Analytical Ordinal Priority Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52812/msbd.104Keywords:
Multiple Attribute Decision-Making, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, Ordinal Priority Approach , Analytical Ordinal Priority Approach, closed-form solution, Group Decision MakingAbstract
The study proposes an analytical (closed-form) solution to the Ordinal Priority Approach (OPA) in multiple attribute decision-making. The proposed Analytical Ordinal Priority Approach (AOPA) can calculate the weights of alternatives, criteria and experts, without linear programming. The application of the AOPA is demonstrated through an example run on Microsoft Excel. The results are consistent with those of the classical OPA. The findings are important for those who seek convenience and may wish to execute the OPA on commonly used spreadsheets without the need for the programming languages.
References
Ananda, J., & Herath, G. (2009). A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning. Ecological Economics, 68(10), 2535-2548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.05.010
Aouadni, S., Aouadni, I., & Taghipour, A. (2024). Using Ordinal Priority Approach With Confidence-Level Measurement for Third-Party Logistics Provider Selection in the Tunisian Healthcare Sector. In Applications of New Technology in Operations and Supply Chain Management (pp. 404-429). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-1578-1.ch020
Ataei, Y., Mahmoudi, A., Feylizadeh, M. R., & Li, D. F. (2020). Ordinal priority approach (OPA) in multiple attribute decision-making. Applied Soft Computing, 86, 105893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.105893
Bah, M. K., & Tulkinov, S. (2022). Evaluation of Automotive Parts Suppliers through Ordinal Priority Approach and TOPSIS. Management Science and Business Decisions, 2(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.52812/msbd.37
Barron, F. H., & Barrett, B. E. (1996). Decision quality using ranked attribute weights. Management Science, 42(11), 1515-1523. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.42.11.1515
Čačić, N., Blagojević, M., & Šarac, D. (2024). A new approach to comparison of CEP service providers using ordinal priority method. Cogent Engineering, 11(1), 2380033. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2024.2380033
Debroy, P., Smarandache, F., Majumder, P., Majumdar, P., & Seban, L. (2025). OPA-IF-Neutrosophic-TOPSIS Strategy under SVNS Environment Approach and Its Application to Select the Most Effective Control Strategy for Aquaponic System. Informatica, 36(1), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.15388/24-INFOR583
Du, J, Liu, S., Javed, S.A., Goh, M., & Chen, Z. (2024). Enhancing Quality Function Deployment through the Integration of Rough Set and Ordinal Priority Approach: A Case Study in Electric Vehicle Manufacturing. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 7541-7552. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3282228
Hwang, C.-L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey. New York: Springer.
Javed, S. A., & Du, J. (2023). What is the Ordinal Priority Approach?. Management Science and Business Decisions, 3(1), 12-26. https://doi.org/10.52812/msbd.72
Kiptum, C. K., Bouraima, M. B., Stević, Ž., Okemwa, S., Birech, S., & Qiu, Y. J. (2022). Sustainable strategies for the successful operation of the bike-sharing system using an ordinal priority approach. Journal of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, 1(2), 43-50. https://doi.org/10.56578/jemse010201
Mahmoudi, A., & Javed, S. A. (2022). Probabilistic approach to multi-stage supplier evaluation: Confidence level measurement in ordinal priority approach. Group Decision and Negotiation, 31(5), 1051-1096. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-022-09790-1
Mahmoudi, A., & Javed, S. A. (2023a). Uncertainty analysis in group decisions through interval ordinal priority approach. Group Decision and Negotiation, 32(4), 807-833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-023-09825-1
Mahmoudi, A., & Javed, S. A. (2023b). Strict and weak ordinal relations for estimating the criteria weights in Ordinal Priority Approach (OPA). MethodsX, 11, 102389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2023.102389
Mukhametzyanov, I. (2021). Specific character of objective methods for determining weights of criteria in MCDM problems: Entropy, CRITIC and SD. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 4(2), 76-105. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame210402076i
Pitka, P., Kovačević, T., Simeunović, M., Simeunović, M., & Jović, A. (2023, March). Estimation of transport service quality using an ordinal priority model. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Transport (Vol. 177, No. 7, pp. 457-466). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1680/jtran.22.00104
Saaty, T.L., & Vargas, L.G. (2007). Dispersion of group judgments. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46, 918–925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2007.03.004
Stillwell, W. G., Seaver, D. A., & Edwards, W. (1981). A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 28(1), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(81)90015-5
Wang, C. N., Nguyen, T. T. T., Dang, T. T., & Nguyen, N. A. T. (2022). A hybrid OPA and fuzzy MARCOS methodology for sustainable supplier selection with technology 4.0 evaluation. Processes, 10(11), 2351. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10112351
.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Science Insight
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: The work is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is properly attributed.
