Systems, Procedures and Voting Rules in Context by Adiel Teixeira de Almeida & Danielle Costa Morais & Hannu Nurmi

Author:Adiel Teixeira de Almeida & Danielle Costa Morais & Hannu Nurmi
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9783030309558
Publisher: Springer International Publishing

12.3 Types of Aggregation of DMs’ Preferences

The aggregation of DMs’ preferences consists of reducing the set of each individual DM’s preferences to a collective preference system for the whole group of DMs. With a group of DMs, the preference aggregation process is closely related to a few factors, such as the way in which the DMs interact, including their power relation system, the time they have available to spend on this process, whether they are available to interact simultaneously and the role of other actors in this process.

Regarding the power relation system amongst the DMs, one of them may be a supra-DM, who usually has a hierarchical position in the organization’s structure that is higher than that of the other DMs. The supra-DM is in charge of making the decision on main issues, such as the decision process itself, global evaluations and evaluating the other DMs’ choices. The supra-DM is called a ‘benevolent dictator’ by Keeney (1976), and acts in accordance with one of the two types of Group Decision process. The other type is called the ‘participatory group problem’, in which the group acts jointly in the process and each DM has the same power and hierarchical position. Regarding other actors, instead of an analyst, in some situations a role is played by a facilitator or a mediator. With a facilitator, the interaction between DMs may be a more detailed process, assuming that the DMs are available for this. These issues play a conclusive role in the kind of group decision (GD) process, when classifying the types of GD aggregation.

Regarding the way in which the preferences are combined in order to obtaining a collective preference, whether or not a supra-DM is present, the decision process can be implemented in two ways as shown in Fig. 12.1 (Nurmi 1981; Kim and Ahn 1999; Leyva-López and Fernández-González 2003; Dias and Clímaco 2005; de Almeida et al. 2015):

Fig. 12.1Group decision aggregation processes

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.