A comparison of two multi-criteria decision-making techniques

This study compares benefits of two multi-criteria decision making techniques: Multi-criteria Rank Ordering (MRO) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). The study is intended to help software designers determine which method to implement when helping users compare alternatives. The AHP method requires more user time and effort than MRO; our goal was to explore whether AHP provided sufficient benefits over MRO to warrant the additional time it requires. Eighteen subjects were asked to use software tools implementing AHP and MRO. They compared student application files and identified applicants most qualified for admission to graduate school. The results showed that although AHP required more time than MRO, AHP resulted in lower variance in the assessments produced by different decision makers. This may be explained by the richer information collected by the AHP method, resulting in more accurate reflections of decision makers´ assessments. Thus, for high criticality domains, AHP may be warranted.