20.500.12556/DKUM-58297 VEČKRITERIJSKO ODLOČANJE O INVESTIRANJU V OKOLJU PRIJAZNO TEHNOLOGIJO Z METODAMA AHP IN PRIME Multicriteria decision making on investment in environmentally friendly technology with the AHP and PRIME methods Investicijske odločitve so z vidika podjetij pomembne poslovne odločitve. Bistven vpliv imajo na njihovo prihodnost saj imajo dolgoročne posledice za njegov nadaljnji razvoj in poslovanje. Kadar se podjetja odločijo za investicije (še posebej za večje oziroma radikalne), imajo predvidoma omejena finančna sredstva. Pri večkriterijskem odločanju si lahko pomagajo z analitičnimi orodji, saj je nujno potrebna skrbna proučitev možnih potencialnih načinov investiranja, da bi preprečili oportunitetne izgube. Za najprimernejšo obliko investicij mora podjetje skrbno izbrati pravilne metode za medsebojne primerjave ali analize, ki bodo odvrnile dvome negotovosti naložbe oziroma podale večjo gotovost pri odločanju. V diplomskem delu smo se lotili primera investiranja podjetja v okolju prijazno tehnologijo z večkriterijskim odločanjem. Naš primer zajema štiri alternative oziroma tehnologije (izpihovanje dušika, obarjanje, SBR-gnojevka in SBR-metanol), tri podkriterije (ekonomski, tehnično-tehnološki in okoljski) in štirinajst atributov (investicija, pogonski stroški, potreben volumen reaktorjev, zahtevnost tehnologije, zahtevnost vzdrževanja, cena vzdrževanja, poraba kemikalij, instalirana moč, delovna sila, zanesljivost tehnologije, preizkušenost tehnologije, zmanjšanje ostalega onesnaževanja, hitrost postavitve naprave in nastajanje drugih odpadkov), po katerih smo prišli do rešitve zastavljenega problema, ki je izbira najustreznejše tehnologije. Pri iskanju najboljše investicijske izbire smo uporabili računalniška programa za večkriterijsko odločanje Expert Choice in PRIME Decisions. Programa temeljita na različnih metodah, ki smo ju opisali v empiričnem delu naloge, to sta AHP in PRIME. Metodi se razlikujeta predvsem po načinu izražanja sodb. Metoda PRIME se je izkazala za koristnejšo z vidika intervalnega vrednotenja, saj je smiselna pri negotovih informacijah, medtem ko je metoda AHP učinkovitejša zaradi natančnejših vnosov pri določanju vrednosti kriterijev oziroma alternativ, ki temeljijo na razmerni skali. K postopku reševanja zastavljenega problema smo pristopili po korakih, ki so si podobni pri obeh metodah. Začeli smo s strukturiranjem odločitvenega drevesa, definirali alternative in določali uteži ter na koncu opravili še sintezo rezultata. S programom Expert Choice smo šli še korak naprej, saj smo naredili tudi analizo občutljivosti, ki omogoča spreminjanje uteži kriterijev, kar je pomanjkljivost programa PRIME Decisions. Na koncu smo primerjali tudi rezultate obeh programov in prišli do ugotovitve, da je razvrstitev vrednosti alternativ enaka. Investment decisions are among the most important decisions made by businesses. Having long-term implications for the future development and business performance, investment decisions play a critical role in shaping the future of any business. When a business decides to make an investment, particularly a large or major one, the available budget is normally limited. Using analytical software tools for processing multiple criteria is essential in this case, since all potential investment options need to be carefully examined in order to avoid any opportunity loss. To pick out the most suitable investment option, a business has to carefully select the right methods for comparing or analyzing all the available options so as to cast away any doubts about the investment's uncertainty, or in other words, to allow a greater degree of certainty in the decision-making process. This diploma work examines a business looking to make an investment in environment-friendly technology while relying on multi-criteria decision-making. The case presented in this paper comprises four distinct alternatives or technologies (nitrogen stripping, precipitation, sludge SBR, and methanol SBR), three subcriteria (economic, technical and technological, and environmental) and 14 attributes (investment, operating costs, required reactor capacity, complexity of technology, complexity of maintenance, maintenance costs, usage of chemicals, installed capacity, workforce, reliability of technology, proven performance of technology, reduction of other pollution, system deployment costs, and production of other waste categories), on the basis of which a solution to the problem was found in the form of the most suitable technology. Two multi-criteria decision-making analytical software tools, Expert Choice and PRIME Decisions, were used for choosing the best investment option. The software tools use different methods, AHP and PRIME respectively, which are described in the empirical section of the diploma work. The fundamental difference between the two methods is the way they make judgments. Being useful when dealing with uncertain information, the latter proved to be more valuable in terms of interval-level evaluation, whereas the AHP method is more effective by allowing more detailed entries for assigning values to criteria or alternatives based on a ratio scale. The problem-solving process was carried out in steps, which are similar with both methods. We first constructed a hierarchical model, defined the alternatives, specified the weights, and finished by synthesizing the results. With Expert Choice, we even took a step further by running a sensitivity analysis, which, on account of its effectiveness, turned out to be a disadvantage of the PRIME Decisions software. By comparing the final results produced by both software tools, we found that the ranking of the alternatives was identical. Expert Choice PRIME Decisions metoda AHP metoda PRIME večkriterijsko odločanje Expert Choice PRIME Decisions metoda AHP metoda PRIME Multicriteria Decision Making true true false [N. Žokalj] Slovenski jezik Angleški jezik Diplomsko delo 2016-04-13 19:35:22 2016-06-22 09:32:50 2022-06-16 03:07:47 2019-07-11 10:34:55 2016 0 Maribor 0 0000-00-00 NiDoloceno NiDoloceno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 519.8 12345628 URN:SI:UM:DK:BWMVXHDC UN_Zokalj_Nejc_2016.pdf UN_Zokalj_Nejc_2016.pdf 1 8645A0092A118D46E4596F6355D86CFF 9fbbb5655cb9f4060d55ddd4d2227aff2cb59e95adc8c2f1bcb56479b32e9890 a2373794-7c0c-11eb-bb7a-00155d0001ca https://dk.um.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=93542 Ekonomsko-poslovna fakulteta 0 0 0