The budgetary constraints for the Brazilian Navy (BN) have caused several negative effects, resulting in an undersized fleet, decreasing the capacity to protect marine oil and natural gas fields, combat marine pollution from ships, and monitor other illegal activities at sea and inland waters. This paper aims to choose a medium-sized warship to be built by the BN, through the application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. After a bibliometric study on Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM), the AHP was chosen as the most appropriate method for the proposed case study. We analyzed three ship projects with regard to nine operational and economic criteria, taking into account the evaluations of BN officers with recognized experience and knowledge in military operations. We also introduced a sensitivity analysis based on the relationship between standard deviation and mean scores in order to verify and increase the reliability of the ranking. As a result, the methodology suggested that the best option is to build a brand-new ship with more significant modernizations to provide for the operational needs of the BN.

Since 2011, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has maintained the Better Life Initiative, which proposes a quality-of-life index called Better Life Index (BLI), consisting of 11 dimensions. This paper presents a multivariate analysis approach that aims to reduce the BLI dimensions. For this purpose, we applied factor extraction by main components to reorganize BLI variables into three dimensions (factors): dimension 1 - personal development and support factors; dimension 2 - financial balance; and dimension 3 - insecurity with the labor market. These three factors were used as criteria for the PROMETHEE-SAPEVO-M1 multicriteria method. We applied the methodology to data from 38 countries (35 from OECD and 3 non-OECD economies). As a result, we verified that Denmark, Iceland and Switzerland stood out as the countries with the best performances after the proposed analysis. Among the 38 countries evaluated, 19 showed positive flows, allowing the distribution into two well-defined groups. Also, adopting this hybrid methodology of multivariate analysis and multicriteria was advantageous because it reduced the evaluation criteria that the decision-maker needs to evaluate. We compared the results obtained by PROMETHEE-SAPEVO-M1 with the ViseKriterijumska Optimizacija $i$ Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) and Elimination Et Choix Traduisant la Realité - Multicriteria Ordinal (ELECTRE-MOr) methods, with remarkably similar results. The main contribution of this study is to provide a hybrid methodology composed of a statistical structuring approach (factor analysis) in a problem with multiple conflicting criteria. After all, the approach proposed in this article represented a 94% reduction in the decision maker’s cognitive effort.

This paper presents a new approach based on Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), named PROMETHEE-SAPEVO-M1, through its implementation and feasibility related to the decision-making process regarding the evaluation of helicopters of attack of the Brazilian Navy. The proposed methodology aims to present an integration of ordinal evaluation into the cardinal procedure from the PROMETHEE method, enabling to perform qualitative and quantitative data and generate the criteria weights by pairwise evaluation, transparently. The modeling provides three models of preference analysis, as partial, complete, and outranking by intervals, along with an intra-criterion analysis by veto threshold, enabling the analysis of the performance of an alternative in a specific criterion. As a demonstration of the application, is carried out a case study by the PROMETHEE-SAPEVO-M1 web platform, addressing a strategic analysis of attack helicopters to be acquired by the Brazilian Navy, from the need to be evaluating multiple specifications with different levels of importance within the context problem. The modeling implementation in the case study is made in detail, first performing the alternatives in each criterion and then presenting the results by three different models of preference analysis, along with the intra-criterion analysis and a rank reversal procedure. Moreover, is realized a comparison analysis to the PROMETHEE method, exploring the main features of the PROMETHEE-SAPEVO-M1. Moreover, a section of discussion is presented, exposing some features and main points of the proposal. Therefore, this paper provides a valuable contribution to academia and society since it represents the application of an MCDA method in the state of the art, contributing to the decision-making resolution of the most diverse real problems.

This paper proposes a model to evaluate business projects to get into an incubator, allowing to rank them in order of selection priority. The model combines the Momentum method to build prospective scenarios and the AHP-TOPSIS-2N Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method to rank the alternatives. Six business projects were evaluated to be incubated. The Momentum method made it possible for us to create an initial core of criteria for the evaluation of incubation projects. The AHP-TOPSIS-2N method supported the decision to choose the company to be incubated by ranking the alternatives in order of relevance. Our evaluation model has improved the existing models used by incubators. This model can be used and/or adapted by any incubator to evaluate the business projects to be incubated. The set of criteria for the evaluation of incubation projects is original and the use of prospective scenarios with an MCDM method to evaluate companies to be incubated does not exist in the literature.