Multiattribute Decision Analysis Method for Evaluating Buildings and Building Systems.
Multiattribute Decision Analysis Method for Evaluating
Buildings and Building Systems.
(9325 K)
Norris, G. A.; Marshall, H. E.
NISTIR 5663; 86 p. September 1995.
Available from:
National Technical Information Service
Order number: PB96-158670
Keywords:
decision analysis; additive weighting methods;
analytical hierarchy process (APH); building choice;
building economics; capital budget allocation;
hierarchy; multiattribute decision analysis; multiple
criteria decision analysis; multiobjective decision
analysis
Abstract:
Multiattribute decision analysis (MADA) method consider
non-financial attributes (qualitative and quantitative)
in addition to common financial worth measures when
evaluating project alternatives. The building community
needs MADA methods to evaluate building and
building-related investment alternatives where
non-financial attributes are important. The report
reviews 14 classes of methods for performing MADA. It
summarizes their usefulness for screening, ranking, and
choosing among projects; their data input requirements;
and how each method scores project alternatives. Two
methods - the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and
non-traditional capital investment criteria (NCIC) - are
described in detail. Assumptions, procedures,
strengths, and limitations are described for each. AHP
was selected for detailed description because of four
important strengths: it is well-known and well-reviewed
in the literature; it includes an efficient atrribute
weighting process of pairwise comparisons; it
incorporates hierarchical descriptions of attributes,
which keeps the number of pairwise comparisons
manageable; and most of all, its use is facilitated by
available software. A case study of a hypothetical
company choosing a new headquarters illustrates AHP in
choosing among building alternatives. NCIC was selected
for detailed description because of four strong points:
it was designed to address some of the criticisms of AHP
which have appeared in the literature; it includes
pairwise comparisons for efficiency; it incorporates
hierarchical descriptions of attributes to keep the
number of pairwise comparisons manageable; and most of
all, it develops "scores" for alternatives which are
denominated in monetary terms, making otherwise implied
valuation of attributes explicit and allowing the
results to be incorporated into traditional economic
worth analyses. A case study of a hypothetical company
selecting the location of a new branch office
illustrates NCIC. Detailed descriptions of some typical
building-related decisions - choosing among office
buildings, residences, building components, and building
materials - provide additional examples of possible MADA
applications. A list of 15 building-related attributes,
with complete definitions, helps decision makers
customize a MADA model for making a building choice.
Although the report focuses on buildings, MADA methods
apply equally to the evaluation of non-building capital
budgeting decisions.
Building and Fire Research Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD 20899