Keywords
multi-criteria decision-making
Spearman's correlation
supplier selection
weighted product with averaging and mean-normalized evaluation
How to Cite
Abstract
The weighted product (WP) method is one of the popular methods in decision support systems (DSSs) due to its simplicity, calculation efficiency, and ability to handle various types of criteria with different weights. This research proposes a modification to the WP model designed to enhance fairness and rationality in the ranking process of alternatives. Therefore, a modified approach, Weighted Product with Averaging and Mean-Normalized Evaluation (WP-A), is adopted by integrating objective weighting methods and more adaptive normalization, so that each criterion can be evaluated proportionally. The supplier selection case study is used to test the effectiveness of the proposed model by comparing it with other MCDM methods. The results of the study show that the WP-A method produces more consistent results and has a stronger correlation with other methods, as indicated by Spearman's correlation test, with a value of 0.9828, indicating a very strong level of consistency with the reference rankings. The main contribution of this research is to provide a new framework for the development of the WP method so that it can be relied upon to support a more transparent and objective decision-making system.
References
[1] I. Naz et al., “Integrated Geospatial and Geostatistical Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Urban Groundwater Quality Using Water Quality Indices,” Water, vol. 16, no. 17, p. 2549, 2024, doi: 10.3390/w16172549.
[2] A. R. Mishra, P. Rani, F. Cavallaro, I. M. Hezam, and J. Lakshmi, “An Integrated Intuitionistic Fuzzy Closeness Coefficient-Based OCRA Method for Sustainable Urban Transportation Options Selection,” Axioms, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 144, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.3390/axioms12020144.
[3] M. Gheibi et al., “A Sustainable Decision Support System for Drinking Water Systems: Resiliency Improvement against Cyanide Contamination,” Infrastructures, vol. 7, no. 7, 2022, doi: 10.3390/infrastructures7070088.
[4] P. William, O. J. Oyebode, A. Sharma, N. Garg, A. Shrivastava, and A. Rao, “Integrated Decision Support System for Flood Disaster Management with Sustainable Implementation,” IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 1285, no. 1, p. 012015, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1285/1/012015.
[5] A. Fetanat and M. Tayebi, “Fuzzy set–based decision support system for hydrogen sulfide removal technology selection in natural gas processing: a sustainability and efficiency perspective,” Environ. Monit. Assess., vol. 196, no. 12, p. 1267, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10661-024-13348-w.
[6] S. Setiawansyah, “IT Personnel Recruitment Decision Support System: Combination of TOPSIS and Entropy Weighting Methods,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Technology Information, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 118–130, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.58602/jaiti.v2i3.131.
[7] A. Venkateshwaran, I. Kant Deo, and R. K. Jaiman, “MUTE-DSS: A digital-twin-based decision support system for minimizing underwater radiated noise in ship voyage planning,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 343, p. 123343, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.123343.
[8] M. Seidi, S. Yaghoubi, and F. Rabiei, “Multi-objective optimization of wire electrical discharge machining process using multi-attribute decision making techniques and regression analysis,” Sci. Rep., vol. 14, no. 1, p. 10234, 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-60825-w.
[9] N. Hendrastuty, S. Setiawansyah, M. G. An’ars, F. A. Rahmadianti, V. H. Saputra, and M. Rahman, “G2M weighting: a new approach based on multi-objective assessment data (case study of MOORA method in determining supplier performance evaluation),” Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 403–416, 2025, doi: 10.11591/ijeecs.v38.i1.pp403-416.
[10] H. A. Dağıstanlı and K. G. Kurtay, “Facility Location Selection for Ammunition Depots based on GIS and Pythagorean Fuzzy WASPAS,” Journal of Operations Intelligence, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 36–49, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.31181/jopi2120247.
[11] A. R. Mishra, P. Rani, and R. S. Prajapati, “Multi-criteria weighted aggregated sum product assessment method for sustainable biomass crop selection problem using single-valued neutrosophic sets,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 113, p. 108038, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2021.108038.
[12] M. Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, “Assessment of distribution center locations using a multi-expert subjective–objective decision-making approach,” Sci. Rep., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 19461, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-98698-y.
[13] P. Rani and A. R. Mishra, “Multi-criteria weighted aggregated sum product assessment framework for fuel technology selection using q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets,” Sustain. Prod. Consum., vol. 24, pp. 90–104, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.06.015.
[14] L. SARSAR and A. ECHAOUI, “The Effect of Economic Growth on of Renewable Energy Production in Morocco: An Empirical Analysis Source-Wise From 1964 to 2021,” International Journal of Trade and Management, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 172–183, 2024, doi: 10.34874/PRSM.ijtm-vol1iss3.1363.
[15] U. Cali et al., “Offshore wind farm site selection in Norway: Using a fuzzy trigonometric weighted assessment model,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 436, p. 140530, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140530.
[16] A. Blagojević, Ž. Stević, D. Marinković, S. Kasalica, and S. Rajilić, “A Novel Entropy-Fuzzy PIPRECIA-DEA Model for Safety Evaluation of Railway Traffic,” Symmetry, vol. 12, no. 9, p. 1479, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.3390/sym12091479.
[17] A. Negi et al., “A hybrid CRITIC-MAIRCA framework for optimal phase change material selection in solar distillation systems,” International Journal of Thermofluids, vol. 27, p. 101167, May 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ijft.2025.101167.
[18] N. O. B. de Paula, M. dos Santos, C. F. S. Gomes, and F. Baldini, “CRITIC-MOORA-3N Application on a Selection of AHTS Ships for Offshore Operations,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 214, pp. 187–194, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2022.11.165.
[19] H. Sulistiani, S. Setiawansyah, A. F. O. Pasaribu, P. Palupiningsih, K. Anwar, and V. H. Saputra, “New TOPSIS: Modification of the TOPSIS Method for Objective Determination of Weighting,” International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 991–1003, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.22266/ijies2024.1031.74.
[20] M. MARUF and K. ÖZDEMİR, “Ranking of Tourism Web Sites According to Service Performance Criteria with CRITIC and MAIRCA Methods: The Case of Turkey,” Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1108–1117, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.33712/mana.1352560.
[21] M. W. Arshad, D. Darwis, H. Sulistiani, R. R. Suryono, Y. Rahmanto, and D. A. Megawaty, “Combination of Weighted Product Method and Entropy Weighting in the Best Warehouse Employee Recommendation,” KLIK: Kajian Ilmiah Informatika dan Komputer, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 193–202, 2024, doi: 10.30865/klik.v5i1.2095.
[22] T. G. Soares, A. A. J. Sinlae, A. Herdiansah, and A. Arisantoso, “Decision Support System for Selection of Internet Services Providers using the ROC and WASPAS Approach,” Journal of Computer System and Informatics (JoSYC), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 346–356, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.47065/josyc.v5i2.4892.
[23] A. Mitra, “Application of multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis (MOORA) for selection of cotton fabrics for optimal thermal comfort,” Research Journal of Textile and Apparel, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 187–203, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1108/RJTA-02-2021-0021.
[24] S. Setiawansyah, “Improving Decision Accuracy Through LOPCOW Weighting and AROMAN Methods in Retail Store Location Selection,” Jurnal Ilmiah Informatika dan Ilmu Komputer (JIMA-ILKOM), vol. 4, no. 1 SE-Articles, pp. 77–88, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.58602/jima-ilkom.v4i1.57.
[25] T. Van Dua, D. Van Duc, N. C. Bao, and D. D. Trung, “Integration of objective weighting methods for criteria and MCDM methods: application in material selection,” EUREKA: Physics and Engineering, no. 2, pp. 131–148, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.21303/2461-4262.2024.003171.
[26] F. A. AlFaraidy, K. S. Teegala, and G. Dwivedi, “Selection of a Sustainable Structural Floor System for an Office Building Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Multi-Attribute Utility Theory,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 17, p. 13087, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su151713087.
[27] Y. Chen and Y. Ma, “Dynamic Hybrid Multi-Attribute Group Decision-Making with Two Reference Points for Electricity Sales Package Recommendation,” Applied Sciences, vol. 15, no. 5, p. 2331, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.3390/app15052331.
[28] M. Narang, A. Kumar, and R. Dhawan, “A fuzzy extension of MEREC method using parabolic measure and its applications,” Journal of Decision Analytics and Intelligent Computing, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 33–46, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.31181/jdaic10020042023n.
[29] A. Yudhistira, Setiawansyah, T. Ardiansah, S. Maryana, Y. Yadin, and R. Oktaviani, “Development of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory Methods in Dynamic Decision Models Using Change-Data Driven,” Evergreen, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 3279–3289, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.5109/7326962.
[30] S. H. Hadad, A. R Metha, S. Setiawansyah, and H. Sulistiani, “Evaluation of Salesperson Performance in the Sales Allowance Decision Support System Using the MARCOS and PIPRECIA Methods,” Journal of Computer System and Informatics (JoSYC), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 477–486, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.47065/josyc.v5i2.4863.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.