Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 5(13): 3476-3480, 2013

ISSN: 2040-7459; e-ISSN: 2040-7467

© Maxwell Scientific Organization, 2013
Submitted: April 27, 2012 Accepted: June 01, 2012 Published: April 15, 2013

Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory

1,2
Elham Falatoonitoosi, 2Zulkiflle Leman, 1,3Shahryar Sorooshian and 4,5Meysam Salimi
1
Department of Industrial Engineering, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
2
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University Putra Malaysia
3
Business School, Taylor’s University, Malaysia
4
Management of Economical Institution Department, University of Economic Science, Tehran, Iran
5
Graduate School of Management, Management and Science University, Malaysia

Abstract: The aim of this study is introducing a technique to illuminate composite issue, aspects or system factors,
the complicated problems need to be structured with graphical illustration and analyzed casual interdependence and
influences throughout the organization. Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)
methodology is proposed to for researching and solving complex and intertwined problem groups because of its
capability in verifying interdependence between variables and try to improve them by offering a specific chart to
reflect interrelationships between variables. In this technique experts plays complementary and approval role in all
steps and sections. , key factors will be clarified by using the direct-influenced matrix and then it specifies priorities
of each factor. The end product of the DEMATEL process is a visual demonstration-the Impact-Relations Map
(IRM)-by which respondents organize their own actions in the world. First In this study, DEMATEL methodology
in explained and then kind of different problems which can be solved by DEMATEL, will discussed and finally the
method of DEMATEL is detailed completely.

Keywords: Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL), MCDM, Hybrid model

INTRODUCTION important and related issues to cause and effect (Chung-

Wei and Gwo-Hshiung, 2009) as well as make it
At the end of 1971, Decision-Making Trial and possible to visualize the casual relationships of sub-
Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) technique was criteria and systems in the course of casual diagram that
employed by Fontela and Gabus, 1976 and it has it may demonstrate communication network, or a little
managed to solve many global complex problems in control relationships between individuals (Jiann and
scientific, political and economic by considering Gwo-Hshiung, 2011; Wu and Lee, 2007; Chiu et al.,
experts’ attitudes (Gabus and Fontela, 1972; Gabus and 2006). This methodology is able to verify
Fontela, 1973). First time, BMI institute applied
interdependence among the unpredictable features or
DEMATEL method to execute big and complicated
attributes likewise containing reveals the characteristic
project in GRC and “Science and Human Affairs
Program of the Battelle Memorial Institute of Geneva” with an essential system and development trend and try
improved it during 1972 to 1976 to solve and explain to reflect the interrelationship between variables by
complex group problems by searching for integrated improving the directed graph (Hori and Shimizu, 1999;
solutions (Naser et al., 2010; Doraid et al., 2011b). It is Tamura et al., 2002), besides DEMATEL helps to
useful for visualizing the structure of complicated better understand for identifying of practical solutions,
causal relationships with matrices or digraphs. Hence, particular problem and above all, the cluster of
the DEMATEL model can convert the relationship complicated problems (Chiu et al., 2006; Huang et al.,
between the causes and effects of criteria into an 2007; Liou et al., 2007; Tzeng et al., 2007). Impact
intelligible structural model of the system. Relation Map (IMR) is the final result of the
DEMATEL become more popular method in Japan DEMATEL procedure.
because it is a widespread technique which is able to In DEMATEL structure, each factors or parts may
evaluate and formulate all intertwined cause and effect exert on and obtain from other higher or lower level
relationships in each structural model. The foundation factors. One of excellence of this technique rather than
of DEMATEL is graph theory and enables us to have a others decision making method in applying feedback
enhanced realizing of casual relationships by dividing application. The entire factors establish worth and
 
Corresponding Author: Elham Falatoonitoosi, Department of Industrial Engineering, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Kerman, Iran
3476
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(13): 3476-3480, 2013

Create the Normalizin Achieve the Get the

direct- g direct- total- casual
influenced influenced relation diagram
matrix matrix matrix

Raw data from Obtain the impact

experts’s opinions relationship map

Fig. 1: Illustrate steps of DEMATEL in a diagram

importance of factors instead of considering only Evaluating Sustainable Supplier (Chiou et al., 2011),
specific factors (Fontela and Gabus, 1976). prioritizing distribution centers in supply chain (Amiri
The main objective of this study is nominating a et al., 2011) Besides the results from final step of
MCDM method for solving complicated issues and for DEMATEL (IRM) could be used in fuzzy approach to
evaluating, comparing and improving the effectiveness evaluate the super additive efficiency rate After
of every system factors by dividing all factors into determining the interrelations between criteria and also
cause and effect group. Actually, DEMATEL technique it could be combined with another multi criteria
is able to visualize interdependencies among the decision making methods like Analytic Hierarchy
unpredictable aspects by representing direct Process (AHP), Analytic Network Process method
relationship map (Fig. 1) (Elham et al., 2012). Also the (ANP) (Saaty, 1996; Tsai and Chou, 2009) to quantify
strange of influence of each factor is demonstrated as dependence and feedback relationships between certain
numerical and it manages to find that which factors criteria, VIKOR and Technique for Order Performance
have more effects on other factor. Therefore, by by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). in these cases
improving the case group, effect group will be the final decision will be effected by DEMATEL result
improved easily. In fact, aspects in effect group are tend while it is applied as a part of hybrid MCDM model.
to be simply influenced by others features in cause
group. As a result, this methodology enables business The DEMATEL method:
managers to reach a high performance regarding to the
effect group criteria in all fields. For applying DEMATEL, there are 5 main step:

Previous studies in DEMATEL: Furthermore  making the direct-influenced matrix

DEMATEL technique has been applied in various  calculating the direct-influenced matrix
situation, ranging from manufacturing planning and normalization
control to multi criteria decision making and analyzing  achieving the total-relation matrix
world challenging such as administration control  Producing a causal diagram
systems (Hori and Shimizu, 1999) Marketing strategy  Obtaining the inner dependence matrix and impact
and customer performance (Chiu et al., 2006), safety relationship map
and security measurement (Liou et al., 2007), fuzzy  Obtaining the inner dependence matrix. In this
approach and expert systems (Wu and Lee, 2007; Lin step, the sum of each column in total-relation n×n
and Wu, 2008), modernization strategy set for Taiwan’s matrix is equal to 1 by the normalization method
SIP Mall (Huang et al., 2007). Success factors of and then the inner dependence matrix can be
hospital service quality (Jiunn-I et al., 2010) and acquired.
industry material selection process (Shih-Chi et al.,
2011). The procedures of the DEMATEL method can be
DEMATEL method is the most important expressed as follow:
application that is applied in the multi-criteria decision
making (MCDM) field to visualize and construct Step 1: Finding the direct-relation (Average) matrix. :
interrelations between criteria and sub-criteria as such At first we have four scales that determine the
as, Evaluating Green Suppliers and Selecting Green values of relationships between different
Supplier (Ru-Jen, 2011; Shahryar et al., 2012), factors according to the experts’ opinion.
3477 
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(13): 3476-3480, 2013

0 = no influence
1 = low influence
2 = high influence
3 = very high influence

There are H experts and n factor (criteria) to be

considered. Each expert answer the certain questions to
illustrate the degree of a criterion i effect criterion j due
to her or his beliefs. For now aij donates pair wise
comparisons between any two criteria and it is assigned
integer score ranging from 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. The scores are

given by each expert and … are answers
each of them that make the non-negative matrix Fig. 2: Example of network influence map
, with 1<k<H. A high score indicates a
D (3)
belief that greater improvement in i is required to
improve j. Then it’s possible to calculate the
average matrix A on account of all expert’s opinions by Consequently total direct effects that criterion i
averaging the H their scores as follows: gives to the other criteria is obtained by sum of each
row i of matrix A as well as the sum of each column j
represent most direct effects on others by total direct
∑ (1)
effects of the criterion. “Likewise, since the sum of
each column j of matrix A represents the total direct
The average matrix is also called the effects received to other criteria by criterion i,
initial direct-influenced matrix which indicates the max ∑ aij represents the total direct effects that the
initial direct effects each criterion exerts on and receive criterion j receives the most direct effects from other
from other criteria. Moreover in this step, obtaining the criteria and The positive numerical s takes the smaller
causal effect between each pair of criteria in a system of the two as the upper bound and the matrix D is
by drawing an influence map will be possible. Also as obtained by dividing each element of A by the scalar s.”
follows: (Jiann and Gwo-Hshiung, 2011). Each element dij of
If aij ≤ 1 matrix D is between zero and less than 1: 0 1.
 Independent is identified among all 
criteria; otherwise, non‐independent 
Step3: Calculate the total-relation matrix. A continuous
will be identified 
reducing of the indirect effects of problems
beside the powers of matrix D, like to an
engrossing Markov chain matrix, guarantees
convergent solutions to the matrix inversion.
The structural relations between the criteria of a
system are converted to intelligible and logical map of Note that:
the system. Figure 2 shows an example of such a
network influence map which helps to explain the , ,…, ∞
structure of the factors. represents a criterion in the lim 0
→∞
system. As an instance the arrow from to indicate 0
the effect that on and the power of its effect is 3.
The total relation matrix is achieved as
Step 2: Normalize the initial direct-relation matrix. By follow:
normalizing the average matrix A, normalized
initial direct relation matrix D is obtained in the ∑∞ …
following formulate: ⋯ )
⋯ )
max max ∑ aij , max ∑ aij (2) 1 (4)

3478 
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(13): 3476-3480, 2013

Table 1: Review of hybrid models

Year Hybrid model Title Aim Authors
2011 DEMATEL, ANP, A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy Evaluating green Gülçin and Gizem
TOPSIS under fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy supplier
environmet TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers
2011 DEMATEL, ANP An integrated MCDM technique combined with Using average Jiann and Gwo-
DEMATEL for a novel cluster-weighted with ANP method (equal Hshiung
method cluster-weighted) to
obtain the weighted
supermatrix
2011 DEMATEL, ANP, Brand marketing for creating brand value based on a Evauating brand Yung-Lan and
VIKOR MCDM model combining DEMATEL with ANP and marketing Gwo-Hshiung
VIKOR methods
2011 DEMATEL, ANP, A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL and ANP Information Yu-Ping et al.
VIKOR for information security risk control
security risk control assessment assessment
2011a DEMATEL ,TOPSIS A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for Doraid et al.
supplier selection
2010 DEMATEL,ANP, BSC Enhancing the Performance of a SOC Design Service Improving the Chi-Yo et al.
Firm by Using a Novel DANP Based MCDM Performance of a
Framework on the Balanced Scorecard SOC Design Service
2009 DEMATEL. ANP, Selecting management systems for sustainable Sustainable Wen-Hsien and
ZOGP development in SMEs: development Wen-Chin
A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP and
ZOGP

I: Identity matrix CONCLUSION

T: Total relation matrix ( )
This study highlights a flexible and effective
The sum of rows and sum of columns of the total decision making method which is DEMATEL,
relation matrix T are computed as an r and c 1 according to a novel hybrid MCDM practices. This
vectors. study is based on the target values of a review
algorithm with emphasize on compromise solution in
∑ (5) hybrid decision making methods as well as criteria
interrelationship studies. Results of DEMATEL applied
∑ (6) examples showed the potential of this method in
MCDM, so it can help designers and decision makers
.
for acquiring more strong decisions.
demonstrates the total effects, both direct
and indirect, given by criterion i to the other criteria j =
REFERENCES
1, 2, ... , n, similarity represents total effects,
direct and indirect, received by criterion j from the Amiri, M., S.S. Jamshid, P. Nafiseh and S. Mahdi,
other criteria i = 1, 2, ...,n As a result, while i = j the 2011. Developing a DEMATEL method to
sum (ri + ci) that is called “Prominence’’ proves the prioritize distribution centers in supply chain.
degree of importance role of criterion i in system and Manage. Sci. Lett., 10(3-4): 279-288.
also gives an index that shows the total effects both Chiou, C.Y., H.C. Chen and C.W. Hsu, 2011. Using
given and received by criterion i. likewise , the (ri ci) DEMATEL to explore a casual and effect model of
that in called “Relation” shows the net effect that sustainable supplier selection. IEEE, 4(2): 240-244.
criterion i donates to the system. When (ri ci) is Chi-Yo, H., C. Hueiling, T. Gwo-Hshiung and H.
positive, criterion i will be to the cause group and when Kuang-Hua, 2010. Enhancing the Performance of a
(ri ci) is negative, criterion i is a net receiver. SOC design service firm by using a novel DANP
Based MCDM framework on the balanced
Hybrid MCDM DEMATEL: DEMATEL technique scorecard. IEEE, 1-6.
has combined with other MCDM methods such as Chiu, Y.J., H.C. Chen, J.Z. Shyu and G.H. Tzeng, 2006.
AHP, ANP, VIKOR and TOPSIS. As fallow some of Marketing strategy based on customer behavior for
this hybrid models are reviewed in recent years. the LCD-TV. Int. J. Manage. Decision Making,
(Table 1). 7(2-3): 143-165.
3479 
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(13): 3476-3480, 2013

Chung-Wei, L. and T. Gwo-Hshiung, 2009. Liou, J.J.H., G.H. Tzeng and H.C. Chang, 2007. Airline
Identification of a threshold value for the safety measurement using a hybrid model. J. Air
DEMATEL method using the maximum mean de- Transp. Manag., 13(4): 243-249.
entropy algorithm to find critical services provided Naser, B.M., S. Mahdi, S.A. Amir, Y. Hami and H.H.
Seyed, 2010. Strategic environment analysis using
by a semiconductor intellectual property mall.
DEMATEL method through systematic approach.
Expert Syst. Appl., 8(1): 9891-989. Manage. Sci. Eng., 11(2-3): 95-105.
Doraid, D., H. Mohammed and B. Farhan, 2011a. A Ru-Jen, L., 2011. Using fuzzy DEMATEL to evaluate
fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for the green supply chain management practices. J.
supplier selection. Exp. Syst. Appl., 8(2): Clean. Prod., 8(3): 1-8.
8384-8391. Saaty, T.L., 1996. Decision making with dependence
Doraid, D., H. Mohammed and B. Farhan, 2011b. A and feedback: Analytic network process. RWS
fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for Publication, Pittsburgh.
supplier selection. Exp. Syst. Appl., 38: Shahryar, S., A. Aireza, S. Meysam and F. Elham,
8384-8391. 2012. Interrelation study of entrepreneur’s
Elham, F., L. Zulkiflle and S. Shahryar, 2012. Casual capability. World Appl. Sci. J., 17(7): 818-820.
strategy mapping using integrated BSC and Shih-Chi, C., C.C. Sun and A. Herchan, 2011. The
MCDM-DEMATEL. J. Am. Sci., 8(5). DEMATEL approach applied to solar cell industry
Fontela, E. and A. Gabus, 1976. The DEMATEL material selection process in Taiwan. Session
observer, DEMATEL 1976 report. Battelle Geneva Interd. Manage. Sem., 15(13): 253-267.
Research Center, Switzerland Geneva. Tamura, M., H. Nagata and K. Akazawa, 2002.
Gabus, A. and E. Fontela, 1972. World Problems an Extraction and systems analysis of factors that
Invitation to Further Thought within the prevent safety and security by structural models. In
Framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva 41st SICE Annual Conference, Osaka, Japan.
Research Centre, Switzerland, Geneva. Tsai, W.H. and W.C Chou, 2009. Selecting
Gabus, A. and E. Fontela, 1973. Perceptions of the management systems for sustainable development
World Problematique: Communication Procedure, in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on
Communicating with those Bearing Collective DEMATEL, ANP and ZOGP. Exp. Syst. Appl.,
Responsibility. 36(2): 1444-1458.
Gülçin, B. and Ç. Gizem, 2011. A novel hybrid MCDM Tzeng, G.H., C.H. Chiang and C.W. Li, 2007.
approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning
and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers. programs: A novel hybrid mcdm model based on
Exp. Syst. Appl., 39(3): 3000-3011. factor analysis and DEMATEL. Exp. Syst. Appl.,
Hori, S. and Y. Shimizu, 1999. Designingmethods of 32(4): 1028-1044.
human interface for supervisory control systems. Wen-Hsien, T. and C. Wen-Chin, 2009. Selecting
Control Eng. Pract., 7(11): 1413-1419. management systems for sustainable development
Huang, C.Y., J.Z. Shyu and G.H. Tzeng, 2007. in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on
Reconfiguring the innovation policy portfolios for DEMATEL, ANP and ZOGP. Exp. Syst. Appl., 36:
Taiwan's SIP Mall industry. Technovation, 27(12): 1444-1458.
Wu, W.W. and Y.T. Lee, 2007. Developing global
744-765.
managers’ competencies using the fuzzy
Jiann, L.Y. and T. Gwo-Hshiung, 2011. An integrated
DEMATEL method. Exp. Syst. Appl., 32(2):
MCDM technique combined with DEMATEL for a 499-507.
novel cluster-weighted with ANP method. Expert Yung-Lan, W. and T. Gwo-Hshiung, 2011. Brand
Syst. Appl., 7(2): 1417-1424. marketing for creating brand value based on a
Jiunn-I, S., W. Hsin-Hung and H. Kuan-Kai, 2010. A MCDM model combining DEMATEL with ANP
DEMATEL method in identifying key success and VIKOR methods. Exp. Syst. Appl., 16(3).
factors of hospital service quality. Knowl-Based Yu-Ping, O.Y., S. How-Ming and T. Gwo-Hshiung,
Syst. Arch., 23(1): 277-282. 2011. A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL
Lin, C.J. and W.W. Wu, 2008. A causal analytical and ANP for information security risk control
method for group decision-making under fuzzy assessment. Inform. Sci., In Press.
environment. Exp. Syst. Appl., 34(1): 205-213.

3480