Comparing AHP and CBA as Decision Methods to Resolve the Choosing Problem in Detailed Design
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 141, Issue 1
Abstract
Multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methods can help designers address the choosing problem in building detailed design. Many, however, appear to assume that all methods are equivalent. This paper argues that differences between MCDM methods matter. The first contribution of this paper is differentiating between the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and choosing by advantages (CBA) by comparing them through an example. The second contribution is explaining why CBA is superior to AHP for this context. In summary, CBA (1) provides a more context-based analysis than AHP, (2) does not incorporate conflicting judgments for weighing factors as AHP does, (3) does not assume linear trade-offs between factors as AHP does, (4) does not assume that factors have zero as a natural scale as AHP does, (5) focuses on differentiating between alternatives more than AHP, (6) maintains the result of the decision when nondifferentiating factors are removed, whereas AHP may not, and (7) defers subjective judgments until late in the decision-making process, whereas AHP requires expressing them earlier. This presents a significant research finding, considering the wide use of AHP. Further research is needed to assess what range of design decisions CBA supports.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The research for this paper was supported in part by the Project Production Systems Laboratory (P2SL). In addition, P. Arroyo is supported by a CONICYT Ph.D. fellowship from the Chilean government and the Pontificia Universidad Católica (PUC) de Chile. All support is gratefully acknowledged. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of contributors to P2SL, CONICYT, or PUC.
References
Aguado, A., del Caño, A., de la Cruz, M. P., Gómez, D., and Josa, A. (2012). “Sustainability assessment of concrete structures within the Spanish structural concrete code.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 268–276.
Arroyo, P., Tommelein, I. D., and Ballard, G. (2012a). “Comparing multi-criteria decision-making methods to select sustainable alternatives in the AEC industry.” Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. for Sustainable Design, Engineering and Construction (ICSDEC), Fort Worth, TX.
Arroyo, P., Tommelein, I. D., and Ballard, G. (2012b). “Deciding a sustainable alternative by ‘choosing by advantages’ in the AEC industry.” Proc., 20th Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction, San Diego, CA, 41–50.
Azapagic, A., and Perdan, P. (2005). “An integrated sustainability decision-support framework Part I: Problem structuring.” Int. J. Sustainable Dev. World Ecol., 12(2), 98–111.
Bakhoum, E. S., and Brown, D. C. (2012). “Developed sustainable scoring system for structural materials evaluation.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 110–119.
Barzilai, J. (2001). “On the foundations of measurement.” Proc., 2001 IEEE Int. Conf. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Tucson, AZ.
Belton, V., and Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: An integrated approach, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
Cao, W., Sheng, Y., and Qin, Y. (2009). “AHP for the assessment of permafrost environment in Muli mining area of Qinghai Province, China.” Proc., 14th Conf. on Cold Regions Engineering, Duluth, MN, 201–211.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). “Building theories from case study research.” Acad. Manage. Rev., 14(4), 532–550.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). “Five misunderstandings about case-study research.” Qual. Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
Grant, E. (2007). “A decision-making framework for vegetated roofing system selection.” Ph.D. dissertation, Architecture and Design Research, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA, 300.
Guitouni, A., and Martel, J.-M. (1998). “Tentative guidelines to help choose an appropriate MCDA method.” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 109(2), 501–521.
Kang, S., and Seo, J. (2013). “GIS method for haul road layout planning in large earthmoving projects: Framework and analysis.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 236–246.
Koga, J. (2008). “Introductory guidelines to sound decision making.” Choosing by advantages training handout, Cathedral Hill Hospital Project, San Francisco, CA.
Köksalan, M., Wallenius, J., and Zionts, S. (2012). Multiple criteria decision making, World Scientific Publishing.
Lacerda, R. T. O., Ensslin, L., and Ensslin, S. R. (2011). “A performance measurement framework in portfolio management: A constructivist case.” Manage. Decis., 49(4), 648–668.
Lee, H. W., Tommelein, I. D., and Ballard, G. (2010). “Lean design management in an infrastructure design-build project: A case study.” Proc., 18th Annual Conf. Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 18), Haifa, Israel, 113–122.
Nguyen, H. V., Lostuvali, B., and Tommelein, I. D. (2009). “Decision analysis using virtual first-run study of a viscous damping wall system.” Proc., 17th Annual Conf. Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 17), Taipei, Taiwan, 371–382.
Okudan, G. E., and Tauhid, S. (2008). “Concept selection methods—A literature review from 1980 to 2008.” Int. J. Des. Eng., 1(3), 243–277.
Pan, W., Dainty, A., and Gibb, A. (2012). “Establishing and weighting decision criteria for building system selection in housing construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 1239–1250.
Parrish, K., and Tommelein, I. D. (2009). “Making design decisions using choosing by advantages.” Proc., 17th Annual Conf. Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 17), Taipei, Taiwan, 501–510.
Roy, B. (1981). “Multicriteria analysis: Survey and new directions.” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 8(3), 207–218.
Roy, B. (1985). Multi-criteria methodology for decision analysis, Collection Gestion-Edition Economica, Paris.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making for leaders: The analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
Sarkis, J. (2003). “Quantitative models for performance measurement systems alternate considerations.” Int. J. Prod. Econ., 86(1), 81–90.
Seydel, J., and Olson, D. (1990). “Bids considering multiple criteria.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 609–623.
Shapira, A., and Goldenberg, M. (2005). “AHP-based equipment selection model for construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 1263–1273.
Stewart, T. J. (1992). “A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and practice.” Int. J. Manage. Sci., 20(5–6), 569–586.
Suhr, J. (1999). The choosing by advantages decision making system, Quorum, Westport, CT, 304.
Thanopoulos, T. (2012). “Lean decision making and design management for sustainable building systems and controls: Target value design, set-based design, and choosing by advantages.” Master of Engineering thesis, Engineering and Project Management, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA.
Yeh, C. (2002). “A problem-based selection of multi-attribute decision making methods.” Int. Trans. Oper. Res., 9(2), 169–181.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (applied social research methods), 2nd Ed., Sage Publishing, Beverly Hills, CA.
Zavadskas, E. K., and Turskis, Z. (2011). “Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: An overview.” Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ., 17(2), 397–427.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 141 • Issue 1 • January 2015
Copyright
© 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Aug 9, 2013
Accepted: Mar 19, 2014
Published online: Aug 13, 2014
Published in print: Jan 1, 2015
Discussion open until: Jan 13, 2015
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.