Multi-criteria decision-making methods: application in humanitarian operations

IF 4.5 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Aniruddh Nain, Deepika Jain, A. Trivedi
{"title":"Multi-criteria decision-making methods: application in humanitarian operations","authors":"Aniruddh Nain, Deepika Jain, A. Trivedi","doi":"10.1108/bij-11-2022-0673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper aims to examine and compare extant literature on the application of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques in humanitarian operations (HOs) and humanitarian supply chains (HSCs). It identifies the status of existing research in the field and suggests a roadmap for academicians to undertake further research in HOs and HSCs using MCDM techniques.Design/methodology/approachThe paper systematically reviews the research on MCDM applications in HO and HSC domains from 2011 to 2022, as the field gained traction post-2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami phenomena. In the first step, an exhaustive search for journal articles is conducted using 48 keyword searches. To ensure quality, only those articles published in journals featuring in the first quartile of the Scimago Journal Ranking were selected. A total of 103 peer-reviewed articles were selected for the review and then segregated into different categories for analysis.FindingsThe paper highlights insufficient high-quality research in HOs that utilizes MCDM methods. It proposes a roadmap for scholars to enhance the research outcomes by advocating adopting mixed methods. The analysis of various studies revealed a notable absence of contextual reference. A contextual mind map specific to HOs has been developed to assist future research endeavors. This resource can guide researchers in determining the appropriate contextual framework for their studies.Practical implicationsThis paper will help practitioners understand the research carried out in the field. The aspiring researchers will identify the gap in the extant research and work on future research directions.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first literature review on applying MCDM in HOs and HSCs. It summarises the current status and proposes future research directions.","PeriodicalId":48029,"journal":{"name":"Benchmarking-An International Journal","volume":"6 6s 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Benchmarking-An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/bij-11-2022-0673","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to examine and compare extant literature on the application of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques in humanitarian operations (HOs) and humanitarian supply chains (HSCs). It identifies the status of existing research in the field and suggests a roadmap for academicians to undertake further research in HOs and HSCs using MCDM techniques.Design/methodology/approachThe paper systematically reviews the research on MCDM applications in HO and HSC domains from 2011 to 2022, as the field gained traction post-2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami phenomena. In the first step, an exhaustive search for journal articles is conducted using 48 keyword searches. To ensure quality, only those articles published in journals featuring in the first quartile of the Scimago Journal Ranking were selected. A total of 103 peer-reviewed articles were selected for the review and then segregated into different categories for analysis.FindingsThe paper highlights insufficient high-quality research in HOs that utilizes MCDM methods. It proposes a roadmap for scholars to enhance the research outcomes by advocating adopting mixed methods. The analysis of various studies revealed a notable absence of contextual reference. A contextual mind map specific to HOs has been developed to assist future research endeavors. This resource can guide researchers in determining the appropriate contextual framework for their studies.Practical implicationsThis paper will help practitioners understand the research carried out in the field. The aspiring researchers will identify the gap in the extant research and work on future research directions.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first literature review on applying MCDM in HOs and HSCs. It summarises the current status and proposes future research directions.
多准则决策方法:在人道主义行动中的应用
本文旨在研究和比较现有文献中多准则决策(MCDM)技术在人道主义行动(HOs)和人道主义供应链(hsc)中的应用。它确定了该领域现有研究的现状,并提出了一个路线图,供院士们利用MCDM技术进一步研究HOs和造血干细胞。本文系统回顾了自2004年印度洋海啸后MCDM在HO和HSC领域的应用研究,并对2011 - 2022年MCDM在HO和HSC领域的应用进行了综述。在第一步中,对期刊文章进行详尽的搜索,使用48个关键字搜索。为了确保质量,只选择那些发表在sci期刊排名前四分之一的期刊上的文章。共有103篇同行评议的文章被选中进行审查,然后分成不同的类别进行分析。研究结果:本文强调了利用MCDM方法对医院进行高质量研究的不足。它为学者提出了一个路线图,通过提倡采用混合方法来提高研究成果。对各种研究的分析显示,明显缺乏上下文参考。一个特定于居屋的情境思维导图已经被开发出来,以协助未来的研究工作。这个资源可以指导研究人员在确定适当的上下文框架为他们的研究。本文将帮助实践者理解在该领域开展的研究。有抱负的研究人员将确定现有研究中的差距,并为未来的研究方向而努力。原创性/价值据作者所知,这是关于MCDM在HOs和hsc中应用的第一篇文献综述。总结了目前的研究现状,提出了未来的研究方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
16.10%
发文量
154
期刊介绍: Benchmarking is big news for companies committed to total quality programmes. Its enthusiastic reception by many prominent business figures has created high levels of interest in a technique which promises big rewards for co-operating partners. Yet, like total quality itself, it must be understood in its proper context, and implemented single mindedly if it is to be effective - this journal helps companies to decide if benchmarking is right for them, and shows them how to go about it successfully.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信