scholarly journals Applying AHP in Conflict Resolution

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-147
Author(s):  
Luis G Vargas ◽  
H. J. Zoffer
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Graduate School ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
University Of Pittsburgh ◽  
Implementation Guidelines ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
The University ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The current failure to resolve conflicts worldwide highlights the need for a different approach to conflict resolution. A new International Center for Conflict Resolution (IC4CR), to be housed in the Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business, was funded by the University of Pittsburgh Chancellor Patrick Gallagher in response to a proposal by professors Luis Vargas and Jerry Zoffer.  The mission of IC4CR is to provide decision makers with an in-depth understanding of the negotiating positions of all parties and recommend implementation guidelines, based on preferences and priorities, to facilitate resolution of otherwise intractable conflicts. We propose to implement this mission by conducting studies of diplomatic and corporate conflicts using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP).

scholarly journals ISAHP2018 Conference in Hong Kong, July 12-15

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rozann W. Saaty
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
International Symposium ◽  
Graduate School ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
The Past ◽  
University Professor ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
The University ◽  
Hierarchy Process

This year the International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (ISAHP2018) was dedicated to the memory of Thomas Saaty, the father of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, and my husband of 52 years, who passed away on August 17, 2017, at the age of 91 The conference chair was Luis Vargas, Tom’s longtime colleague at the University of Pittsburgh's Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business where he held the chair of Distinguished University Professor. Their names are linked on many AHP articles and books that they co-authored during the past 40 years.

Some Conflicting Results in the Analytic Hierarchy Process

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (02) ◽  
pp. 465-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ardalan Bafahm ◽  
Minghe Sun
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Unexpected Result ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Preference Relations ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been believed to be one of the most pragmatic and widely accepted methods for multi-criteria decision making. However, there have been various criticisms of this method within the last four decades. In this study, the results of AHP contradicting common expectations are examined for both the distributive and ideal modes. Specifically, conflicting priorities, conflicting decisions, and conflicting preference relations are investigated. A decision-making scenario is used throughout the paper and an illustrative example constructed from the decision-making scenario is provided to demonstrate each of the conflicting results recommended by AHP. With a parametric formulation of each unexpected result, the possibility of unexpected results of AHP is generalized irrespective of applying the distributive or ideal mode. The logic and causes of these contradictions are also analyzed. This study shows that AHP is not always reliable, and could lead the decision makers towards incorrect decisions.

HANDLING UNCERTAINTY IN THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS: A STOCHASTIC APPROACH

2007 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 177-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
HAMIDREZA ESKANDARI ◽  
LUIS RABELO
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Rank Order ◽  
Stochastic Approach ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Propagation Of Uncertainty ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Alternatives ◽  
School Selection ◽  
Hierarchy Process

This paper describes a methodology for handling the propagation of uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). In real applications, the pairwise comparisons are usually subject to judgmental errors and are inconsistent and conflicting with each other. Therefore, the weight point estimates provided by the eigenvector method are necessarily approximate. This uncertainty associated with subjective judgmental errors may affect the rank order of decision alternatives. A new stochastic approach is presented to capture the uncertain behavior of the global AHP weights. This approach could help decision makers gain insight into how the imprecision in judgment ratios may affect their choice toward the best solution and how the best alternative(s) may be identified with certain confidence. The proposed approach is applied to the example problem introduced by Saaty for the best high school selection to illustrate the concepts introduced in this paper and to prove its usefulness and practicality.

Group assessment of key indicators of sustainable waste management in developing countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 913-922 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Tot ◽  
Goran Vujić ◽  
Zorica Srđević ◽  
Dejan Ubavin ◽  
Mário Augusto Tavares Russo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Borda Count ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Key Indicators ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Decision makers in developing countries are struggling to solve the present problems of solid waste management. Prioritisation and ranking of the most important indicators that influence the waste management system is very useful for any decision maker for the future planning and implementation of a sustainable waste management system. The aim of this study is to evaluate key indicators and their related sub-indicators in a group decision-making environment. In order to gain insight into the subject it was necessary to obtain the qualified opinions of decision makers from different countries who understand the situation in the sector of waste management in developing countries. An assessment is performed by 43 decision makers from both developed and developing countries, and the applied methodology is based on a combined use of the analytic hierarchy process, from the multi-criteria decision-making set of tools, and the preferential voting method known as Borda Count, which belongs to social choice theory. Pairwise comparison of indicators is performed with the analytic hierarchy process, and the ranking of indicators once obtained is assessed with Borda Count. Detailed analysis of the final results showed that the Institutional–Administrative indicator was the most important one, with the maximum weight as derived by both groups of decision makers. The results also showed that the combined use of the analytic hierarchy process and Borda Count contributes to the credibility and objectivity of the decision-making process, allowing its use in more complex waste management group decision-making problems to be recommended.

scholarly journals THE MAGIC OF THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Orrin Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Scientific Justification ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Careful Investigation

Dr. Thomas Saaty developed the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with the underlying goal of making it simple and accessible to the lay user. In Saaty’s own words, the AHP is based on how “ordinary people process information” and “express the strength of their judgments” (Saaty, 1994, p. 37). Because he was successful in developing the AHP in accordance with these goals, when decision makers use the AHP their experience can feel magical as they find pairwise comparisons natural and can relate to the final priorities. Careful investigation of the axioms, theorems, and proofs shows that the AHP is more than just magic and provides scientific justification of the highest order. Five important components of the AHP and some background into the history of its development are summarized and highlighted from Saaty’s article, “How to Make a Decision: the Analytic Hierarchy Process” (Saaty, 1994). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v9i3.519

scholarly journals Pitt Creates New IC4CR Center to Utilize AHP in Resolving International Conflicts

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 151
Author(s):  
Jerry Zoffer
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Graduate School ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
International Conflicts ◽  
University Of Pittsburgh ◽  
Implementation Guidelines

The current failure to resolve conflicts worldwide highlights the need for a different approach to conflict resolution. A proposal by University of Pittsburgh professors Luis Vargas and Jerry Zoffer to create a new International Center for Conflict Resolution (IC4CR) was funded by University of Pittsburgh Chancellor Patrick Gallagher and will be housed in the Katz Graduate School of Business. The mission of IC4CR is to provide decision makers with an in-depth understanding of the negotiating positions of all parties and recommend implementation guidelines, based on preferences and priorities, to facilitate resolution of otherwise intractable conflicts.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document