Evaluating Competing Criteria
Developing a system design for government projects typically requires a defense contractor to evaluate and make system decisions based on documents such as a request for proposal (RFP), statement of work (SOW), and concept of operations (CONOP) as shown in Figure 1. From these documents, a contractor must assess system alternatives while maximizing the customer’s expected system goals, objectives, and capabilities. As with any complex design, there may be competing goals and objectives, so a structured method of evaluating criteria, priorities, and alternatives is needed to support design decisions.
The analytical hierarchical process (AHP) is a commonly used multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method that can be used to evaluate design alternatives. AHP is favored over other MCDA methods due to its structured mathematical approach and ease of use.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.