Analytic Hierarchy Process AHP
Contents |
[edit] Introduction
The analytic hierarchy process (AHP - or analytical hierarchy process) is a form of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) that applies mathematics and psychology to the selection process - with minimal bias - when no clear choice is apparent. AHP can help to identify the most beneficial solution using a systematic approach that ranks different options based on importance.
AHP was developed in the 1970s by Thomas Saaty, a university professor who specialised in statistics and operations research. Along with AHP, Saaty created two other decision-making approaches - the Analytic Network Process or ANP (for decisions that depend on feedback) and Neural Network Process or NNP (which incorporates the mathematics of ANP and applies neural firing and synthesis).
[edit] Overview
AHP takes a problem and examines it in three phases:
- The goal. What issue needs to be resolved?
- The solutions. What are all of the available alternatives?
- The criteria. What criteria will be used to judge the possible solutions?
After phase three has been determined, it is then possible to calculate an importance weighting for each criterion. This is achieved through pairwise comparisons, a method of analysis that evaluates two criteria at the same time rather than comparing several criteria at once. Pairwise comparisons make it easier to select the most appropriate choice once the utility factor has been calculated. Utility is defined as a numerical representation of how useful or beneficial something is.
[edit] Addressing the calculation process
Linear algebra is a type of mathematics that can be used along with pairwise comparisons to prioritise the criteria, based on the weight of its importance. Criteria with higher numbers are seen as more important.
Despite being technically valid and practically useful, AHP has been criticised for its reliance on mathematics. However, basic AHP calculations can be performed by readily available tools such as Excel. More advanced software is also available to automate the process.
To assist in the calculation process, Saaty created a sample nine-point scale, which is reproduced in the study, Analytic Hierarchy Process-Based Construction Material Selection for Performance Improvement of Building Construction: The Case of a Concrete System Form.
Definition | Intensity of importance |
Equally important | 1 |
Moderately more important | 3 |
Strongly more important | 5 |
Very strongly more important | 7 |
Extremely important | 9 |
Intermediate values | 2, 4, 6, 8 |
[edit] Applying AHP
Because AHP is designed to assist in the analysis of complex situations, it has been used in business, manufacturing and other industries. Rather than prescribing a "correct" decision, AHP helps decision makers find one that best suits their values and their understanding of the problem.
For this reason, AHP is sometimes used in engineering, construction management, portfolio management, facilities maintenance, material selection and other important situations. In the US, engineers used an AHP rating system to prioritise maintenance projects for thousands of public structures, including nearly 3,000 bridges in need of repair.
As a material selection tool, AHP is designed to look beyond a product’s price or life cycle while removing conflicting or biased evaluation criteria based on less quantifiable factors such as personal preference or previous experience. Instead, it helps make selections based on qualitative properties such as performance.
[edit] Critique of AHP
Arroyo, Tommelein and Ballard (2014) offered a critique of AHP in a paper in the Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. They suggested that Choosing by Advantages (CBA) is preferable to AHP at least in the context of detailed design.
CBA:
- provides a more context-based analysis than AHP,
- does not incorporate conflicting judgments for weighing factors as AHP does,
- does not assume linear trade-offs between factors as AHP does,
- does not assume that factors have zero as a natural scale as AHP does,
- focuses on differentiating between alternatives more than AHP,
- maintains the result of the decision when non-differentiating factors are removed, whereas AHP may not, and
- defers subjective judgments until late in the decision-making process, whereas AHP requires expressing them earlier.
CBA is now being used in UK by Highways England and the East Thames Crossing project among others.
For more on CBA see e.g.
- Deciding a Sustainable Alternative by Choosing by Advantages' in the AEC industry
- Applying Choosing by Advantages in the Public Tendering Procedure
- Does Choosing by Advantages Promote Inclusiveness in Group Decision-Making?
- Does Your Decision-Making Process Protect Customer Value?
- Choosing by Advantages for the Selection of a New Member of the Project Team
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
- Case-based reasoning CBR.
- Decision making on building design and construction projects.
- Double diamond design process.
- Project manager.
- Six sigma.
[edit] External resources
- Analytic Hierarchy Process-Based Construction Material Selection for Performance Improvement of Building Construction: The Case of a Concrete System Form.
- Using the analytic hierarchy process (ahp) to select and prioritize projects in a portfolio.
- What to Do? Let’s Think It Through! Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Make Decisions.
- Comparing AHP and CBA as Decision Methods to Resolve the Choosing Problem in Detailed Design
Featured articles and news
Deputy editor of AT, Tim Fraser, discusses the newly formed society with its current chair, Chris Halligan MCIAT.
Barratt Lo-E passivhaus standard homes planned enmasse
With an initial 728 Lo-E homes across two sites and many more planned for the future.
Government urged to uphold Warm Homes commitment
ECA and industry bodies write to Government concerning its 13.2 billion Warm Homes manifesto commitment.
Places of Worship in Britain and Ireland, 1929-1990. Book review.
The emancipation of women in art.
CIOB Construction Manager of the Year 2025
Just one of the winners at the CIOB Awards 2025.
Call for independent National Grenfell oversight mechanism
MHCLG share findings of Building Safety Inquiry in letter to Secretary of State and Minister for Building Safety.
The Architectural Technology Awards
AT Awards now open for this the sixth decade of CIAT.
50th Golden anniversary ECA Edmundson awards
Deadline for submissions Friday 30 May 2025.
The benefits of precast, off-site foundation systems
Top ten benefits of this notable innovation.
Encouraging individuals to take action saving water at home, work, and in their communities.
Takes a community to support mental health and wellbeing
The why of becoming a Mental Health Instructor explained.
Mental health awareness week 13-18 May
The theme is communities, they can provide a sense of belonging, safety, support in hard times, and a sense purpose.
Mental health support on the rise but workers still struggling
CIOB Understanding Mental Health in the Built Environment 2025 shows.
Design and construction material libraries
Material, sample, product or detail libraries a key component of any architectural design practice.
Construction Products Reform Green Paper and Consultation
Still time to respond as consultation closes on 21 May 2025.
Resilient façade systems for smog reduction in Shanghai
A technical approach using computer simulation and analysis of solar radiation, wind patterns, and ventilation.