Macro Management & Public Policies | Volume 05 | Issue 02 | June 2023

Macro Management & Public Policies

https://journals.bilpubgroup.com/index.php/mmpp

REVIEW

VIKOR Method—An Effective Compromising Ranking Technique

for Decision Making
Hamed Taherdoost1*, Mitra Madanchian2
1
Department of Arts, Communications and Social Sciences (ACSS), University Canada West, Vancouver, V6Z0E5,
Canada
2
Hamta Group, Hamta Business Corporation, Vancouver, V6E0A6, Canada

ABSTRACT
The VIKOR (VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje) method, which is a multi-criteria decision-
making method, is examined in this paper. The VIKOR method, like other MCDM techniques such as the Technique
for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), is widely used to solve complex decision-making
problems in various fields such as engineering, management, and finance. This paper provides an overview of the
VIKOR method, including its application areas, advantages, and disadvantages. Besides, in this survey paper, the
process steps of the VIKOR method are described, including determining the decision matrix, normalizing the matrix,
determining the weights of the criteria, calculating the utility and regret values, calculating the VIKOR index, and
finally ranking the alternatives. By providing an overview of the VIKOR method and its process steps, this paper aims
to provide a better understanding of the method and its potential application in different decision-making contexts.
Keywords: Decision making; Multi criteria decision making; VIKOR method; VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I
Kompromisno Resenje; Multi attribute decision making

and decision-makers with different dimensions of a

1. Introduction
Multi-attribute decision making (MADM) meth-
ods can be used to solve most decision-making
problems with contradictory and multiple evaluation
standards [1]. These methods assist the managers
problem, which allows them to evaluate all probable
options and consider different elements and under
variable degrees in the decision making which is a
vital aspect of individuals’ life [2]. There are different
qualitative and quantitative MADM techniques.

*CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:
Hamed Taherdoost, Department of Arts, Communications and Social Sciences (ACSS), University Canada West, Vancouver, V6Z0E5, Canada;
Email: hamed.taherdoost@gmail.com; hamed@hamta.org
ARTICLE INFO
Received: 21 March 2023 | Revised: 17 April 2023 | Accepted: 27 April 2023 | Published Online: 17 May 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/mmpp.v5i2.5578
CITATION
Taherdoost, H., Madanchian, M., 2023. VIKOR Method—An Effective Compromising Ranking Technique for Decision Making. Macro Manage-
ment & Public Policies. 5(2): 27-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/mmpp.v5i2.5578
COPYRIGHT
Copyright © 2023 by the author(s). Published by Bilingual Publishing Group. This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribu-
tion-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

27
 Macro Management & Public Policies | Volume 05 | Issue 02 | June 2023

The compromise ranking method known as VIKOR profit and minimum costs (expenses), although other
“VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno concepts and dimensions such as energy and services
Resenje” is one of the main and effective MADM also can be included. Generally, the criteria include
tools used to select an alternative among different op- different qualitative and quantitative aspects such as
tions by considering several criteria [1]. This method technical and economic criteria, which can be either
works based on introducing a ranking index consid- quantitative or qualitative. On the other hand, the
ering the closeness to an ideal solution using a spe- criteria functions can be expressed by using different
cific measure [3-5]. Therefore, the basis of this method measuring units, and this difficulty to make the com-
is similar to TOPSIS (based on distances to the ideal parison between alternatives must be addressed in
solution [6]), although there are some differences decision making [5].
that will be discussed in the following sections [7-9]. To sum, the VIKOR provides a multi-criteria
Furthermore, this method does not consider bias to- ranking index based on the closeness to the ideal
ward a particular option, and a compromise is made solution and aims to determine:
between possibilities, desires, as well as the deci- ● the compromise ranking list;
sion makers’ interests. The VIKOR method seeks to ● the compromise solution;
identify the most suitable alternative from a range of ● the weight stability intervals.
viable options by balancing the ideal and anti-ideal Here, the weight stability intervals are determined
solutions. This approach takes into account several for the compromise solution’s preference stability
criteria and aims to achieve the best possible out- which is gained with the initial (given) weights [8].
come. One of the significant benefits of the VIKOR The following sections are provided to review
method is its capability to manage insufficient or the VIKOR method in more detail. For this, first, the
main differences between the TOPSIS and VIKOR
conflicting data while accommodating both quantita-
will be described, then the application areas, advan-
tive and qualitative aspects. Nevertheless, the meth-
tages, and disadvantages are listed. The process steps
od also has certain limitations, such as its suscepti-
also are explained in the last section.
bility to fluctuations in the criteria weightings, which
can impact the ranking outcomes.
This compromise solution is based on examining
2. VIKOR vs. TOPSIS
the narrower range of viable solutions that approach As discussed, both methods work based on the
the ideal solution based on their values, for exam- closeness of options to an ideal point. However,
ple, a reference point that is in the criteria functions’ there are several differences between them that are
space. Usually, these criteria consider maximum summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. TOPSIS and VIKOR differences [9].
Features TOPSIS VIKOR
Normalization Method vector normalization linear normalization
Based on the shortest distance to the ideal solution
Based on a maximum “group utility” for the
Compromise Solution and the greatest distance from the negative-
“majority” and a minimum of an individual regret
Basis ideal solution without considering the relative
for the “opponent”.
importance.
The ranking index includes the distances from the Introduces a function for aggregation that shows
ideal point and the nadir (negative-ideal) point. One the distance from the ideal solution. Here, the
Aggregation and
of the main concerns is to determine the reference ranking index is “an aggregation of all criteria, the
Ranking Index
point and the issues related to eliminating the role relative importance of the criteria, and a balance
of relative importance in this method. between total and individual satisfaction”.
The best alternative in the ranking index has the
The closest alternative to the ideal solution has the
Solution highest rank, but it is not always the alternative
highest rank.
with a minimum distance from the ideal point.

28
 Macro Management & Public Policies | Volume 05 | Issue 02 | June 2023

3. Application areas of VIKOR are summarized here. They classified the application
fields into 15 different categories. The summary is
MADM methods are applicableTOPSIS
Features in different areas. shown in Table 2.VIKOR
The VIKOR method also can be applied in manifold
not always the alternative with a
subject areas such as engineering,minimum supply chain andfrom the ideal
health care. The distribution of the
distance
subject areas of
4. Advantages and disadvantages of
point.
the VIKOR method based on searching the “VIKOR”
VIKOR
title in the “ScienceDirect” database3.(includingApplication the areas of VIKOR
As can be seen in other MADM methods, the
researchMADM
articlesmethods
with “VIKOR” title in their “title, VICOR
are applicable in different areas. The VIKOR also possesses different
method also advantages
can be applied inand dis-
manifold
abstract,
subject or keywords”)
areas is shown supply
such as engineering, in Figure
chain1: and health advantages. One of the
care. The distribution main
of the positive
subject areaspoints
of the in the
VIKOR
method based on searching the “VIKOR” title in the “ScienceDirect” database (including the research
To discuss the application areas more specifically, VIKOR is reflecting most decision makers’ attributes articles with
“VIKOR”
the resultstitle
of ainliterature
their “title, abstract,
review or keywords”)
by Mardani et al. is shown
[10]
by in Figure 1: a compromise solution . The other
determining [3]

Figure 1. Distribution of the VIKOR subject areas.

Figure 1. Distribution of the VIKOR subject areas.
Table 2. Application areas of the VICOR method.
To discuss the application areas more specifically, the results of a literature review by Mardani et al. [10] are
summarized Area
Application Description
here. They classified the application fields into 15 different categories. The summary is shown in Table
2. The articles in different sub-areas such as manufacturing systems, machine tools, product design,
Manufacturing
robot selection, strategies of manufacturing, and development of products.
Table 2. Application areas of the VICOR method.
This area includes project management, transportation systems, building fields, and tunneling
Construction Management
sub-areas.
Application Area Description
The articles aim to select materials for different purposes such as pipeline material, materials for
Material Selection
transducer application, etc.
Manufacturing The articles in different sub-areas such as manufacturing systems, machine tools,
This area product
includesdesign,
the performance evaluation
robot selection, of banks,
strategies of universities,
manufacturing,businesses as well as of
and development
Performance Evaluation
engineering departments.
products.

Construction Management This area includes project management, transportation systems, building fields, and
29
 Macro Management & Public Policies | Volume 05 | Issue 02 | June 2023

Table 2 continued
Application Area Description
Health-Care The studies consider the healthcare management and healthcare waste disposal fields.
This field covers different sub-areas including supply chain networks, selection of suppliers, and
Supply Chain
the performance of the supply chain.
Tourism The studies are about tourism development and its policies.
Service Quality It includes electronic quality of services, airlines as well as service quality improvement areas.
Sustainability and Renewable This area considers energy resources, environmental management and evaluation, and the
Energy Fields assessment of life cycle sustainability.
The subjects aim to develop, plan, manage and distribute water resources based on optimal
Water Resources Planning
usage.
Marketing includes outsourcing providers, portfolio selection, brand marketing, and also strategy
Marketing
evaluation sub-areas.
The subjects aim to evaluate the risks in different processes, study information security, and also
Risk and Financial Management
consider the financial performance improvement and financial assessment areas.
It is about city logistics, knowledge management, selection of concepts, process performance,
Operation Management
and benchmarking fields.
Human Resource Management The sub-areas such as evaluation of HRM systems, corporate social responsibility, intellectual
(HRM) capital as well as customer satisfaction are considered.
Other areas such as the leachate treatment process, network selection, flood management, etc. are
Other Areas
studied.

merits of the VIKOR can be listed as:
● It has a very simple ranking procedure with a
small number of steps [3];
● It considers minimum individual regrets and
maximum group benefits to gain an acceptable
compromise solution;
● A consistency check is not required in this
method [11].
On the other hand, it possesses different demer-
its. The main is that the VIKOR searches for the
compromise ranking order, for example between ex-
pected solution and pessimistic. Therefore, changing
the solutions’ weights can impact the ranking as the
results of the solution. Although, the noted demerit is
considered an advantage by some authors. Because,
changing the weights of the expected solution and
pessimistic a significant factor, it could be possible
to identify how the impacts on the coefficient of
weights can affect the alternatives’ ranking. Another
disadvantage is the necessity of using a complex lin-
ear normalization method in a specific step to gain
dimensionless units in the decision matrix (as other
methods are not suitable). However, modifications
are suggested that can make using other normaliza-
tion methods possible in some situations [5,12].
To improve the traditional VIKOR concept, var-
ious variants are suggested by several authors. For
example, variants such as Comprehensive VIKOR,
Fuzzy VIKOR, Regret VIKOR, and a modified
model have been proposed and analyzed by Chat-
terjee and Chakraborty [13] in order to determine the
suitability of different VIKOR variations for various
decision-making problems. Based on their results,
Fuzzy VIKOR, for instance, is recommended when
the information is imprecise.
5. VIKOR process steps
The process of conducting the VIKOR method
includes different steps (shown in Figure 2). The
variables used in the equations are defined first as:
● aj is the alternative, j = 1,2, ..., J and J is the
number of alternatives;
● fi is the criterion i = 1,2, ..., n and n is the num-
ber of criteria;
● fij is the value of ith criterion function for the

30
 Macro Management & Public Policies | Volume 05 | Issue 02 | June 2023

alternative aj; cision table followed by an initial decision matrix to

● wi is the weights of the icriterion expressing show the alternatives, criteria, and their weights.
the relative importance of the criteria. Step 2. Determining Lp-metric
An assumption in this method is to evaluate each
alternative based on each criterion and use a com-
Formation of Initial Matrix
promise ranking comparing closeness to the ideal
alternative. For this, Lp-metric is used as an aggre-
gating function to develop the multi-criteria measure
for compromise ranking. Lp-metric is calculated as
Equation (1):
Determining − Metric  1/

 =  (∗ −  )/(∗ − −
 ) ℎ  1 ≤  ≤ ∞  = 1,2
 1/ =1 (1)

 =  (∗ −  )/(∗ − −
 ) ℎ  1 ≤  ≤ ∞  = 1,2,3, …, .
=1
In the VIKOR process, L 1j and L ∞j (as S j and
Obtaining the Best ∗ and Rj in Equations (2) and (3); respectively) are used
the Worst −
 for ranking measure formulation in the next steps.
Furthermore, the solutions gained by min jS j and
minjRj are with “a maximum group utility known as
majority rule” and “a minimum individual regret of
the opponent”; respectively. Ideal and compromise
Computing the  and 
solutions are shown in Figure 3. In this figure, F c is
Values
the compromise solution which is the closest feasible
solution to the ideal solution (F*), and compromise
means an agreement based on mutual concessions.
These concepts are shown in the figure and can be
illustrated as:
Computing 
∆1 = ∗1 − 1   ∆2 = ∗2 − 2

Ranking the Alternatives

Examining the Conditions

Figure 2. VIKOR process steps.
Step 1. Formation of Initial Matrix
The VIKOR process starts with providing a de-
Figure 3. Ideal and compromise solutions in the VIKOR method [9].
After recognizing the compromise concept better,
the VIKOR algorithm to gain the compromise rank-
ing is described in the next following steps.

31
 loss of opportunity”.

In the above equation, three ranking lists are formed as follows:

  is “the measure of deviation which expresses the demand for maxim
Macro Management & Public Policies | Volume  05  | is “the02measure
Issue of deviation which expresses the demand for m
| June 2023
between some alternative from the ideal point”.

StepStep 3.
Step Obtaining
Step
3. Obtaining the Bestthe
3.3.Obtaining
Obtaining the Best
∗the Best
and Best
the and
∗Worst
∗
and the
andthe the
 Worst
Worst−
−Worst
 
−
at, if Qj < is Qt“the
. establishing of compromise ranking list which unifies units 
StepIn3.this step,
Obtaining
Step theBest
3. Obtaining
the values ∗
the
 and ofthe
Best and
∗Worst
and the ∗−
−∗and
for− −all
 Worst − cri- StepStep 7. Examining
Ranking
6.functions thebe the Conditions
Alternatives
In In
this
this
step,
step, the the
values
In this step, the values of  and   for values
∗ of of and    for
for
 all criterion allallfunctions
criterion
criterion functions
must must
must
be determined. bedetermined.
determined.
For this, For
Forthis,
this,
terion functions must be determined. For this, After ranking the alternatives, the last step to gain
In
∗ ∗this step,In this
thevalues
step,− −the of ∗
values
and of − ∗
  for
− Theℎ results of
bethis stepthis,
are three ranking lists (as discussed in the previo
,when aand allcriterion
for all functions
criterion functions
must
thethebeℎdetermined.
must determined.
For For this,
∗ = max=

=max
  max
 −= min
   
 = =min
,, whenmin
a, benefit
  a benefit
when when is benefit
arepresented
benefit is isrepresented
is repre- represented
by thethe ℎby
ranked
by
compromise
function. function.
function.
based on the valuessolution is ,to
of  examine
, and  in whether
decreasingthe
order. For example
∗ = max∗ =max 
th −
=min  − ,
= when
min abenefit, when is
a benefit
representedis represented
by the  ℎ
by function.
the ℎ
function.
selected alternative a' (with minimum Q) fulfills the
sented by the i function.

 

 
 
Step 7. Examining the Conditions
Step 4. Computing the Sj and Rj values following conditions or not:
Equations (2) and (3) are used to gain the values ● Condition
After ranking1: The first condition
the alternatives, the lastknown
step toasgain
“ac-
the compromise s
Equations
Equations (2)
(2) and
and (3)
(3) are
are used
used to
to gain
gain the
the values
values of
of  and
and 
 ::
selected alternative  '
(with minimum ) fulfills the following conditions or not:
of Sj andEquations
Rj:
Equations
(2) and (3) are used to gain the values of  and :
(2) and (3) are used to gain the values of  and  :

ceptable advantage” examines the following
 = 
= =1 (
∗
(∗∗ −
− 
 )/(
∗
)/(∗∗ −
− 
−
−− );
);  =
= 1,2,
1,2, …,
…, .
. (2)  condition:
Condition 1: The first condition known as “acceptable advantage” exam
 =  (
=1 − )/( −  ); = 1,2, …, .
 = =1  (∗ −  )/(∗ − −
=1   ∗  );  = 1,2, …, .
 = max [   ∗∗ −  /( ∗∗
∗ − −−)];  = 1,2, …, .  " − (' ) ≥ 1/( − 1) (6)
  =
 = max
 max  [  −
[ ∗ −  /(∗ − −  /( − )];  =
 )]; = 1,2,
1,2, …,…, ..  (3)
−

 = max  [  −  /( −  )];  = 1,2, …, .

 where
where "a" is the
is the secondsecond alternative
alternative in the listinofthe list of rank-
ranking.
StepStep
Step
Step 5. Computing
5.
5.
5. Computing
Computing
Computing

::: Qj
Step 5. Computing  : ing.
ThisThis value value isisobtained
obtained using
using the the following
following equation: equa-  Condition 2: The second condition is “the acceptable stability in dec
This value is obtained
This value is obtained using the following equation: using the following equation: ● Condition
when the alternative 2: The' second (ranked first condition
in the ) isis “the
also the first in the  or/
tion: This value is obtained using the following equation:
  − − ∗
∗∗
 − −−  ∗∗
∗ ; acceptable stability in decision making” and
 ==  −
−− − −∗∗∗ + + 11 1− −   −− −  ∗∗ ;
  =  −
 = − − ∗ + 1 −  − − 
−  ∗ + −   − −− ∗∗ ;; can be satisfied when the alternative a' (ranked
 −  − ∗
 − − 
∗
∗∗   =   − − ∗∗ 
∗
(4) first in the Q) is also the first in the S or/and R
:
: 
 =
= − − ∗∗   = − − ∗∗

:  = (  −   −  ranking lists.

:  = ( (−− − −−  ∗∗)))  
 = 
 = − − ∗
−− − − ∗∗
(− − ∗ )  −
Then: When one of the above conditions are not satis-
Then:
Then:
Then: Then: fied the following decisions are made to find a set of
 ==   +
+ 11 1− −   ;
 ;
 =
 = 
  +
 + 1
−
−



  ;; 

(5) compromise solutions:
In Equation In
In Equation
In Equation
Equation (4):(4): (4):
(4):
● If just condition 1 is satisfied, then a' and a"
In Equation (4):
∗∗∗ =  ;; −−− = ∗∗ − are in the final compromise solution set.
∗ = = minmin
min  = max
max  ;; 
 ∗ = min
= min   ;;; −− == maxmax 
 ...
 ; − = max    ; ∗ = min    − = max  

 = min   ;  = max

  ;  = min

  ;  = max

  .


● If just condition 2 is satisfied, then a', a", …,
In Equation In
In Equation
Equation (4), (4),
(4), ϑ is is
is “theweight
“the
“the weight
weight of
of of satisfying
satisfying
satisfying most
most criteria”
criteria” based
based a(h)on
onisthe theweight
the weight of
of the
alternative the strategy
set. h isof
strategy ofa“the
position number
“the
In Equation (4),  is “the weight of satisfying most criteria” based on the weight of the strategy of “the
majority
most
majority In
of
criteria”
of Equation
criteria”
criteria” based or
or(4), “the
on
“the  isthe “the
maximum
maximum weight
weight group
group of
of satisfying
utility”.
the
utility”. On
strategy
On most
the
the ofcriteria”
other
other based
hand,
hand, 1
1 −
−on theisisweight
“the
“the of theof
weight
weight of strategy
the
the of “the
individual
individual
majority of criteria” or “the maximum group utility”. On the other hand, 1in−the
majority
loss of of criteria” or “the maximum group utility”. On the other hand, 1 −  is “the weight of the individual
opportunity”.
 ranking
is “the weightlist when
of the the condition
individual Q(a(h)) –
loss
“the of opportunity”.
loss ofmajority
opportunity”. of criteria” or “the maximum group
loss of opportunity”. Q(a) < 1/(J – 1) is verified using a(h) [3,5,7,9].
utility”.InOn In the above equation, three ranking lists are formed as follows:
In the the
the above
above other equation,
equation, hand, three
three (1 ranking
– ϑ) islists
ranking “the
lists areweight
are formed
formed as offollows:
as follows:
In the above equation, three ranking lists are formed as follows:
the individual  is “the loss
“the measure of
measure of opportunity”.
of deviation
deviation which which expresses
expresses the the demand
demand for for maximum
maximum group group benefit”.
 
 the
In


 is “the
 is
 aboveisis“the“the
measure
measure
equation,
measure
of
ofof
deviation
deviation
three
deviation
which
which
ranking
which
6. Conclusions
expresses
expresses lists
expresses
the
theare
demand
demand
the demand
for maximum
for maximum
for
group benefit”.
benefit”.
group benefit”.
minimization
 
  is is “the “the measuremeasure of of deviation
deviation which which expresses
expresses the the demand
demand for minimization of
for minimization of maximum
of maximum distance
maximum distance
distance
 between  is “the some measure
alternative of deviation
from the which
ideal expresses
point”. the demand for minimization of maximum distance
formed between as follows:
between some alternative
some alternative from from the the ideal
ideal point”.
point”. In conclusion, the VIKOR MADM method is a
  between
 is “thesome
is “the establishing
establishingalternative of from the ideal
of compromise
compromise point”.list
ranking
ranking list which
which unifies
unifies units
units  and
and  ”.
  ”.

●  Q
 sj is is“the
is “the
“the measureof
establishing
establishing of of deviation
compromise
compromise
ranking
ranking which list which
list which useful
ex- unifies
unifies unitstool
units  for
 and 
 and  ”.
 decision-making
 ”. in various applica-
Step
Step 6. 6. presses
Ranking
Ranking the the demand for maximum group bene- tion areas, ranging from supply chain management to
theAlternatives
Alternatives
Step 6. Ranking the Alternatives
Step 6. fit”. Ranking the Alternatives healthcare and water resources planning. The main
The
The resultsresults of of thisthis step step are are three
three ranking
ranking lists lists (as(as discussed
discussed in in the
the previous
previous step).step). The
The alternatives
alternatives should should be be
The results of this step are three ranking lists (as discussed in the previous step). The alternatives should be
ranked
ranked● based QThe
based Rj is on“the
results
on the
the values ofmeasure
values this of step
of  areof
,
 ,, 
threedeviation
, andranking
,, and
and  in
 which
in lists
decreasing
decreasing ex-
(as discussedorder. advantages
in the
order. For
For previous
example,
example, ofis VIKOR
step).
is Thethan
better
better than include
alternatives
 ,, if
if  < itsability
should . be to provide
ranked based on the values of 
  
 in decreasing order. For example,  is better than  , if  <<  ..
ranked based on the values of  ,  , and  in decreasing order. For example,  is better than  , if  <  .
presses the demand for minimization of maxi- a compromise solution that takes into account mul-
 
Step
Step 7. 7. Examining
Examining the the Conditions
Conditions
Step 7. mum
Step 7. Examining
Examining distance the between some alternative from tiple criteria and its ability to rank alternatives based
Conditions
the Conditions
theAfter
After ideal ranking
ranking point”. the
the alternatives,
alternatives, the the last
last step
step to to gain gain the
the compromise
on their distance
compromise solution
solution is to
to examine
isfrom the ideal
examine whether
whether the
solution.
the However,
After ranking the alternatives, the last step to gain the compromise solution is to examine whether the
selected
selected After ranking
alternative
alternative ''' (withthe alternatives,
(with minimum
minimum )
) the last the
fulfills
fulfills stepfollowing
the to gain conditions
following the compromise
conditions or
or not:
not: solution is to examine whether the
●
selected Q is
alternative
selected alternativej “the establishing
 (with minimum of compromise
) fulfills
 (with minimum ) fulfills the following conditions or not:
' the ranking
following VIKOR
conditions or not:also has some disadvantages, such as its
 list Condition
which1:
Condition 1: The
unifies
1: The first first
first unitscondition
condition Qsj and known
known QRjas as “acceptable
”. “acceptable
as advantage”
“acceptable advantage”
advantage” examines
sensitivity
examines the
to the
the following
the following
following condition:
weight condition:
coefficients assigned to the
condition:
 Condition The condition known examines
 Condition 1: The first condition known as “acceptable advantage” examines the following condition:
  Step
""
" − − ( (6. 'Ranking
''
)) ≥ ≥ 1/( 1/( − −the 1) Alternatives
1) criteria and its lack of (6) flexibility in dealing with un-
(6)
 " − (' ) ≥ 1/( − 1) (6)
 The − ( ) ≥ 1/( − 1) certain and imprecise information. (6)
" results of this step are three ranking lists
where
where  "" is is the
the secondsecond alternative alternative in in thethe list
list of
of ranking.
ranking.
where
(as discussed
" is the second alternative
in thealternative previous in the
step). list of
Theranking.
alternatives The comparison between VIKOR and TOPSIS
where  is the second in the list of ranking.
 ConditionCondition 2:
2: The
The second
second condition
condition is
is “the
“the acceptable
acceptable stability
stability in
in decision
decision making”
making” and
and can can be
be satisfied
satisfied between the
should be
 Condition ranked
Condition 2:
based
2: The second
The
on
second '' the values
condition is “the
condition
of
is
Q
“the
, Q
sj acceptable
Rj
acceptable
, and revealed
stability in
stability in
somemaking”
decision
decision
important
making”
and
and
can
can
differences
be
be
satisfied
satisfied
when
when the
the alternative
alternative  (ranked first in the ) is also the first in the
' (ranked first in the ) is also the first in the  or/and  ranking lists. or/and  ranking lists.
Qj in decreasing when the alternative order. For ' (rankedexample, first inajtheis ) is also
better the firsttwo
than in the  or/and While ranking lists. methods aim to provide a
when the alternative  (ranked first in the ) is also the first in themethods.
 or/and  rankingboth lists.

32
 Macro Management & Public Policies | Volume 05 | Issue 02 | June 2023
compromise, solution based on multiple criteria, they
differ in terms of their normalization methods, the
basis of their compromise solution, aggregation, and
ranking index. Specifically, VIKOR uses a ranking
index based on the concept of “closeness to the ide-
al solution”, whereas TOPSIS uses a ranking index
based on the concept of “closeness to the average
solution” [6].
Overall, the VIKOR MADM method can be a
valuable tool for decision-makers who need to eval-
uate alternatives based on multiple criteria. The pro-
cess steps involved in using VIKOR, including de-
fining the decision problem, selecting the criteria and
alternatives, normalizing the criteria values, calculat-
ing the VIKOR scores, and ranking the alternatives,
are straightforward and can be easily implemented
using various software tools.
Conflict of Interest
There is no conflict of interest.
References
[1] Taherdoost, H., Madanchian, M., 2023.
Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) meth-
ods and concepts. Encyclopedia. 3(1), 77-87.
[2] Taherdoost, H., Madanchian, M., 2020. Priori-
tization of leadership effectiveness dimensions
improving organizational performance via an-
alytical hierarchy process (AHP) technique: A
case study for malaysia’s digital service SMEs.
Digital Transformation and Innovative Services
for Business and Learning. IGI Global. 1-21.
[3] Wei, J., Lin, X. (editors), 2008. The multiple at-
tribute decision-making VIKOR method and its
application. 2008 4th International Conference
on Wireless Communications, Networking and
Mobile Computing; 2008 Oct 12-14; Dalian.
New York: IEEE. p. 1-4.
[4] San Cristóbal, J.R., 2011. Multi-criteria deci-
33
sion-making in the selection of a renewable
energy project in spain: The Vikor method. Re-
newable Energy. 36(2), 498-502.
[5] Zimonjić, S., Đekić, M., Kastratović, E., 2018.
Application of vikor method in ranking the in-
vestment projects. Journal of International Eco-
nomic Law. 8, 125-134.
[6] Jalaliyoon, N., Taherdoost, H., Zamani, M.,
2010. Utilizing the BSC and EFQM as a com-
bination framework; Scrutinizing the possibility
by TOPSIS method. International Journal of
Business Research and Management. 1(3), 169-
182.
[7] Ceballos, B., Lamata, M.T., Pelta, D.A., 2016.
A comparative analysis of multi-criteria deci-
sion-making methods. Progress in Artificial In-
telligence. 5(4), 315-322.
[8] Opricovic, S., 1998. Multicriteria optimization
of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Belgrade. 2(1), 5-21.
[9] 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), 445-
455.
[10] Mardani, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Govindan, K.,
et al., 2016. VIKOR technique: A systematic
review of the state of the art literature on meth-
odologies and applications. Sustainability. 8(1),
37.
[11] Zheng, G., Wang, X., 2020. The comprehensive
evaluation of renewable energy system schemes
in tourist resorts based on VIKOR method. En-
ergy. 193, 116676.
[12] Mančev, M., 2013. Service quality management
in the libraries at the University of Niš Faculties
using the VIKOR method. Journal INFO Theca.
14(1), 15-25.
[13] Chatterjee, P., Chakraborty, S., 2016. A compar-
ative analysis of VIKOR method and its vari-
ants. Decision Science Letters. 5(4), 469-486.