Pugh+Analysis+and+Decision+Making

__Multiple attribute decision making based on fuzzy preference information on alternatives: Ranking and weighting__ by: Ying-Ming Wang (University of Manchester, UK) and Celik Parkan (Long Island University, NY) Published in 2005 in Fuzzy Sets and Systems Volume 153
 * To read more info about real estate coach then go over to** [|real estate mentors]**.Maggie Castle**

This article explains how to give a theoretical base for material selection since many material property databases do not do this. The approach takes into account the properties of materials and are classified either qualitatively or quantitively depending on the property. The quantitive properties are then assigned a value between 0 and 10, 0 being the most undesirable. These values are based on the user requirements of the system. The qualitative properties are assigned usually Yes/No values or a similar type. All these values are combined into a matrix with the different possible materials. The article introduces some in depth math to find the best solution, but adding up columns of numbers is acceptable too. This method is nice because usually there is not 1 right answer that all the requirements fit into perfectly and this allows our groups to visually show their ratings for different criteria and requirements of our system!

__Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment__ by: Chen-Tung Chen (Department of INformation Management, The Overseas Chinese College of Commerce, Taiwan) 1997 Published in Fuzzy Sets and Systems in 1997

This article talks about the TOPSIS method for solving MCDM problems. It introduces the idea of a bell shaped curve with the positive ideal solution at the top of this curve. All alternative solutions, of possibilities that are being tested, fall along this curve and the best possible solution will fall closest to the positive ideal solution and furthest away from the negative ideal solution. These values are shown to be calculated in difficult math and in matrices. This is a way that our class could view different options and what is closest to the ideal option, and possibly creating a curve to see which option is closest to the ideal one.


 * Kevin Dickey**

Cervone, Frank. “Applied Digital Library project management: using Pugh matrix analysis in complex decision-making situations.” //OCLC// Systems and Services 25.4 (2009): 228-232.

Frank Cervone of Purdue University’s Information Services department describes the uses of a Pugh matrix in making complex decisions. The author presents Pugh matrix analysis as a method for choosing the best solution to problems that involve many dimensions and factors. Rather than using complex mathematical formulas, a Pugh matrix analysis (PMA) allows for a simplified decision-making process that still takes external factors into consideration. Cervones describes seven steps to performing a PMA. The first step is to develop or choose criteria for comparison within the matrix. Next, users must choose which factors of the criteria are to be compared. Users can then create a matrix showing these criteria. In the fourth step, each criterion within the matrix must be assigned a weight. For the fifth step, users must set a “baseline” plan. This serves as a basis for comparing all other plans of action in the matrix. Users move on to step six, where they compare other plans to the baseline and generate scores for each factor in the other plans. Once these scores are generated, they must be added to form a total for each plan. Cervone describes the sixth step in more detail, assigning a point system. A score of “0” designates that a particular factor in another plan is neither advantageous nor disadvantageous over the baseline. Scores of +1, +2, and +3 describe increasing advantages over the baseline, whereas scores of -1, -2, and -3 describe increasing disadvantages in comparison to the baseline. Based on the weighted sum of all scores, users can determine the most effective plan for their situation. Pugh matrices seem like something that would be very useful for some of the groups in our work breakdown structure (WBS). While my group (Structure) may not see significant benefits from these matrices, I can see the guys over in Illumination putting these matrices to good use to choose light sources.

Harvey, Jean. “Switching from improvement to innovation – on the fly.” //Quality Progress//, 38.1 (January 2007): 55-63.

In this article, author Jean Harvey describes methods for preventing stoppages and slowdowns during the project development cycle. Harvey incorporates Pugh matrices into his methodology, citing their usefulness as tools for systematic comparisons of concepts. The Pugh matrix is designed to cover the three stakeholders in an organization – the employees, the customers, and the shareholders. Teams can use these analytical tools to guide them through the concept selection and improvement process, by examining the ability of each decision to meet the needs of each group of stakeholders. In this matrix, one hundred points are spread between each of the groups, distributed as a system to designate particular “weight” to groups during the decision-making process. One concept is selected as a standard, “S”, which is a basis for comparison of all other concepts. Concepts which better fit the needs of a group receive a “+”, whereas those which could be less than satisfactory receive a “-“ in the matrix. The concept with the greatest difference between the weighted sum of the pluses and the weighted sum of the minuses is the best. In situations where the weighted sum of minuses is always greater than the weighed sum of pluses, then the “standard” concept is the best.




 * Eric Scaraglino **

Pugh Concept Analysis: **What is Pugh Concept Analysis? ** Pugh Analysis was invented by Stuart Pugh as an approach for selecting concept alternatives. Pugh Concept Analysis can also be referred as Pugh Matrix or Decision Making. **When to use it? ** When you wish to make the best decision on something taking all different options/factors into account. **How to use it? ** The first step is to establish a baseline, where you are designing or wish to improvise on the process. Then you develop concepts with multiple options/factors. **Grid Analysis** is a technique where you make a list of your options in a grid table. The **team** gives each option/factor a score (0 to 5 where 0 means not very important and 5 means very important) and weigh the total score for that option/factor. This helps you decide between different options before making your final decision. This will be useful when we make our decisions for our PTM project such as ordering materials. For example, we could discuss the options/factors for light bulbs before we order using the Pugh Analysis. We want to decide the price for it, the brightness of it, the size of it, and the impact it will have on the PTM dome.

[] http://thequalityportal.com/q_pugh.htm

Kurt Rose
Thakker A. “__3DCAD conceptual design of the next-generation impulse turbine using the Pugh decision-matrix__” Materials & Design Volume 30, Issue 7, August 2009, Pages 2676-2684

This article talks about two things, Pugh’s method of concept selection and a 3DCAD environment. It touches briefly on Pugh’s method while elaborating extensively on 3DCAD environment. According to this article, Pugh developed a decision matrix method called “Pugh’s method of concept selection.” This method prioritizes matrices that visualize a decision making process and can help facilitate new product design procedures.

[|http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TX5-4TTMJJ4-2&_user=47004&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000005018&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=47004&md5=49b28f67c08159dc566dd57f665df108&searchtype=a]

Tague, Nancy. “__Evaluation and Decision-Making Tools__” The Quality Toolbox, // Second Edition, // ASQ Quality Press, 2004, pages 219-223.

This article elaborates on what exactly a decision matrix is and how to create one. Decision matrices should be used when options should be narrowed to one choice, when the decision must be made on the basis of several different criteria and after the options have been reduced using reduction methods. Step 1: Brainstorm criteria appropriate for the situation. Step 2: Discuss and refine list. Identify things that may not have been included and prioritize. Step 3: Assign a “weight” to each criterion. Do this by distributing 10 points among the project. Step 4: Draw an L shaped matrix and write the criteria and their weights as lables along an edge, and a list of options across the others. Step 5: Evaluate each choice. Step 6: Multiply each option’s rating by the weight. The one that generates the highest score may not be the best option, but it can bring up good discussion points. The rest of the article just provides examples and other things that should be taken into consideration. For example, long lists of options can be shortened with a tool such as a list reduction.

http://asq.org/learn-about-quality/decision-making-tools/overview/decision-matrix.html

Sam Valer i o


This article defines Pugh Analysis as qualitatively comparing alternative concepts, or methods, of a design of a project within the Systems Solution Level. These concepts are ranked so that some options can be eliminated, allowing one to go into greater depth when comparing the remaining options. A matrix is then created, where the options are compared to some different baseline concepts, or requirements, and each option is given either a +1, meaning it performs better in that attribute, or a -1, meaning it performs worse. This makes it easier to decide the "winners" and "losers" among each option. A Pugh Analysis is great for making goals easier to clarify, making requirements more official, having a better understanding of the problems and potential solutions, as well as the interaction between proposed solutions, which allows room for additional solutions to be proposed. This method of comparison well help the illumination group greatly when we have to compare the results of the tests of all of the different kinds of lights, whether those tests be radiometric measurements, or taking pictures of the lights shining on a surface to see if they give enough light for the camera to have sufficient exposure time.

Jenna Shorkey
__A comprehensive method for comparing mental models of dynamic systems by Martin Schaffernicht, Stefan N. Groesser__ This article compares methods of comparing mental models, aka, comparing decision making processes. Mental models are basically models of how managers make decisions, even though other supporting methods may be available. This can help our groups understand the decision making processes and how to improve our way of decision making. The Pugh analysis is used implicitly in this article.

__Failure Prevention by Brett A. Miller, Stork Technimet, Inc.__ This article outlines the methods by which you can prevent failure of a product or idea through planning ahead. This article is specifically about matierials selection would could be a world of help to our project. We sometimes have a difficult time completing rationales for our choices and hopefully this could help us. This could be extremely helpful to our groups as we have many great ideas but we lack in the planning aspect. Pugh analysis is also used implicitly here, because I could not find any peer reviewed articles about Pugh analysis specifically.

__PUGH Analysis: Overview__
This web document basically gives what the title implies - an overview. It describes the theory of a Pugh matrix and its applicability to projects, much like ours. Essentially, a Pugh matrix analysis has fundamental similarities to something like a pro vs. con chart. However, it does have its own subtleties that give it an edge for comparison techniques. A Pugh analysis works based on what is called a "baseline". A conceptual team begins by establishing a set of guidelines that adhere to a customer's specific wants or needs. Using these specifications, they work out a concept that best fits what the customer wants. Using this concept as a baseline, they can then compare any other concept relative to the baseline. Each concept would get broken down into different characteristics, and those characteristics would be rated either a positive (+) for being better than the baseline, a zero for the same, or a negative ( - ) for worse. Once a total sum is found for each of the concepts, the "best" concept will have the highest score. This analysis matrix is much more efficient than having to spend time on a concept that eventually proves to be an undesired concept, thus saving much time and money.

[]

__Criteria-Pugh-Matrix-Results __
I thought this power point would be a good aid in understanding Pugh Matrices a little better by providing an example in a real situation. This is very helpful because it literally goes through every step in the process in a very clear concise manner. It begins with a table of contents and goes through the steps - proposers and proposals, references used, review process, results, analysis of results, conclusions, and recommendations. Breaking down the process in these steps helps to see the importance or a clear organizational thought process and a means of analyzing that process. This is exactly why the Pugh Analysis is used. We can implement this tool as well for our project and possibly prevent future setbacks that could potentially waste vital time put into the completion of our PTM.

- this was found using the database Scirus on RIT's library search ||
 * [|TG3-MAC-Criteria-Pugh-Matrix-Evaluation-Results]

Ashley Miller
__Creative Cognition: Theory, Research and Appplications__ by Ronald A. Finke, Thomas B. Ward, and Steven M. Smith published by Bradford, The MIT Press, paper 1996 (hard 1992).

Often times the design process is over-simplified by researchers, leaving a huge gap between their studies and the industry around their studies. Pugh suggests that, in order to dissolve this gap, the design process must be broken down into three parts: 1.) Total design vs. partial design 2.) Static products vs. dynamic products 3.) Technology-specific methods vs. generic methods Given the above parts of design, Pugh fights that the entire process described as the “design phase” becomes more manipulative and demanding of much more attention from the designer. Instead of having a set list of directions, this process allows for the designer to have a general frame to base their work on, and subsequently allows for the manipulation of the design process to fit a specific project.  This type of thinking can be applied to our project in that it sets a general frame for us to follow when trying to make decisions. Instead of blindly making choices, we can follow this frame to give basis for all made decisions.



__An Evidential Reasoning Approach for Multiple-Attribute Decision Making with Uncertainty__ by Jian-Bo Yang and Madan G. Singh IEEE Transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics. Vol. 4. No. 1. January 1994

Decision making, according to this article, is dealt with based on priorities and uncertainties. When given a set of details that contribute to solving a problem, one must decide which of the details matters most in finding a solution and then rank the rest based on the placement of the most important matter. Once a ranking has been determined, the problem can be solved, but only within uncertainty. With every ranking an uncertainty exists such that the actual ranking may not ever be 100%. This uncertainty allows for a bit of flexibility within the decision making process, and should always be given attention.

Within our project, the idea of ranking priorities is essential. If we don’t know what things need to be targeted first, we could easily get ahead or behind ourselves, subsequently offsetting the decision making process and the progress within it. Specifically, we must strive to stay on schedule within individual groups, but at the same time pay close attention to how our priorities rank with the other groups priorities. If lighting is behind and the camera has set a priority to test with lights, then a manipulation of priorities and a consideration of uncertainty must occur.



Scarlett Montanaro
__**Concept Development of a Multi-Vehicle System for an Operationally Responsive Mission**__ by Ryan Odegard, Nicholas Borer, and Jana Schwartz The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Houston, TX

Pugh Analysis is used to compare and select concepts. This is best used when concept evaluation is necessary at a qualitative level, whereas if the data is quantitative, you would use an Object-Process Network, which is similar to a Pugh Analysis.

Completing a Pugh analysis results in: • Greater insight into the requirements, • Greater understanding of the problem, • Greater understanding of the potential solutions, • An understanding of the interaction between the proposed solutions, which can lead to additional solutions, • A knowledge of the reasons why one concept is stronger or weaker than another.

A Pugh analysis also creates a ranking of the concepts that allows the user to prioritize which concepts seem to be the best..



__**Concept Selection for Market Potential Using Fuzzy Selection Approach**__ by W.F. Lu, J. Sun, H.T. Loh, and C.W. Chua Department of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore

A Pugh Matrix is characterized by columns headed by the different concepts in consideration and the evaluation criteria heading the rows. This is the simplest and quickest means to implement and is very suitable to filter protect concepts. However, the evaluation criteria is assumed to have equal importance when in many cases this is untrue. This article recommends using Utility Scoring instead. This is similar to a Pugh Matrix, except it has an extra column for criteria weights. The concept with the highest score is deemed the best one to use.



**Dan Goldberg**
**__MARVIN – Near Surface Methane Detection on Mars __** The article entitled “MARVIN – Near Surface Methane Detection on Mars” was written by graduate students attending the Georgia Institute of Technology, School of engineering. Srotri, Khalid, Gunduz, Manyapu, Sumer, and Schrage designed a concept for a device to be used in a mission searching for life on Mars. In their process of designing such a concept, they used attempted many different design methodologies. The Pugh analysis, which they briefly describe, is defined as “+/-/same rating with respect to a baseline concept”. They also say that this method was not efficient in yielding a definitive answer. However, it did help. This group ended up going with a TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference with Similarity to Ideal Solution) analysis while backing it up with results from the Pugh analysis.



__**Concept Development of a Multi-Vehicle System for an Operationally Responsive Mission **__

The article “Concept Development of a Multi-Vehicle System for an Operationally Responsive Mission” was written by Odegard from The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Houston, TX and Borer and Schwartz from The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, MA. These researchers created a framework for early stages of a conceptual design. The researches name Pugh analysis as a way to compare dissimilar concept alternatives and down-select among them. They say that the analyses are more effective when multiple baselines are used. This is because a better idea of tradeoffs can be formulated. In all, the Pugh analysis is a good resource to clearly lay out different possibilities and tradeoffs associated with each.

Phoenix Rodden
Pugh, William and David Wonnacott, November 1994

Through this article, we can see the beginnings of the ideas behind Pugh analysis. Puch and Wonnacott discuss how one can allow array dependence analysis to run faster when certain algorithms are used. In programming when more than one memory access refers to the same data, it can slow down compile time. With the reuse of variables, you can end up compiling over the same piece of information, which wastes time. As any programmer will tell you, compiling is a good time to go make a sandwich. To save time, you can change the way that the compiler looks at numbers, and instead of using the exact values, use free-form variables. This is the idea behind the application of Pugh analysis on human decision making. Instead of starting with actual values, one can prioritize attributes of a project, which is much faster than laying out every single piece of information that applies to the requirements.

Kwangsun Yoon The Journal of the Operational Research Society Vol. 40, No. 7 (Jul., 1989), pp. 681-686

This article discusses how one is prone to errors when doing analysis of a project that has multiple attributes. They cite Pugh and Winslow and their questions "Given some set of numbers and their errors, what is the error in some prescribed function involving these numbers?" This sums up the problems with this approach nicely. If one has made errors in the Pugh analysis, how can the ratios in the whole function of importance of attributes be correct? It is important to compensate for inconsistent human judgment. Yoon chooses to do this using an algorithm that looks at the ratios between all of the values attributed to the set. By storing these values in a matrix and performing calculations, it is possible to discover the error in that particular set. Yoon then chooses an example of a city building a library and choosing between different plans, which emphasis on certain attributes. Basically this technique is used to get rid of the irrationality of human decision making.

Carl Stahoviak
The Pugh Analysis Matrix is a systems engineering methodology for describing and fully understanding the dimensional requirements of a proposed idea and evaluating various concepts to determine which best fulfills these requirements to the greatest extent. The Pugh Analysis Methodology is useful for laying out both the baseline (non-negotiable and functional) and higher degree (system specifics) system or product requirements as defined by the customer. This method helps the engineering team to better understand the true requirements of the system being designed before blindly throwing poorly developed solutions and time at a problem, and it specifies a procedure for evaluating idea proposals on the basis of the degree to which each meets these requirements.
 * Pugh Analysis:**

M. N. Islam Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2004) 23: 489–494

//"A methodology for extracting dimensional requirements for a product from customer needs//" describes a methodology based in part on the Pugh Analysis that is to be used to determine the best solution to solving the specific problem of designing a gear pump for fluid transfer. The article outlines a flow chart to expound upon the standard Pugh Analysis that is very useful in determining the full range of system requirements and the degree to which each proposed concept meets each of these requirements.





=**Nadya Spice**=
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 32px;">"Pugh Analysis :: Overview :: The Quality Portal." // The Quality Portal :: Organizing the Web with a Focus on Quality //. 02 Oct. 1999. Web. 21 Jan. 2011. <http://thequalityportal.com/q_pugh.htm>. **



In my research, I found pugh analysis to be a decision making process. Similar to the everyday pros vs cons list, it weighs benefits and tradeoffs between different approaches to a problem. tables are typically used to show the results. this will help us with our project because as we get further and further into the processes many decisions are to be made, and we do not want to lose sight of why or how we make these decisions.