A Study of Multicriteria Decision Making for Supplier Selection in Automotive Industry

Table 9

Summary of disadvantages of MCDM models.

Differences	AHP	FAHP	TOPSIS	FTOPSIS	FAHPiFTOPSIS
When a problem is decomposed into subsystems, the decision problem might become; very large and lengthy [7]	Y
AHP’s using crisp number, hence not able to reflect human thinking style [7]	Y
When a number of alternatives and criteria increased, pair-wise comparison becomes cumbersome and risk of inconsistencies grows [22, 25–27]		Y
Problem is not decomposed into hierarchy hence decision maker might encounter difficulty to simplify the problem			Y	Y
Integration with FAHP resulted in a number of extra steps to be followed					Y
Does not take into account the uncertainty associated with the mapping of one’s judgment to a number [23]	Y
FAHP requires more complex computations than FTOPSIS which includes pair wise comparison [22, 28]		Y
In the extent analysis of FAHP, the priority weights of criterion or alternative can be equal to zero [22]		Y

Note: Y means the differences are applicable for the respective MCDM.