Group Decision Making

Part of the Applied Optimization book series (APOP, volume 29)


Although many decisions are made, not by individuals, but in groups such as boards, councils, and committees, the MCDA literature pays little attention to group decision making. Particularly the power relations in groups are overlooked. There is always a power game, however. In national decision-making bodies each member seems to have a weight which is proportional to the size of the organization which he/she represents. In international decision-making bodies the weights of the members are related to the population size or the Gross National Product of the respective countries. Alternatives which are weakly supported by the powerful members have therefore little chance of being adopted by the group, even when MCDA reveals a high degree of support for them under the erroneous assumption that all members have equal weights.


Group Decision Criterion Weight Compromise Solution Impact Score Weighted Vote 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References to Chapter 6

  1. 1.
    Aczél, J., and Saaty, Th.L., “Procedures for Synthesizing Ratio Judgements”. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27, 93–102, 1983.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barzilai, J., and Lootsma, F.A., “Power Relations and Group Aggregation in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART”. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 6, 155–165, 1997. In the same issue there are comments by O.I. Larichev (p. 166), P. Korhonen (pp. 167–168), and L.G. Vargas (pp. 169–170), as well as a response by F.A. Lootsma and J. Barzilai (pp. 171 — 174).MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bueno de Mesquita, B., and Stokman, F.N., “European Community Decision Making”. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Galbraith, J.K., “The Anatomy of Power”. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, 1983.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heller, F.A., and Wilpert, B., “Competence and Power in Managerial Decision Making”. Wiley, New York, 1981.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hofstede, G., “Management Scientists are Human”. Management Science 40, 4–13, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Honert, R. van den, and Lootsma, F.A., “Group Preference Aggregation in the Multiplicative AHP. The Model of the Group Decision Process and Pareto Optimality”. European Journal of Operational Research 96, 363–370, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hwang, C.L., and Lin, M.J., “Group Decision Making under Multiple Criteria”. Springer, Berlin, 1987.MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    LaPlante, A., “Nineties Style Brainstorming”. Technology Supplement to Forbes Magazine, October 25, pp. 44–61, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lootsma, F.A., “Prospects for MCDA in Groups”. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 7, 121–122, 1998.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lootsma, F.A., Mensch, T.C.A., and Vos, F.A., “Multi-Criteria Analysis and Budget Reallocation in Long-Term Research Planning”. European Journal of Operational Research 47, 293–305, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mintzberg, H., “Power in and around Organizations”. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1983.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Radford, K.J., “Individual and Small Group Decisions”. Springer, New York, 1989.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ramanathan, R., and Ganesh, L.S., “Group Preference Aggregation Methods employed in the AHP: an Evaluation and an Intrinsic Process for Deriving Members’ Weightages”. European Journal of Operational Research 79, 249–265, 1994.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roy, B., and Vanderpooten, D., “The European School of MCDA: Emergence, Basic Features, and Current Works”. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 5, 22–37, 1996. In the same volume there is a comment by F.A. Lootsma (pp. 37–39) as well as a response by B. Roy and D. Vanderpooten (pp. 165–166).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spillman, B., Spillman, R., and Bezdek, J., “A Fuzzy Analysis of Consensus in Small Groups”. In P.P. Wang and S.K. Chang (eds.), “Fuzzy Sets, Theory and Applications to Policy Analysis and Information Systems”. Plenum, New York, 1980, pp. 291–308.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor, A.D., “Mathematics and Politics”. Springer, New York, 1995.MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Walker, W., Abrahamse, A., Bolten, J., Kahan, J.P., Riet, O. van de, Kok, M, and Braber, M. den, “A Policy Analysis of Dutch River Dike Improvements: Trading Off Safety, Cost, and Environmental Impacts”. Operations Research 42, 823–836, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Personalised recommendations