W5_TOM_ Choosing MBA Program by Using Multi-Attribute Decision Making Non-Compensatory Models


  1. Problem Definition

Ms. XY has intention to enter next education level through a Master of Business and Administration degree. And she is strongly determined to choose MBA program which best fit with her preferences. And what she asked is advice on which one is the best MBA program for her.

 

  1. Development of Feasible Alternative

In this case, I will use multi-attributes decision making with four non-compensatory models, which are dominance, satisficing, disjunctive resolution, and lexicography models.

3. Development Outcomes for Alternatives

Based on Ms. XY’s personal preferences, she would like to choose one of four possible alternatives, which are MBA programs at University of Melbourne, INSEAD, Boston University, or Erasmus University.

4. Selection of Criteria

The selection of the best MBA for Ms. XY should have analysis that considers attributes of alternatives which shown below:


5. Analysis of the Alternative

Dominance Model

Dominance model is a decision making method done by pairing alternatives and comparing each attribute to different alternatives.

In order to quantify the dominance level, each status type is scored: “Better” has 1 point of score, “Equal” has 0 point of score, and “Worse” has -1 point of score. Afterwards we are able to see range value as level of dominance.

It is obvious that Erasmus University valued as the highest dominance level toward Boston University.

Satisficing Model and Disjunctive Model

Satisficing model draws a boundary of minimum and maximum acceptable value of each attribute. The boundary is created based on Ms. XY’s preferences.

By correlating with disjunctive resolution model, we are able to create elimination effect to alternatives outside the specified acceptable value.

Therefore, based on analysis above the best alternative of MBA program would be Erasmus University, because it is the only alternative which fit with acceptable value.

Lexicography

Lexicography model tries to identify each attribute’s priority of rank. The ranking is based on the number of times an attribute appears to be more important than another attribute.

The order of attribute ranking is found to be: salary increase>career progress rank>travel>global MBA ranking>diversity of int’l student>course period, tuition fee>living Cost.

Next, we need to rank each alternative to each attribute, from the best one to the worst one.

In this case, we are able to conclude that Erasmus University is the best alternative.

6. Selection of Preferred Alternative

Dominance model, satisficing model & disjunctive resolution model and lexicography model shows results that makes us no wonder why the best alternative of MBA program for Ms. XY will turn out to be MBA at Erasmus University.

7. Performance Monitoring & Post Evaluation Result.

The analysis shows that Erasmus University is the MBA program that best fit with Ms. XY’s preferences. However, on the other hand INSEAD seems very competitive and actually can turn out to be the second alternative, and it may be in the same position when using satisficing & disjunctive resolution model if INSEAD has equal education cost (tuition fee and living cost).

References:

  1. Sullivan, W. G., Wicks, E. M., & Koelling, C. P. (2012). Engineering Economy. (15th ed.).Chapter 14 Decision Making Considering Multiattributes. (pp. 555-560). Boston, MA: Prentice Hall.
  2. Erasmus University. (2013). Tuition Fees and Other Costs.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from:

    http://www.rsm.nl/mba/international-full-time-mba/admissions-application/tuition-fees-other-costs/

  3. INSEAD. (2013). Tuition and Fees.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://mba.insead.edu/financing/fees.cfm

  4. University of Melbourne. (2013). Cost of Living Summary Table.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://services.unimelb.edu.au/finaid/planning/cost_of_living/summary

  5. Boston University. (2013). Tuition and Financial Aid. Available:

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://management.bu.edu/graduate/graduate-admissions/tuition/full-time/

  6. Financial Times. (2013). Erasmus University.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/rsm-erasmus-university/global-mba-ranking-2013#global-mba-ranking-2013

  7. Financial Times. (2013). INSEAD.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/insead/global-mba-ranking-2013#global-mba-ranking-2013

  8. Financial Times. (2013). University of Melbourne.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/melbourne-business-school/global-mba-ranking-2013#global-mba-ranking-2013

  9. Financial Times. (2013). Boston University.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/boston-university-school-of-management/global-mba-ranking-2013#global-mba-ranking-2013

  10. Bloomberg. (2013). EUR-USD Exchange Rate on 27 September 2013.

    Retrieved on 27 September 2013 from: http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/EURUSD:CUR

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under Tommy Edward, Week 05

4 responses to “W5_TOM_ Choosing MBA Program by Using Multi-Attribute Decision Making Non-Compensatory Models

  1. AWESOME Tom, Excellent case study, you followed our step by step process perfectly (IF you do the Compensatory Modesl for your NEXT blog posting it may help refine the decision a bit more) AND your did a great job on your references and citations using APA format.

    Keep up this high quality of work and looking forward to seeing your W6 report.

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, Jakarta, Indonesia

  2. Pingback: W6_SSD_Non Compensatory Decision Making – Selecting Transmission Projects | Simatupang AACE 2014

  3. Pingback: W6_TOM_ Choosing MBA Program by Using Multi-Attribute Decision Making Compensatory Models. | Simatupang AACE 2014

  4. Pingback: Non Compensatory Decision Making – Selecting Transmission Projects | Risky Bits

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s