The paper considers major principles of application of the multi‐attribute systems to solve legislative tasks. In order to assess dispute resolution methods from economic, social and other points of view, it is necessary to apply methods for assessing solutions according to multiple attributes. All known multi‐attribute methods cannot value the atribute weights as one weight of attribute is higher or lower significant than the other attribute. The new step‐wise weight assessment ratio analysis method (SWARA) allows including experts, lawyers or dispute parties opinion about significance ratio of the attributes in the process of rational decision determination. SWARA method could be applied in practical implementation of specialised decision support systems and alternative dispute resolution in virtual environment. Starting with principles and established approaches, a problem‐structuring methodology was developed which would condition the problem to allow a more thoughtful application of existing decision‐making analytic methodologies. Santrauka Darbe nagrinejami daugiakriterines analizes taikymo galimybes ir principai teisiniams uždaviniams spresti. Siekiant ekonominiu, socialiniu ar kitu aspektu ivertinti ginču sprendimo būdu alternatyvas, būtina taikyti metodus, ivertinančius šias alternatyvas apibūdinančius kriterijus. Tačiau visi žinomi daugiakriteriniai metodai nevertina, kiek rodikliai, apibūdinantys alternatyvas, yra vienas už kita svar‐besni ar ne tokie reikšmingi. Pasiūlytas naujas kriteriju svoriu nustatymo metodas, pagristas nuose‐kliu laipsnišku poriniu kriteriju santykines svarbos lyginimu (angl. Step‐Wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis ‐ SWARA), leidžia priimant sprendimus ivertinti ekspertu, advokatu ar ginčo šaliu nuomo‐ne apie rodikliu reikšmingumu skirtumus. SWARA metodas gali būti taikomas kuriant specializuotas sprendimu paramos sistemas, skirtas racionaliam ginču sprendimo būdui parinkti ar ginčams spresti alternatyviais būdais virtualioje aplinkoje. Darbe trumpai apžvelgti ginču sprendimo būdai, sukurtas ju vertinimo ir lyginimo metodas, kuris sekmingai galetu būti taikomas ir kitiems uždaviniams spresti.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to discuss the advantage of a combinatory methodology presented in this study. The paper suggests that the comparison with results of previously developed methods is in high agreement.Design/methodology/approach: This paper introduces a combined compromise decision-making algorithm with the aid of some aggregation strategies. The authors have considered a distance measure, which originates from grey relational coefficient and targets to enhance the flexibility of the results. Hence, the weight of the alternatives is placed in the decision-making process with three equations. In the final stage, an aggregated multiplication rule is employed to release the ranking of the alternatives and end the decision process.Findings: The authors described a real case of choosing logistics and transportation companies in France from a supply chain project. Some comparisons such as sensitivity analysis approach and comparing to other studies and methods provided to validate the performance of the proposed algorithm.Originality/value: The algorithm has a unique structure among MCDM methods which is presented for the first time in this paper.

Optimization of Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment

Multicriteria decision‐making (MCDM) methods are used in many areas of human activities. Each alternative in a multicriteria decision‐making problem can be described by a set of criteria. Criteria can be qualitative and quantitative. They usually have different units of measurement and a different optimization direction. The normalization aims at obtaining comparable scales of criteria values. The paper introduces a new Additive Ratio ASsessment (ARAS) method. In order to illustrate the described ARAS method a real case study of evaluation of microclimate in office rooms is presented. The case study aims to determine the inside climate of the premises, where people work, and to define measures to be taken to improve their environment. Based on the analysis, the following criteria for inside climate evaluation are suggested: air turnover inside the premises, air humidity, air temperature, illumination intensity, air flow rate, and dew point. The criteria weights were determined by the method of pairwise comparison based on the estimates of experts. Santrauka Daugiakriteriniai sprendimų metodai taikomi daugelyje žmogaus veiklos sričių. Kiekviena alternatyva, sprendžiant daugiakriterinius uždavinius, gali būti apibūdinta kriteriju aibe. Kriterijai gali būti kokybiniai ir kiekybiniai. Jie paprastai turi skirtingus matavimo vienetus ir įvairią optimizavimo kryptį. Kriterijų vertės yra normalizuojamos lyginamos skalės vertėms gauti. Straipsnyje pateikiamas naujas adityvinis kriterijų santykių įvertinimo metodas (ARAS) daugiakriteriniams uždaviniams spręsti. ARAS metodo taikymui pavaizduoti pateiktas realus mikroklimato biuro patalpose vertinimo tyrimas. Tyrimo tikslas ‐ įvertinti patalpų, kurioje žmonės dirba, mikroklimata ir nustatyti priemones, kurių reikia imtis aplinkai pagerinti. Remiantis uždavinio tikslų analize, siūlomi šie kriterijai vidaus klimatui įvertinti: oro pasikeitimas, patalpų oro santykinė dregmė, oro temperatūra, apšvietimo intensyvumas, oro srautas ir rasos taškas. Kriterijų svoriai nustatomi porinio lyginimo metodu, remiantis ekspertų vertinimais. Kriterijų reikšmės nustatytos sertifikuotu prietaisu.

Decision-making is primarily a process that involves different actors: people, groups of people, institutions and the state. As a discipline, multi-criteria decision-making has a relatively short history. Since 1950s and 1960s, when foundations of modern multi-criteria decision-making methods have been laid, many researches devoted their time to development of new multi-criteria decision-making models and techniques. In the past decades, researches and development in the field have accelerated and seem to continue growing exponentially. Despite the intensive development worldwide, few attempts have been made to systematically present the theoretical bases and developments of multi-criteria decision-making methods. However, the methodological choices and framework for assessment of decisions are still under discussion. The article describes the situation with reviews of MCDM/MADM methods. Furthermore, there is a need for research to study the strengths and weaknesses of different decision-making methods.