Journal of Applied Information Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

The Extraction of Expert Weights from Pair Wise Comparisons in Delphi Method


Affiliations
1 Business Studies and Development Office, Saipa Yadak, Iran, Islamic Republic of
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


In the second step of Delphi, it has often seen that experts play their roles with same weights of importance. Meanwhile, some experts clearly wiser and more powerful in such matters than others. There is no specific guidance to find the weight of importance of experts in Delphi process. Therefore, this paper intends to introduce a simple method (based on Eigenvector method - by using the number of iteration to reach convergence) to find the weight of importance of experts in Delphi process. The findings in this paper confirm the effectiveness of proposed method. So that, inconsistent expert's get less weight and vice-versa. A numerical example demonstrates the application of the proposed method.

Keywords

Group Decision-Making, Delphi, Weights of Experts, Eigenvector.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Blair, S., & Uhl, N P. (1993). Using the Delphi method to improve the curriculum. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 23(3), 107-128.

  • Dick, B. (2002). Building agreement from disagreement: The anatomy of dialectical processes. International Congress of Action Research and Process Management, Griffith University, Brisbane, 10 to 13 July 1990.

  • Eshlaghy, A. T. & Farokhi, N. E. (2011). Measuring the importance and the weight of decision makers in the criteria weighting activities of group decision-making process. American Journal of Scientific Research, 24, 6-12.

  • Gordon, T. J. (1994). The Delphi method. In Gleen J C (ed) future research methodology AC/UNU Millennium Project. Retrieved from http://www.gerenciamento.ufba.br/Downloads/delphi (1), pp. 1-33.

  • Welty, G. (1972). Problems of selecting experts for Delphi exercises. Academy of Management Journal, 15(1), 121-124.

  • Welty, G. (1973). Some problems of selecting Delphic expert for educational planning and forecasting exercise.California Journal of Educational Research, 24(3), 129-134.

  • Hasanzadeh, M. (2012). Application of Delphi method for criteria selection in site survey of oil jetties in Iran.Environment and Natural Resource Research, 2(1), 119-128.

  • Hanafin, S. (2004). A review of literature on the Delphi technique. Retrieved from www.childerensdatabase.ie/documents/publications/Delphi_yuechnique_A_ literature_review.Pdf. (accessed on 14 April 2013).

  • Hsu, Y. L. (2010). The application of fuzzy Delphi method and fuzzy AHP in lubricant regenerative selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(1), 419-425.

  • Pirdavani. (2009). A multiple criteria decision-making approach for prioritizing accident hotspots in the absence of crash data. Transport Reviews, 8, 1-17.

  • Powell, C. (2003). The Delphi technique: Myths and realities Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(4), 376-382.

  • Quan, Q. (2013). Technology foresight and critical technology selection in china. National Research Center for Science and Technology for Development, ministry science and technology, P. R. China, pp. 1-11. Retrieved from http://www.agri-peri.ir/AKHBAR/cd1/FORESIGHT METHODOLOGY & FORECASTING/FORESIGHT METHODOLOGY/related articles/EXPERIENCES/technology foresight% 20in china 031226.pdf. (Accessed 14 April 2013).

  • Rutkowski, L. (2008). Computational intelligence method and techniques. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

  • Rowe, G. & Wright, G. (1999). The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: Issues and analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 15, 353-375.

  • Romano, A. (2010). Malleable Delphi: Research technique, its evaluation, and business applications.International Review of Business Research Papers, 6(5), 235-243.

  • Sackman, H. (1974). Delphi assessment: Expert opinion, forecasting and group process. United States Air Force Project, RAND.

  • Srdjevic, B. (2005). Combining different prioritization methods in the Analytic Hierarchy Process synthesis.Computer & Operations Research, 32(7),1897-1919.

  • Yang, L. C. & Lu, H. P. (2012). Appling Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) to evaluate the key factors of a knowledge management system. Information Engineering Letters, 2(3), 28-34.

  • Hong, Y. (2012). The application of modified Delphi-AHP method in the college students’ comprehensive quality evaluation system. International Journal of Information and Education, 2(4), 389-393.

  • Zorzi, C. C., & Capriati, M. (2001). How foresight actions can be used to support the long-term competitive position of local SME systems. FOREN Work package 5 final report.

  • Unido Report. (2003). Foresight Methodologies. United Nation Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Economy Environment Employment, training module 2 Textbook.


Abstract Views: 265

PDF Views: 0




  • The Extraction of Expert Weights from Pair Wise Comparisons in Delphi Method

Abstract Views: 265  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Mohammad Azadfallaf
Business Studies and Development Office, Saipa Yadak, Iran, Islamic Republic of

Abstract


In the second step of Delphi, it has often seen that experts play their roles with same weights of importance. Meanwhile, some experts clearly wiser and more powerful in such matters than others. There is no specific guidance to find the weight of importance of experts in Delphi process. Therefore, this paper intends to introduce a simple method (based on Eigenvector method - by using the number of iteration to reach convergence) to find the weight of importance of experts in Delphi process. The findings in this paper confirm the effectiveness of proposed method. So that, inconsistent expert's get less weight and vice-versa. A numerical example demonstrates the application of the proposed method.

Keywords


Group Decision-Making, Delphi, Weights of Experts, Eigenvector.

References