In this paper, a new multi-criteria problem solving method—the Full Consistency Method (FUCOM)—is proposed. The model implies the definition of two groups of constraints that need to satisfy the optimal values of weight coefficients. The first group of constraints is the condition that the relations of the weight coefficients of criteria should be equal to the comparative priorities of the criteria. The second group of constraints is defined on the basis of the conditions of mathematical transitivity. After defining the constraints and solving the model, in addition to optimal weight values, a deviation from full consistency (DFC) is obtained. The degree of DFC is the deviation value of the obtained weight coefficients from the estimated comparative priorities of the criteria. In addition, DFC is also the reliability confirmation of the obtained weights of criteria. In order to illustrate the proposed model and evaluate its performance, FUCOM was tested on several numerical examples from the literature. The model validation was performed by comparing it with the other subjective models (the Best Worst Method (BWM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)), based on the pairwise comparisons of the criteria and the validation of the results by using DFC. The results show that FUCOM provides better results than the BWM and AHP methods, when the relation between consistency and the required number of the comparisons of the criteria are taken into consideration. The main advantages of FUCOM in relation to the existing multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods are as follows: (1) a significantly smaller number of pairwise comparisons (only n − 1), (2) a consistent pairwise comparison of criteria, and (3) the calculation of the reliable values of criteria weight coefficients, which contribute to rational judgment.

Sustainable development is one of the most important preconditions for preserving resources and balanced functioning of a complete supply chain in different areas. Taking into account the complexity of sustainable development and a supply chain, different decisions have to be made day-to-day, requiring the consideration of different parameters. One of the most important decisions in a sustainable supply chain is the selection of a sustainable supplier and, often the applied methodology is multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). In this paper, a new hybrid MCDM model for evaluating and selecting suppliers in a sustainable supply chain for a construction company has been developed. The evaluation and selection of suppliers have been carried out on the basis of 21 criteria that belong to all aspects of sustainability. The determination of the weight values of criteria has been performed applying the full consistency method (FUCOM), while a new rough complex proportional assessment (COPRAS) method has been developed to evaluate the alternatives. The rough Dombi aggregator has been used for averaging in group decision-making while evaluating the significance of criteria and assessing the alternatives. The obtained results have been checked and confirmed using a sensitivity analysis that implies a four-phase procedure. In the first phase, the change of criteria weight was performed, while, in the second phase, rough additive ratio assessment (ARAS), rough weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS), rough simple additive weighting (SAW), and rough multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) have been applied. The third phase involves changing the parameter ρ in the modeling of rough Dombi aggregator, and the fourth phase includes the calculation of Spearman’s correlation coefficient (SCC) that shows a high correlation of ranks.

For companies active in various sectors, the implementation of transport services and other logistics activities has become one of the key factors of efficiency in the total supply chain. Logistics outsourcing is becoming more and more important, and there is an increasing number of third party logistics providers. In this paper, logistics providers were evaluated using the Rough SWARA (Step-Wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis) and Rough WASPAS (Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment) models. The significance of the eight criteria on the basis of which evaluation was carried out was determined using the Rough SWARA method. In order to allow for a more precise consensus in group decision-making, the Rough Dombi aggregator was developed in order to determine the initial rough matrix of multi-criteria decision-making. A total of 10 logistics providers dealing with the transport of dangerous goods for chemical industry companies were evaluated using the Rough WASPAS approach. The obtained results demonstrate that the first logistics provider is also the best one, a conclusion confirmed by a sensitivity analysis comprised of three parts. In the first part, parameter ρ was altered through 10 scenarios in which only alternatives four and five change their ranks. In the second part of the sensitivity analysis, a calculation was performed using the following approaches: Rough SAW (Simple Additive Weighting), Rough EDAS (Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution), Rough MABAC (MultiAttributive Border Approximation Area Comparison), and Rough TOPSIS (Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution). They showed a high correlation of ranks determined by applying Spearman’s correlation coefficient in the third part of the sensitivity analysis.

Selection of carpenter manufacturer using fuzzy EDAS method

The organization and execution of the transport of dangerous goods is conditioned by a series of legal, technical, technological, safety, and engineering requirements, which must be met. In this way, a complex system is created which has a large number of participants and in which optimization should be performed at each stage from all the above aspects. The main goal of this paper is to create a novel Fuzzy‐Rough MCDM (Multiple‐Criteria Decision‐Making) for the evaluation of companies engaged in the transport of dangerous goods. A group decision‐making model was created to evaluate 11 transport companies based on nine legal, technical, technological criteria. The improved fuzzy stepwise weight assessment ratio analysis (IMF SWARA) method was used to calculate the criterion weights, while transport companies were ranked based on Rough Measurement Alternatives and Ranking according to the COmpromise Solution (R‐MARCOS). The integration of these methods into a single model that combines two theories of uncertainty, fuzzy and rough, was performed for the first time in this study, which represents a significant contribution. The results show that the most significant criteria are as follows: dangerous goods are classified and permitted under ADR (Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road), the prescribed documents are in the transport unit, and the equipment is in the transport unit. When it comes to the evaluation results of companies, it can be noticed that A1 and A4 show the best performance, while A8 and A9 are in the last position. In order to test the stability of the model developed, sensitivity analysis, comparative analysis, and the influence of the dynamic formation of the initial matrix were created.