Wielokryterialne metody wspomagania decyzji w procesie innowacji

• Autorzy: Jerzy Michnik
• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

Inspiracją do napisania tej pracy były wyzwania, jakie stawiają dzisiejsze czasy podmiotom prowadzącym działalność gospodarczą. Globalna konkurencja, deregulacja, zwiększona zmienność otoczenia i związana z nią niepewność wymagają odpowiedniej reakcji ze strony zarządzających firmami. Podejmowanie decyzji staje się procesem coraz bardziej złożonym i wymagającym nowoczesnych metod wspartych technikami informatycznymi. W odpowiedzi na te wyzwania w środowisku badań operacyjnych pojawiły się nurty obejmujące metody i techniki nakierowane na problemy o charakterze strategicznym, w którym złożone powiązania oraz ilość i jakość informacji nie pozwalają na na zastosowanie klasycznych metod optymalizacji. Zanczenie, jakie ma innowacyjność w gospodarce światowej i waga, jaką innowacyjności przypisuje się w Unii Europejskiej, skłoniły autora do zajęcia się problemami decyzyjnymi występującymi w procesie innowacji. Są one dobrym przykładem problemów o strategicznym charakterze i doskonale nadają się na doświadczalne pole dla wielokryterialnych metod wspomagania decyzji. (fragment tekstu)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Procesy innowacyjne; Teoria wspomagania decyzji; Decyzje strategiczne

EN

Innovation processes; Theory of decision support; Strategic decisions

• Czasopismo: Prace Naukowe / Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach
• Rocznik: 2013
• Strony: 194

Twórcy

autor

Jerzy Michnik

• Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach

Bibliografia

• Abtowa J., Piasecki K., Różański T., Świtalski Z. (2007), Matematyka wspomagająca zarządzanie, Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej, Poznań /51, 161/.
• Ackermann F. (2012), Problem structuring methods 'in the Dock': Arguing the case for Soft OR, "European Journal of Operational Research", 219(3), s. 652-658 /22/.
• ANP-Team (2012), Super Decisions, http://www.superdecisions.com /42, 85, 148, 150/.
• Axelrod R. (1976), Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites, Princeton University Press /51/.
• Baruk J. (2006), Zarządzanie wiedzą i innowacjami, Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek /88, 92, 138, 139/.
• Behzadian M., Khanmohammadi Otaghsara S., Yazdani M., Ignatius J. (2012), A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications, "Expert Systems with Applications", 39(17), s. 13051-13069 /34/.
• Bobylev N. (2011), Comparative analysis of environmental impacts of selected underground construction technologies using the analytic network process, "Automation in Construction", 20(8), s. 1030-1040 /63/.
• Bogdanienko J. (red.) (1998), Zarządzanie innowacjami: wybrane problemy, Szkoła Główna Handlowa, Warszawa /8/.
• Bouyssou D., Marchant T., Pirlot M., Perny P., Tsoukias A., Vinclce P. (2000), Evaluation and decision model. A critical perspective, International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Volume 32, wyd. 1., Kluwer, Dordrecht /25, 123/.
• Bouyssou D., Marchant T., Pirlot M., Tsoukias A., Vinclce P. (2006), Evaluation and decision models with multiple criteria: Stepping stones for the analyst, International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Volume 86, wyd. 1., Springer, Boston /16, 19, 22, 23, 24, 31, 73, 80, 162/.
• Brans J.P., Mareschal B. (2005), Promethee Methods, w: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys, red. J. Figueira, S. Greco, M. Erghott, Springer Science + Business Media, s. 163-195 /32/.
• 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), s. 65-76 /9, 10, 105, 132, 134/.
• Checkland P. (2000), Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective., "Systems Research and Behavioral Science", 1T(S1), s. S11-S58 /22/.
• Chen C.C., Shih H.S., Shyur H.J., Wu K.S. (2012), A business strategy selection of green supply chain management via an analytic network process, "Computers and Mathematics with Applications", 64(8), s. 2544-2557 /63/.
• Chen C.H., Tzeng G.H. (2011), Creating the aspired intelligent assessment systems for teaching materials, "Expert Systems with Applications", 38(10), s. 12168-12179 /67/.
• Chiesa V. (2000), Global R&D project management and organization: a taxonomy, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 17(5), s. 341-359 /99, 101, 126/.
• Cooper R.G., Edgett S.J., Kleinschmidt E.J. (1999), New product portfolio management: practices and performance, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 16(4), s. 333-351 /10, 131, 138, 139/.
• Cooper R.G., Edgett S.J., Kleinschmidt E.J. (2000), New Problems, New Solutions: Making Portfolio Management More Effective, "Research-Technology Management", 43, s. 18-33 /10/.
• Cooper R.G., Edgett S.J., Kleinschmidt E.J. (2002a), Optimizing the Stage-Gate Process: What Best-practice Companies Do I, "Research-Technology Management", 45, s. 21-27 /10/.
• Cooper R.G., Edgett S.J., Kleinschmidt E.J. (2002b), Optimizing the Stage-Gate Process: What Best-Practice Companies Do II, "Research-Technology Management", 45, s. 43-49 /10/.
• Cooper R.G., Kleinschmidt E.J. (1986), An Investigation into the New Product Process: Steps, Deficiencies, and Impact, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 3(2), s. 71-85 /132/.
• Danneels E., Kleinschmidt E.J. (2001), Product innovativeness from, the firm's perspective: its dimensions and their relation with project selection and performance, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 18(6), s. 357-373 /131, 138, 139/.
• De Meyer A. (1993), Management of an international network of industrial R&D laboratories, "R&D Management", 23(2), s. 109-120 /99/.
• Dodgson M., Gann D., Salter A. (2008), The Management of Technological Innovation, Oxford University Press /8, 9, 87, 88, 89, 91, 95, 96, 97, 98, 105, 114, 138/.
• Dytczak M., Ginda G. (2009), Identification of building repair policy choice criteria role, "Technological and Economic Development of Economy", 15(2), s. 213-228 / 66/.
• Eden C. (1988), Cognitive mapping, "European Journal of Operational Research", 36(1), s. 1-13 /22/.
• Eden C. (2004), Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems, "European Journal of Operational Research", 159(3), s. 673-686 /49, 51, 106, 107, 108/.
• Eden C., Ackermann F. (2001), SODA-the principles, w: Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited, red. J. Rosenhead, J. Mingers, John Wiley & Sons /22/.
• Edwards W. (1971), Social utilities, "Engineering Economist", 6 /136/.
• 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 /136/.
• Englund R.L., Graham R.J. (1999), From experience: linking projects to strategy, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 16(1), s. 52-64 /105, 133/.
• Figueira J., Greco S., Erghott M. (red.) (2005a), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys, Springer Science + Business Media /23/.
• Figueira J., Mousseau V., Roy B. (2005b), Electre Methods, w: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys, red. J. Figueira, S. Greco, M. Erghott, Springer Science + Business Media /26/.
• Fontela E., Gabus A. (1976), The DEMATEL Observer, DEMATEL 1976, Battelie Geneva Research Centre, Geneva, Switzerland /66/.
• Friend J., Cochran J.J., Cox L.A., Keskinocalc P., Kliaroufeh J.P., Smith J.G. (2010), The Strategic Choice Approach, w: Wiley Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science, John Wiley &; Sons, Inc. /22/.
• Gabus A., Fontela E. (1973), Perceptions of the world problematic: Communication procedure, communicating with those bearing collective responsibility, DEMATEL 1, Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Geneva, Switzerland /66/.
• Galas Z., Nykowski I., Żółkiewski Z. (1987), Programowanie wielokryterialne, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, Warszawa /161 /.
• García-Lapresta J., Pérez-Román D. (2008), Some measures of consensus generated by distances on weak orders, w: XIV Congreso Español sobre Tecnologías y Lógica Fuzzy ESTYLF, Asturias, Spain /31, 117/.
• García-Lapresta J.L., Pérez-Román D. (2011), Measuring Consensus in Weak Orders, w: Consensual Processes, tom 267, red. E. Herrera-Viedma, J.L. Garcia-Lapresta, J. Kacprzyk, M. Fedrizzi, H. Nurmi, S. Zadrożny, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, s. 213-234 /31, 117/.
• Georgiou I. (2012), Messing about in transformations: Structured systemic planning for systemic solutions to systemic problems, "European Journal of Operational Research", 223(2), s. 392-406 /22/.
• Goodwin P., Wright G. (2001), Enhancing Strategy Evaluation in Scenario Planning: a Role for Decision Analysis, "Journal of Management Studies", 38(1), s. 1-16 /43/.
• Goodwin P., Wright G. (2011), Analiza decyzji, Wolters Kluwer Polska, Warszawa /ll, 16, 17, 38, 136/.
• Grinstead C., Snell L. (2006), Introduction to Probability, American Mathematical Society /163/.
• Hall R. (2002), Gaining understanding in a complex cause-effect policy domain, w: Mapping Strategic Knowledge, red. A.S. Huff, M. Jenkins, SAGE, s. 89-111 /51, 108/.
• Hämäläinen R.P., Mustajoki J. (2012), Web-HIPRE Global Decision Support, http: //www.hipre.hut.fi/ /42/.
• Heijden K.v.d. (1996), Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation, wyd. 1., Wiley /43, 142/.
• Hori S., Shimizu Y. (1999), Designing methods of human interface for supervisory control systems, "Control Engineering Practice", 7(11), s. 1413-1419 /66/.
• Hwang C.L., Yoon K. (1981), Multiple attribute decision m,aking: methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey, Springer-Verlag /17, 34/.
• Janasz W., Janasz K., Świadek A., Wiśniewska J. (2001), Strategie innowacyjne przedsiębiorstw, Rozprawy i studia Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, tom 371, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, Szczecin /8, 87, 95/.
• Jasbi J., Ermanfarmaee T. (2010), Identifying Affective Factors in Creating Works of Art and Paintings Using the Method of Group Decision Making (DEMATEL). "European Journal of Social Sciences", 17(4), s. 503-508 /66/.
• Jasiński A.H. (2006), Innowacje i transfer techniki w procesie transformacji, Centrum Doradztwa i Informacji Difin /8, 138/.
• Keeney R. (1994), Creativity in decision-making with value-focused thinking, "Sloan Management Review", 35(4), s. 33-41 /22/.
• Keeney R.L. (1996), Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking. Harvard University Press /22/.
• Keeney R.L., Raiffa H. (1993), Decisions with Multiple Objectives, Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press /38, 83/.
• Kosko B. (1986), Fuzzy cognitive maps, "International Journal of Man-Machine Studies", 24(1), s. 65-75 /22, 51, 52, 108, 109/.
• Kosko B. (1992), Neural Networks and Fuzzy Sets, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs /54/.
• Larichev O.I. (1992), Cognitive validity in design of decision-aiding techniques, "Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis", 1(3), s. 127-138 /56/.
• Lin C.J., Wu W.W. (2008), A causal analytical method for group decision-making under fuzzy environment, "Expert Systems with Applications", 34(1), s. 205-213 /66, 137/.
• Linton J.D., Walsh S.T., Kirchhoff B.A., Morabito J., Merges M. (2000), Selection of R&D projects in a portfolio, w: Engineering Management Society, 2000. Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE, s. 506-511 /105, 135/.
• Łunarski J. (2007), O ewolucji świadomości, rozumu i pomysłowości, w: Zarządzanie innowacjami. Podstawy zarządzania innowacjami, red. J. Łunarski, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Rzeszowskiej, Rzeszów /87/.
• Luo Z.M., Zhou J.Z., Zheng L.P., Mo L., He Y. (2010), A TFN-ANP based approach to evaluate virtual research center comprehensive performance, "Expert Systems with Applications", 37(12), s. 8379-8386 /63/.
• Mackenzie A., Pidd M., Rooksby J., Sommerville I., Warren I., Westcombe M. (2006), Wisdom., decision support and paradigms of decision making, "European Journal of Operational Research", 170(1), s. 156-171 /22/.
• Marchant T. (1996), Valued Relations Aggregation with the Borda Method, "Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis", 5(2), s. 127-132 /32/.
• Marchant T. (1998), Cardinality and the Borda score, "European Journal of Operational Research", 108(2), s. 464-472 /32/.
• Marchant T. (1999), Cognitive maps and fuzzy implications, "European Journal of Operational Research", 114(3), s. 626-637 /49/.
• Marchant T. (2000), Does the Borda rule provide more than a ranking?, "Social Choice and Welfare", 17(3), s. 381-391 /32/.
• Marinova D., Phillimore J. (2003), Models of Innovation, w: The International Handbook on Innovation, red. L.V. Shavinina, Elsevier, s. 44-53 /92/.
• Massey A.P., Wallace W.A. (1996), Understanding and facilitating group problem structuring and formulation: Mental representations, interaction, and representation aids, "Decision Support Systems", 17(4), s. 253-274 /19/.
• McGahan A.M. (2004), How Industries Evolve: Principles for Achieving and Sustaining Superior Performance, Harvard Business Press /116/.
• Michnik J. (2009), Technology Assessment Process for New Production Line Development - Analytic Network Process Approach, w: Multiple Criteria Decision Making'08, red. T. Trzaskalik, University of Economics in Katowice, Katowice, s. 139-150 /63/.
• Michnik J. (2010), Analiza kryteriów występujących w procesie decyzyjnym w zarządzaniu innowacjami, w: Modelowanie preferencji a ryzyko '10, red. T. Trzaskalik, Wydawnictwo AE w Katowicach, Katowice, s. 107-117 /140/.
• Michnik J. (2011a), Przegląd metod decyzyjnych w procesie wdrażania innowacji w organizacjach gospodarczych, "Zeszyty Naukowe UE Katowice (Studia Ekonomiczne)", 62, s. 91-102 /9/.
• Michnik J. (2011b), Zależności między kryteriami w wielokryterialnych modelach zarządzania innowacjami, "Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu", 238, s. 80-92 /148/.
• Michnik J. (2013a), Scenario Planning + MCDA Procedure for Innovation Selection Problem, "Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences", (przyjęte do publikacji) /12, 34/.
• Michnik J. (2013b), Weighted Influence Non-linear Gauge System (WINGS) - an analysis method for the systems of interrelated components, "European Journal of Operational Research", http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.02.007 /12, 69/.
• Michnik J., Kania K. (2012), Assessment and choice of software solution with the Analytic Network Process method, w: ICEIS 2012 - Proceedings of the 14-th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, tom 1 DISI, Wrocław, s. 326-329 /63/.
• Michnik J., Lo M. (2009), The assessment of the information quality with the aid of multiple criteria analysis, "European Journal of Operational Research", 195(3), s. 850-856 /12, 27/.
• Mingers J. (2000a), An Idea Ahead of Its Time: The History and Development of Soft Systems Methodology, "Systemic Practice and Action Research", 13(6), s. 733-755 /22/.
• Mingers J. (2000b), Variety is the spice of life: combining soft and hard OR/MS methods, "International Transactions in Operational Research", 7(6), s. 673-691 /14/.
• Mingers J., Brocklesby J. (1997), Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies, "Omega", 25(5), s. 489-509 /14/.
• Mingers J., Rosenhead J. (2004), Problem structuring methods in action, "European Journal of Operational Research", 152(3), s. 530-554 /22, 47, 48/.
• Montibeller G., Belton V. (2006), Causal maps and the evaluation of decision options - a review, "Journal of the Operational Research Society", 57(7), s. 779-791 /49, 50/.
• Montibeller G., Belton V. (2009), Qualitative operators for reasoning maps: Evaluating multi-criteria options with networks of reasons, "European Journal of Operational Research", 195(3), s. 829-840 /56/.
• Montibeller G., Belton V., Ackermann F., Ensslin L. (2008), Reasoning maps for decision aid: An integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation, "Journal of the Operational Research Society", 59(5), s. 575-589 /22, 55, 56, 108/.
• Montibeller G., Gummer H., Tumidei D. (2006), Combining scenario planning and multi-criteria decision analysis in practice, "Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis", 14(1-3), s. 5-20 /43/.
• 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), s. 72-86 /136/.
• Opricovic S. (1998), Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems, Rap. tech., Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade /34/.
• Opricovic S., Tzeng G.H. (2004), Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, "European Journal of Operational Research", 156(2), s. 445-455 /34, 144/.
• Ostanello A., Tsoukias A. (1993), An explicative model of 'public' inter organizational interactions, "European Journal of Operational Research", 70(1), s. 67-82 /16/.
• Pomykalski A. (2001), Zarządzanie innowacjami, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa-Łódź /87, 95/.
• Pomykalski A. (2010), Zarządzanie procesem innowacji. Wybrane kierunki badawcze, w: Osiągnięcia i perspektywy nauk o zarządzaniu, red. S. Lachiewicz, B. Nogalski, Oficyna Wolters Kluwer business, Warszawa /8/.
• Poznańska K. (2012), Outsourcing prac badawczo-rozwojowych - doświadczenia krajów wysoko rozwiniętych, w: Procesy tworzenia wiedzy oraz transferu osiągnięć naukowych i technologicznych do biznesu, red. M.A. Weresa, K. Poznańska, Oficyna. Wydawnicza Szkoła Główna Handlowa, Warszawa /99/.
• Ravindran A.R,. (red.) (2008), Operations Research and Management Science Handbook, CRC Press, Boca Raton, London, New York /45/.
• Roberts F.S. (1976), The questionnaire method, w: Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites, red. R,. Axelrod, Princeton University Pres, Princeton, s. 333-342 /60, 108, 126/.
• Roberts F.S. (1985), Applications of the theory of meaningfulness to psychology, "Journal of Mathematical Psychology", 29(3), s. 311-332 /47, 73/.
• Rosenhead J., Mingers J. (red.) (2001), Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited 2e: Problem Structuring Methods for Complexity, Uncertainty and Conflict, wyd. 2., John Wiley & Sons /47/.
• Rothwell R. (1992), Successful industrial innovation: critical factors for the 1990s, "R&D Management", 22(3), s. 221-240 /89/.
• Rothwell R. (1994), Towards the Fifth-generation Innovation Process, "International Marketing Review", 11(1), s. 7-31 /89/.
• Roy B. (1985), Methodologie Multicritere d'Aide a la Décision, Economica, Paris /26/.
• Roy B. (1990), Wielokryterialne wspomaganie decyzji, WNT, Warszawa /23, 26/.
• Roy B., Bouyssou D. (1993), Aide Multicritere a la Décision: Methodes et Gas, Economica, Paris /26/.
• Saaty T.L. (2005a), The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Processes for the Measurement of Intangible Criteria and for Decision-Making, w: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys., red. J. Figueira, S. Greco, M. Erghott, Springer Science + Business Media, s. 345-407 /39/.
• Saaty T.L. (2005b), Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process. Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh /63, 65, 83/.
• Saaty T.L., Vargas L.G. (2006), Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process: Economic, Political, Social and Technological Applications with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks, Springer /63/.
• Salomo S., Weise J., Gemiinden H.G. (2007), NPD Planning Activities and Innovation Performance: The Mediating Role of Process Management and the Moderating Effect of Product Innovativeness, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 24(4), s. 285-302 /7/.
• Scott G.M. (2000), Critical Technology Management Issues of New Product Development in High-Tech Companies, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 17(1), s. 57-77 /8/.
• Shen Y.C., Lin G.T., Tzeng G.H. (2011), Combined DEMATEL techniques with novel MGDM for the organic light emitting diode technology selection, "Expert Systems with Applications", 38(3), s. 1468-1481 /67/.
• Siguaw J.A., Simpson P.M., Enz C.A. (2006), Conceptualizing Innovation Orientation: A Framework for Study and Integration of Innovation Research, "Journal of Product Innovation Management", 23(6), s. 556-574 /138/.
• Simon H.A. (1947), Administrative behavior; a study of decision-making processes in administrative organization, Macmillan Co., New York /16/.
• Sipahi S., Timor M. (2010), The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process: an overview of applications, "Management Decision", 48(5), s. 775-808 /38/.
• Stewart T. (2005), Dealing with Uncertainties in MCDA, w: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys., red. J. Figueira, S. Greco, M. Erghott, Springer Science -f Business Media, s. 445-470 /43/.
• Subramanian N., Ramanathan R. (2012), A review of applications of Analytic Hierarchy Process in operations management, "International Journal of Production Economics", 138(2), s. 215-241 /38/.
• Szabłowski J. (2006), Proces zarządzania innowacjami w organizacji, w: Zarządzanie innowacjami. Teoria i praktyka, red. J. Szabłowski, Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Finansów i Zarządzania w Białymstoku, Białystok /94/.
• Tamura H., Akazawa K. (2005a), Stochastic DEMATEL for structural modeling of a complex problematique for realizing safe, secure and reliiable society, "Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology", (4), s. 139-146 /66, 70/.
• Tamura H., Akazawa K. (2005b), Structural modeling and systems analysis of uneasy factors for realizing safe, secure and reliable society, "Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology", (3), s. 64-72 /66, 70/.
• Tidd J., Bessant J. (2011), Zarządzanie innowacjami. Integracja zmian technologicznych, rynkowych i organizacyjnych., Wolters Kluwer Polska, Warszawa /9, 87, 88, 93, 95, 96, 99, 100, 105/.
• Trott P. (2005), Innovation management and new product development, Pearson Education /87, 97, 105, 114/.
• Trzaskalik T. (red.) (2006), Metody wielokryterialne na polskim, rynku finansowym, PWE, Warszawa /26, 38/.
• Tseng M.L. (2010), An assessment of cause and effect decision-making model for firm environmental knowledge management capacities in uncertainty, "Environmental Monitoring and Assessment", 161(1-4), s. 549-564 /66/.
• Tseng M.L. (2011), Using hybrid MCDM to evaluate the service quality expectation in linguistic preference, "Applied Soft Computing Journal", 11(8), s. 4551-4562 /67/.
• Tyszka T. (2010), Decyzje. Perspektywa psychologiczna i ekonomiczna, Wykłady z psychologii, tom 16, wyd. 1., Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warszawa /ll, 17/.
• Tzeng G.H., Chiang C.H., Li C.W. (2007), Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL, "Expert Systems with Applications", 32(4), s. 1028-1044 /67/.
• Wei P.L., Huang J.H., Tzeng G.H., Wu S.I. (2010), Causal modeling of web-advertising effects by improving SEM based on DEMATEL technique, "International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making", 9(5), s. 799 /67/.
• Westland J.C. (2008), Global Innovation Management, Palgrave, Macmillan /7, 9, 87, 97, 102, 103, 105, 116, 132, 138/.
• Wheelwright S., Clark K. (1992), Creating project plans to focus product development, "Harvard Business Review", (March-April) /133/.
• Wu W.W. (2008), Choosing knowledge management strategies by using a combined ANP and DEMATEL approach, "Expert Systems with Applications", 35(3), s. 828-835 /67/.
• Wu W.W., Lee Y.T. (2007), Developing global managers' competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method, "Expert Systems with Applications", 32(2), s. 499-507 /66/.
• Xu P., Chan E. (2013), ANP model for sustainable Building Energy Efficiency Retrofit (BEER.) using Energy Performance Contracting (EPC) for hotel buildings in China, "Habitat International", 37, s. 104-112 /63/.
• Yager R..R. (1995), An approach to ordinal decision making, "International Journal of Approximate Reasoning", 12(3-4), s. 237-261 /112/.
• Yang J., Tzeng G. (2011), An integrated MCDM technique combined with DEMATEL for a novel cluster-weighted with ANP method, "Expert Systems with Applications", 38(3), s. 1417-1424 /67/.