Analytic Network Process (ANP) - BPMSG !EXCLUSIVE!

AHP stands for analytic hierarchy process and belongs to the multi-criteria decision-making methods (MCDM). In AHP, values like price, weight, or area, or even subjective opinions such as feelings, preferences, or satisfaction, can be translated into measurable numeric relations. The core of AHP is the comparison of pairs instead of sorting (ranking), voting (e.g. assigning points) or the free assignment of priorities.Teachers and users of the AHP know that the best way to understand it is to work through an example. The example below shows how a broad range of considerations can be managed through the use of the analytic hierarchy process.The decision at hand requires a reasonably complex hierarchy to describe. It involves factors from the tangible and precisely measurable (purchase price, passenger capacity, cargo capacity), through the tangible but difficult to measure (maintenance costs, fuel costs, resale value) to the intangible and totally subjective (style).( -introduction)

Analytic Network Process (ANP) - BPMSG

The methods in multiple attribute utility theory (MAUT) (Arriaza et al. 2002) and multiple attribute value theory (MAVT) (Martin et al. 2000) were among the first introduced in forestry applications. They are based on ranking and interactive methods which construct a utility/value function for each criterion. The weighted linear combination (WLC) and ordered weighted averaging (OWA) determine different possibilities relative to weights for each factor using the aggregation process (Gülci and Akay 2015; Lin et al. 2014). The combination of analytical hierarchy process (AHP) or analytical network process (ANP) with GIS has been widely used in forest management as well. These methods provide a means to measure quantifiable and/or intangible criteria data. Although the methodology of both techniques is similar, the main difference is that the ANP approach is a generalization of the AHP based on a network, not a hierarchy (Ezzati et al. 2016). A few researchers have applied fuzzy methods in forest management planning, particularly the combination of fuzzy AHP integrated with GIS for localization of forest risk mapping (Eskandari 2017; Kant et al. 2012). This extension technique allows an approach to manage the vagueness and uncertainty of certain data.

Zhang et al. (2013) integrated a participatory process to support zoning of protected and conservation areas applying a combination of GIS and AHP at the regional scale. With semi-structured interviews of 28 stakeholders, three main objectives were identified: conservation, tourism/recreation, and community development. Gülci and Akay (2015) developed a GIS-based MADM using WLC to designate the most suitable ecological passages along a road network in Turkey. They considered nine factors in their model. The rank order of the criteria was established without a pairwise comparison. Fieldwork was conducted using observation activities to monitor the species behaviors and areas. The accuracy results were then computed applying statistical methods. The least cost paths techniques was also used to estimate the best paths for wildlife corridors. Carver et al. (2012) created a WLC and GIS model to map wilderness locations in two national parks in Scotland (Cairngorms; Loch Lomond and The Trossachs). To support wilderness land policy, the preference elicitation was based on attribute weights from the general public (300 residents from national parks, and an additional 1,400 participants from the general public).

In this study, it was tried to create an awareness that one of the scientific methods that can be used in carrier selection may be the AHP technique. Before the AHP method was applied, the criteria to be used in the selection of carrier enterprises that distribute ice cream domestically were determined firstly. Then, the weighting of these criteria determined by using the literature was made. For this purpose, an expert opinion survey was conducted with 10 managers of large companies that dominate the Kahramanmaraş ice cream sector. In the survey study, first of all, each of the criteria determined as a result of the literature review was subjected to a binary comparison by individual experts with each other. Then all the steps of the AHP method were applied. As a result of applying all the steps of the AHP method; it has been determined as that just in time delivery is the most important criterion, reliability is the second, experience is the third, network management is the fourth, the innovation and efficiency of cold chain processes is the fifth, information technologies is the sixth, cost is the seventh, and finally flexibility is the eighth criterion.

Tabela 2Fundamentalna skala porównań kryteriów i wariantów decyzyjnych w metodzie AHP Ocena słowna (werbalna, jakościowa)Ocena numeryczna (ranga)równoważny (tak samo preferowany)1nieznacznie preferowany3silnie preferowany5bardzo silnie preferowany7wyjątkowo preferowany9oceny pośrednie dla porównań pomiędzy powyższymi2, 4, 6, 8Źródło: "How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process", T. Saaty, 1994a, INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics, 24(6), s. 26 ( ). 041b061a72