|
|
| ISL5290 | Multiple Attribute Dec. Making Methods - I | 3+0+0 | ECTS:7.5 | | Year / Semester | Fall Semester | | Level of Course | Second Cycle | | Status | Elective | | Department | DEPARTMENT of BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION | | Prerequisites and co-requisites | None | | Mode of Delivery | Face to face | | Contact Hours | 14 weeks - 3 hours of lectures per week | | Lecturer | -- | | Co-Lecturer | None | | Language of instruction | Turkish | | Professional practise ( internship ) | None | | | | The aim of the course: | | The main purpose of this course is to provide a good insight into the use of AHP, ANP, TOPSIS, DEA, and goal programming approaches that are multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodologies in the evaluation of production/operations management problems. |
| Programme Outcomes | CTPO | TOA | | Upon successful completion of the course, the students will be able to : | | | | PO - 1 : | define the basic techniques used in multi-criteria and/or multi-attribute decision making (MCDM/MADM) methods. | 1,2 | 1,3 | | PO - 2 : | estimate the effect of every multi-criteria decision-making technique used by the decision-makers on the success of a firm. | 1,2,3,4 | 1,3 | | PO - 3 : | use analytical decision-making techniques in solving real-world problems | 1,2,3,4,5 | 1,3 | | PO - 4 : | determine the most appropriate method which comply with the needs, goals, and expectations of the firm by using multi-criteria decision-making (FMCDM) techniques | 1,2,3,4,5 | 1,3 | | PO - 5 : | summarize the results based on the information obtained by multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques | 1,2,3,4,5 | 1,3 | | CTPO : Contribution to programme outcomes, TOA :Type of assessment (1: written exam, 2: Oral exam, 3: Homework assignment, 4: Laboratory exercise/exam, 5: Seminar / presentation, 6: Term paper), PO : Learning Outcome | | |
| Theoretical framework of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology, An illustrative example of the AHP, Solving the AHP problems using the Super decisions software, Theoretical framework of the Analytic Network Process (ANP) methodology, An illustrative example of the ANP, Solving the ANP problems using the Super decisions software, Theoretical framework of the TOPSIS methodology, An illustrative example of the TOPSIS, Theoretical framework of the DEA methodology, An illustrative example of the DEA, Theoretical framework of the Goal Programming methodology, An illustrative example of the Goal Programming
|
| |
| Course Syllabus | | Week | Subject | Related Notes / Files | | Week 1 | Course objectives and outlines | | | Week 2 | Theoretical framework of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology | | | Week 3 | An illustrative example of the AHP | | | Week 4 | Solving the AHP problems using the Super decisions software | | | Week 5 | Theoretical framework of the Analytic Network Process (ANP) methodology | | | Week 6 | An illustrative example of the ANP | | | Week 7 | Solving the ANP problems using the Super decisions software | | | Week 8 | Theoretical framework of the TOPSIS methodology
| | | Week 9 | Mid-term exam
| | | Week 10 | An illustrative example of the TOPSIS | | | Week 11 | Theoretical framework of the DEA methodology | | | Week 12 | An illustrative example of the DEA
| | | Week 13 | Theoretical framework of the Goal Programming methodology | | | Week 14 | An illustrative example of the Goal Programming
| | | Week 15 | An illustrative example of the Goal Programming | | | Week 16 | End-of-term exam | | | |
| 1 | Yoon, K.P., Hwang, C.L., 1995, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. | | | 2 | Saaty, T.L., Saaty, R.W., Decision Making In Complex Environments: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for decision making and The Analytic Network Process (ANP) for decision making with dependence and feedback, RWS Publications, Pittsburg | | | 3 | Saaty, T.L., 1999, Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World, RWS Publications | | | |
| 1 | Forman, E., Selly, M.A. 2002, Decision by Objectives, World Scientific Publishing Company, New York | | | 2 | Lai, Y.J., Hwang, C.L., 1994, Fuzzy Multiple Objective Decision Making, Springer, Manhattan | | | |
| Method of Assessment | | Type of assessment | Week No | Date | Duration (hours) | Weight (%) | | Mid-term exam | 9 | 13/11/2017 | 1 | 30 | | Homework/Assignment/Term-paper | 12 | 04/12/2017 | 1 | 20 | | End-of-term exam | 16 | 08/01/2018 | 1 | 50 | | |
| Student Work Load and its Distribution | | Type of work | Duration (hours pw) | No of weeks / Number of activity | Hours in total per term | | Sınıf dışı çalışma | 8 | 14 | 112 | | Arasınav için hazırlık | 12 | 2 | 24 | | Kısa sınav | 1 | 1 | 1 | | Dönem sonu sınavı için hazırlık | 12 | 3 | 36 | | Total work load | | | 173 |
|