2013 | 137 | 53-68
Article title

Interactive Decision Aiding Technique for a New Product Selection Problem

Title variants
Languages of publication
An important part of the innovation management is to select the best new product project from the preliminary large set of potential alternatives. This problem is broadly discussed in the extant literature. Although the qualitative approaches dominate in literature, there are few examples of more formal decision procedures based on multiple criteria analysis. This article brings an example of interactive procedure that can help decision making in the new product development. As to the authors knowledge, such approach has not been proposed so far to the problem of selecting new product. The interactive procedure gives to the DM an opportunity to actively participate in the whole process and observe its development. During the procedure, the DM can disclose his preferences and values of trade-offs. This kind of assessment of differences in importance of criteria is assumed as more reliable then the direct assessment of weights.
Physical description
  • Benayoun R., de Montgolfier J., Tergny J., Larichev C. (1971), Linear Programming with Multiple Objective Functions: Step Method (STEM). "Mathematical Programming", 8, 366-375.
  • Calantone R.J., Benedetto C.A., Schmidt J.B. (1999), Using the analytic hierarchy process in new product screening. "An International Publication of The Product Development & Management Association", 16 (1), 65-76.
  • Carazo A.F., Gómez T., Molina J., Hernández-Díaz A.G., Guerrero F.M., Caballero R. (2010), Solving a comprehensive model for multiobjective project portfolio selection. "Computers & Operations Research", 37 (4), 630-639.
  • Cooper R.G., Edgett S.J., Kleinschmidt E.J. (2004a), Benchmarking best NPD practices - I. "Research Technology Management", 47, 31-43.
  • Cooper R.G., Edgett S.J., Kleinschmidt E.J. (2004b), Benchmarking best NPD practices - II. "Research Technology Management", 47, 50-59.
  • Doerner K.F., Gutjahr W.J., Hartl R.F., Strauss C., Stummer C. (2006), Pareto ant colony optimization with ILP preprocessing in multiobjective project portfolio selection. "European Journal of Operational Research", 171 (3), 830-841.
  • Dyer J.S. (1972), Interactive Goal Programming. "Management Science", 19, 62-70.
  • Edwards W. (1977), How to use multi-attribute utility measurement for social decision-making. "IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics", 7 (5), s. 326-40.
  • Edwards W. (1971), Social utilities. "Engineering Economist", (Summer Symposium Series) 6.
  • Englund R.L., Graham R.J. (1999), From experience: linking projects to strategy. "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 16 (1), s. 52-64.
  • Geoffrion A.M., Dyer J.S., Feinberg, A. (1972), An Interactive Approach for Multi-Criterion Optimization with an Application to the Operation of an Academic Department. "Management Science", 19, 357-368.
  • Kaliszewski I., Michalowski W. (1999), Searching for psychologically stable solutions of multiple criteria decision problems. "European Journal of Operational Research", 118, 549-562.
  • Linton J.D., Walsh S.T., Kirchhoff B.A., Morabito J., Merges M. (2000), Selection of R&D projects in a portfolio. Engineering Management Society. Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE, 506-511.
  • Michnik J. (2010), Criteria Analysis in a Process of Innovation Management, in: Preference Modeling and Risk '10. Ed. T. Trzaskalik. University of Economics in Katowice Publishing House, 107-117 (in Polish).
  • Michnik J. (2011), A Review of the Decision Methods in Process of Innovation Management in Enterprises. Studia Ekonomiczne, Zeszyty Naukowe UE Katowice 62, 91-102 (in Polish).
  • Miettinen K. (1999), Nonlinear multiobjective optimization. "Kluwer Academic Publishers", Boston.
  • Morcos M. S. (2008), Modelling resource allocation of R&D project portfolios using a multi-criteria decision-making methodology. "International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management", 25 (1), 72-86.
  • Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. (2005), Eds. J. Figueira, S. Greco, M. Ehrgott. Springer, New York.
  • Nikulin Y., Miettinen K., Mäkelä M.M. (2012), A new achievement scalarizing function based on parameterization in multiobjective optimization. "OR Spectrum", 34, 69-87.
  • Nowak M. (2006), INSDECM - an interactive procedure for stochastic multicriteria decision problems. "European Journal of Operational Research", 175, 1413-1430.
  • Nowak M. (2007), Aspiration level approach in stochastic MCDM problems. "European Journal of Operational Research", 177, 1626-1640.
  • Nowak M. (2011), Interactive multicriteria decision aiding under risk - methods and applications. "Journal of Business Economics and Management", 12, 69-91.
  • Roy B. (1985), Méthodologie multicritère d'aide à la décision. "Economica", Paris.
  • Ruiz F., Luque M., Miguel F., del Mar Muñoz M. (2008), An additive achievement scalarizing function for multiobjective programming problems. "European Journal of Operational Research", 188, 683-694.
  • Salo A.A., Hämäläinen R.P. (1992), Preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements. "Operations Research", 40, 1053-1061.
  • Saaty T.L. (2005), Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process. Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
  • Scott G.M. (2000), Critical technology management issues of new product development in High-tech companies. "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 17, 57-77.
  • Wierzbicki A. (1980), The use of reference objectives in multiobjective optimization, in: MCDM Theory and Application. Springer-Verlag. Eds. G. Fandel, T. Gal. Berlin, 468-486.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.