A flexible approach to ranking with an application to MBA Programs

European Journal of Operational Research

Volumn 201, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 470-476

  Köksalan, Murat ^a   Büyükbaşaran, Tayyar ^a,b   Özpeynirci, Özgür ^a,c   Wallenius, Jyrki ^d  

^a MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b Research and Monetary Policy Department   (Turkey)

^c IZMIR UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS   (Turkey)

^d HELSINKI SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (Finland)

Author keywords

MBA Programs; Mixed Integer Programming; Multiple criteria; Ranking; Sorting

Indexed keywords

AGGREGATION MODEL; FINANCIAL TIMES; LINEAR AGGREGATION; MBA PROGRAMS; MIXED INTEGER PROGRAMMING; MULTIPLE CRITERIA; RANKING;

DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING; SORTING;

INTEGER PROGRAMMING;

EID: 70349280199     PISSN: 03772217     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2009.02.034     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adler N., Friedman L., and Sinuany-Stern Z. Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context. European Journal of Operational Research 140 (2002) 249-265
2. Arbel A., and Vargas L.G. Preference simulation and preference programming: Robustness issues in priority derivation. European Journal of Operational Research 69 (1993) 200-209
3. Avery, C., Glickman, M.E., Hoxby, C.M., Metrick, A., 2005. A Revealed Preference Ranking of US Colleges and Universities. NBER Working Paper No. W10803.
4. Borcherding K., Eppel T., and von Winterfeldt D. Comparison of weighting judgments in multiattribute utility measurement. Management Science 37 (1991) 1603-1619
5. Borcherding K., Schmeer S., and Weber M. Biases in multiattribute weight elicitation. In: Caverni J.-P., Bar-Hillel M., Barron H., and Jungermann H. (Eds). Contributions to Decision Research (1995), North-Holland Publisher, Amsterdam 3-28
6. Cook W.D. Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking. European Journal of Operational Research 172 (2006) 369-385
7. Devinney T., Dowling G.R., and Perm-Ajchariyawong N. The Financial Times business school ranking: What quality is this signal of quality?. European Management Review 5 (2008) 195-208
8. Dichev I.D. Comment: The Financial Times business school ranking: What quality is this signal of quality?. European Management Review 5 (2008) 219-224
9. Hämäläinen R.P., and Pöyhönen M. Online group decision support by preference programming in traffic planning. Group Decision and Negotiation 5 (1996) 485-500
10. Keeney R.L., See K.E., and von Winterfeldt D. Evaluating academic programs: With applications to US graduate decision science programs. Operations Research 54 (2006) 813-828
11. Köksalan M. Identifying and ranking a most preferred subset of alternatives in the presence of multiple criteria. Naval Research Logistics 36 (1986) 360-372
12. Köksalan M., Mousseau V., Özpeynirci O., and Özpeynirci S.B. A new outranking-based approach for assigning alternatives to ordered classes. Naval Research Logistics 56 1 (2009) 74-85
13. Köksalan M., and Özpeynirci S.B. An interactive sorting method for additive utility functions. Computers and Operations Research 36 (2009) 2565-2572
14. Köksalan, M., Tuncer, C., forthcoming. A DEA-based approach to ranking multi-criteria alternatives. Information Technology & Decision Making.
15. Köksalan M., and Ulu C. An interactive procedure for placing alternatives in preference classes. European Journal of Operational Research 144 (2003) 429-439
16. Larichev O.I., and Moshkovich H.M. An approach to ordinal classification problems. International Transactions in Operational Research 1 (1994) 375-385
17. Levine, S., 1997. Ignore College Rankings: Become an Educated Consumer. .
18. Mousseau V., Slowinski R., and Zielniewicz P. A user-oriented implementation of the ELECTRE-TRI method integrating preference elicitation support. Computers and Operations Research 27 (2000) 757-777
19. Mustajoki J., Hämäläinen R.P., and Lindstedt M. Using intervals for global sensitivity and worst-case analyses in multiattribute value trees. European Journal of Operational Research 174 (2006) 278-292
20. Mustajoki J., Hämäläinen R.P., and Salo A. Decision support by interval SMART/SWING - Incorporating imprecision in the SMART and SWING methods. Decision Sciences 36 2 (2005) 317-339
21. Mustajoki J., Hämäläinen R.P., and Sinkko K. Interactive computer support in decision conferencing. Decision Support Systems 42 (2007) 2247-2260
22. Policano A.J. What price. BizEd (2005) 26-32
23. Ray S.C., and Jeon Y. Reputation and efficiency: A non-parametric assessment of America's top-rated MBA programs. European Journal of Operational Research 189 (2008) 245-268
24. Steuer R.E. Multiple objective linear programming with interval criterion weights. Management Science 23 (1976) 305-316
25. Salo A.A., and Hämäläinen R.P. Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME) - Elicitation and decision procedures under incomplete information. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 31 6 (2001) 533-545
26. Trieschmann J.S., Dennis A.R., Northcraft G.B., and Niemi A.W. Serving multiple constituencies in the business school: MBA program versus research performance. Academy of Management Journal 43 6 (2000) 1130-1141
27. Ulu C., and Köksalan M. An interactive procedure for selecting acceptable alternatives in the presence of multiple criteria. Naval Research Logistics 48 (2001) 592-606
28. Wang Y., and Elhag T.M.S. A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix. European Journal of Operational Research 177 (2007) 458-471
29. Wedlin L. The role of rankings in codifying a business school template: Classifications, diffusion and mediated isomorphism in organizational fields. European Management Review 4 1 (2007) 24-39
30. Zopounidis C. MCDA methodologies for classification and sorting. Feature Issue of European Journal of Operational Research 138 2 (2002)
31. Zopounidis C., and Doumpos M. Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research 138 2 (2002) 229-246