtain another option |
It would be required another round of the Delphi method - considering the updates coming from the interest group |
It would be required a new brainstorming session for information updates |
It would be required a new NGT session for information updates |
If there is no change in the weights of criteria, it is possible to re-apply the technique to obtain another option |
| Multicriteria analysis |
It is one of the most known and efficient MCDA methods |
It can be used for multicriteria decision making, whether quantitative or qualitative |
Although it can handle with multicriteria problems at the same time, may be complications due to its subjectivity |
Although it can handle with multicriteria problems at the same time, may be complications due to its subjectivity |
Its multicriteria analysis is based on AHP technique |
| Ease of deployment |
It is considered the opinion of one expert per time. Easy data gathering, and results achievement |
It is considered the opinion of one expert per time. Easy data gathering, but may occur some difficulty in data obtaining if the problem complexity requires a high number of sessions |
Ease of deployment. However, the main difficulty is to gather all participants (experts) at the same time |
Ease of deployment. However, the main difficulty is to gather all participants (experts) at the same time |
It is considered the opinion of one expert per time. Easy data gathering, and results achievement |
| Application time |
Fast process. It is based on a matrix construction, which may extend a little further, if facing difficulties in finding an acceptable consistency |
Time consuming process. The application time varies according to the problem complexity and the amount of sessions required |
Time consuming process. The application time varies according to the number of participants and the amount of ideas required |
Time consuming process. Usually, it requires more time than brainstorming because it deals with only one problem at time |
Time consuming process. Usually, it follows the same steps of Delphi method |
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.