A Decision-Aid in Supplier Selection for Entrepreneurs, Using Nested-Design, MODM and FAHP

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 14-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehrdad Agha Mohamad Ali Kermani ◽  
Masoud Nasiri ◽  
Mohamad Hadi Aliahmadi
Keyword(s):  
Supplier Selection ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Multiobjective Programming ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Relative Importance ◽  
Nested Design ◽  
Selection For ◽  
Proper Performance ◽  
Linear Multiobjective Programming ◽  
Do So

Decision making is an important task for entrepreneurs, and proper performance of purchasing has a direct effect on decreasing costs, increasing profitability, and survival of an entrepreneur. Also, entrepreneurs must follow formal rational decision processes as much as possible with fewer costs. To do so, they can use Design of Experiment techniques in combination with decision-aids. In this paper, the authors develop a fuzzy linear multiobjective model for supplier selection. With this model, the decision maker will be able to identify effective criteria with the Nested-Design technique and their relative importance on supplier selection with FAHP. In this regard, fuzzy linear multiobjective programming will be assigned a share of suppliers for supply and demands in the supply chain. The authors expect that using this combination of techniques will have an impressive effect on reducing supplier selection costs.

scholarly journals Development of A Novel Decision Aid for Informed Decision-Making of Intraocular Lens Types in Patients Undergoing Cataract Surgery

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabite Gokce ◽  
Zaina Al-Mohtaseb
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Education ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Selection For

Abstract Objective Surgery is the main treatment of visual loss related to cataracts. There are multiple intraocular lens (IOL) options with certain advantages. Patient education on IOL types is necessary to achieve a successful shared decision making process and meet the expectations of the individual patient. Decision aids (DAs) are used for patient education and we developed a novel DA to assist patients during IOL type selection for their cataract surgery. Methods The Ottawa Personal Decision Guide and the ‘Workbook on Developing and Evaluating Patient Decision Aids’ were used in the development of this DA. General characteristics of cataracts, surgical treatment, and details including advantages and disadvantages of varying IOLs were included in the content of the DA. The DA was further evaluated by 3 physicians (Delphi assessment- International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration standards) and 25 patients (questionnaire of 6 questions with Five-point Likert scale). Results The DA was finalized with feedbacks from the experts. A total score of 50/54 was achieved in Delphi group assessment. Patient perception of the DA was favorable and patients also recommended its use by other patients. Conclusions This novel DA to assist IOL selection for cataract surgery was well accepted by the patients. There is a potential to improve patients’ level of knowledge and diminish decisional conflicts. This potential can also increase patients’ contribution on the shared decision making process. A further prospective randomized trial to compare with the standard patient informing process is also planned.

An Approach for Supplier Selection for Construction Companies Through Analytical Hierarchy Process

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 177-179
Author(s):  
Bhavik K Daxini ◽  
◽  
Prof. (Dr.) R.B. Bhatt Prof. (Dr.) R.B. Bhatt ◽  
Prof. Jayeshkumar Pitroda
Keyword(s):  
Analytical Hierarchy Process ◽  
Supplier Selection ◽  
Construction Companies ◽  
Selection For ◽  
Hierarchy Process

KRiskSM: A Computerized Decision Aid for Client Acceptance and Continuance Risk Assessments

2002 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy B. Bell ◽  
Jean C. Bedard ◽  
Karla M. Johnstone ◽  
Edward F. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Quality Control ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Innovative Technology ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Business Risk ◽  
Client Acceptance

This paper describes the development and implementation of KRisk, an innovative technology-enabled auditor decision aid for making client acceptance and continuance risk assessments. KRisk, developed and designed by KPMG LLP, is part of the firm's audit quality control and risk management processes. In this paper, we discuss the environmental and technological forces that affect auditor business risk management. We also describe important aspects of the development, functionality, and implementation of KRisk. We discuss possible impediments to realizing the full potential of decision aids that have been reported in prior auditing research, and describe how KRisk and related audit quality control procedures implemented at KPMG were designed to overcome such impediments. Also, we present some ideas for scholarly research dealing with auditor business risk management issues, and issues related to the design and use of decision aids in general.

The Effects of Decision Aid Orientation on Risk Factor Identification and Audit Test Planning

2002 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean C. Bedard ◽  
Lynford E. Graham
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Management ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Risk Identification ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Audit Planning ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Risk Management Strategies

In auditing, risk management involves identifying client facts or issues that may affect engagement risk, and planning evidence-gathering strategies accordingly. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether auditors' identification of risk factors and planning of audit tests is affected by decision aid orientation, i.e., a “negative” focus wherein client risk and its consequences are emphasized, or a “positive” focus where such factors are not emphasized. Specifically, we expect that auditors will identify more risk factors using a negatively oriented risk identification decision aid, but only when engagement risk is relatively high. We address this issue in the context of auditors' knowledge of actual clients, manipulating decision aid orientation as negative or positive in a matched-pair design. Results show that auditors using the negative decision aid orientation identify more risk factors than do those using a positive orientation, for their higher-risk clients. We also find that decisions to apply substantive tests are more directly linked to specific risk factors identified than to direct risk assessments. Further, our results show that auditors with repeat engagement experience with the client identify more risk factors. The findings of this study imply that audit firms may improve their risk management strategies through simple changes in the design of decision aids used to support audit planning.

Decision Aids for Generating Analytical Review Alternatives: The Impact of Goal Framing and Audit-Risk Level

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 157-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M. Mueller ◽  
John C. Anderson
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Information Search ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Risk Level ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Goal Framing ◽  
Analytical Review ◽  
The Impact

An auditor generating potential explanations for an unusual variance in analytical review may utilize a decision aid, which provides many explanations. However, circumstances of budgetary constraints and limited cognitive load deter an auditor from using a lengthy list of explanations in an information search. A two-way between-subjects design was created to investigate the effects of two complementary approaches to trimming down the lengthy list on the number of remaining explanations carried forward into an information search. These two approaches, which represent the same goal (reducing the list) but framed differently, are found to result in a significantly different number of remaining explanations, in both low- and high-risk audit environments. The results of the study suggest that the extent to which an auditor narrows the lengthy list of explanations is important to the implementation of decision aids in analytical review.

The Six E’s of Consumer Choice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Moore ◽  
John A. Quelch ◽  
Emily Boudreau
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Choice ◽  
Relative Importance ◽  
Health And Wellness ◽  
Healthcare Decision ◽  
Do So

Whenever consumers make a choice—in healthcare or in other situations—they do so based on the benefits they anticipate. Chapter 5 focuses on the most common benefits consumers seek when making health and wellness decisions. Though they may vary in relative importance based upon the healthcare decision at hand, these six commonly sought benefits are economy, effectiveness, empathy, efficiency, empowerment, and experience. This chapter reviews each of these benefits in-depth, highlighting examples of each in today’s market. Consumers have different ways of assessing these benefits ranging from simultaneously trading off importance between them to using four shortcuts that make comparisons easier.

scholarly journals Systematic Development of Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the IPDAS Collaboration

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2110141
Author(s):  
Holly O. Witteman ◽  
Kristin G. Maki ◽  
Gratianne Vaisson ◽  
Jeanette Finderup ◽  
Krystina B. Lewis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Aid ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
User Involvement ◽  
User Centered Design ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Patient Decision Aids ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Development Processes ◽  
Systematic Development

Background The 2013 update of the evidence informing the quality dimensions behind the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) offered a model process for developers of patient decision aids. Objective To summarize and update the evidence used to inform the systematic development of patient decision aids from the IPDAS Collaboration. Methods To provide further details about design and development methods, we summarized findings from a subgroup ( n = 283 patient decision aid projects) in a recent systematic review of user involvement by Vaisson et al. Using a new measure of user-centeredness (UCD-11), we then rated the degree of user-centeredness reported in 66 articles describing patient decision aid development and citing the 2013 IPDAS update on systematic development. We contacted the 66 articles’ authors to request their self-reports of UCD-11 items. Results The 283 development processes varied substantially from minimal iteration cycles to more complex processes, with multiple iterations, needs assessments, and extensive involvement of end users. We summarized minimal, medium, and maximal processes from the data. Authors of 54 of 66 articles (82%) provided self-reported UCD-11 ratings. Self-reported scores were significantly higher than reviewer ratings (reviewers: mean [SD] = 6.45 [3.10]; authors: mean [SD] = 9.62 [1.16], P < 0.001). Conclusions Decision aid developers have embraced principles of user-centered design in the development of patient decision aids while also underreporting aspects of user involvement in publications about their tools. Templates may reduce the need for extensive development, and new approaches for rapid development of aids have been proposed when a more detailed approach is not feasible. We provide empirically derived benchmark processes and a reporting checklist to support developers in more fully describing their development processes. [Box: see text]

scholarly journals Basing Information on Comprehensive, Critically Appraised, and Up-to-Date Syntheses of the Scientific Evidence: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2199662
Author(s):  
Tammy C. Hoffmann ◽  
Mina Bakhit ◽  
Marie-Anne Durand ◽  
Lilisbeth Perestelo-Pérez ◽  
Catherine Saunders ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Aid ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Patient Decision Aids ◽  
Research Areas ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Evidence Quality ◽  
Emerging Issues

Background Patients and clinicians expect the information in patient decision aids to be based on the best available research evidence. The objectives of this International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) review were to 1) check the currency of, and where needed, update evidence for the domain of “basing the information in decision aids on comprehensive, critically appraised, and up-to-date syntheses of the evidence”; 2) analyze the evidence characteristics of decision aids; and 3) propose updates to relevant IPDAS criteria. Methods We searched MEDLINE and PubMed to inform updates of this domain’s definitions, justifications, and components. We also searched 5 sources to identify all publicly available decision aids ( N = 471). Two assessors independently extracted each aid’s evidence characteristics. Results Minor updates to the definitions and theoretical justifications of this IPDAS domain are provided and changes to relevant IPDAS criteria proposed. Nearly all aids (97%) provided a year of creation/update, but most (81%) did not report an explicit update or expiration policy. No scientific references were cited in 33% of aids. Of the 314 that cited at least 1 reference, 39% cited at least 1 guideline, 44% cited at least 1 systematic review, and 23% cited at least 1 randomized trial. In 35%, it was unclear what statement in the aid the citations referred to. Only 14% reported any of the processes used to find and decide on evidence inclusion. Only 14% reported the evidence quality. Many emerging issues and future research areas were identified. Conclusions Although many emerging issues need to be addressed, this IPDAS domain is validated and criteria refined. High-quality patient decision aids should be based on comprehensive and up-to-date syntheses of critically appraised evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document