Digital Transformation: Evaluating Emerging Technologies. Группа авторов
a method used to determine how to evaluate alternatives by providing an easy and reliable means to rate and rank decision-making criteria. Weights are used and assigned to criteria and the results are normalized. The comparison is implemented in two stages:
1.Determining qualitatively which criteria is more important (i.e., establish a rank order of the criteria), and
2.Assigning a quantitative weight to each criterion, such that the qualitative rank order is satisfied.
The process is based on three steps that differ in their underlying scale. First, the measurement is based on a range from an ordinal perspective (i.e., weighting by ranking). The second step is about constructing an interval by weighted ranking, while the third step calculates the ratio scale—the pairwise comparison value. The three steps are summarized below, based on the document HDM by Dundar Kocaoglu.
•Step 1—Completion of the pairwise comparison matrix: Two considerations are evaluated at a time in terms of their relative importance. Index values from 1 to 99 are used. If criterion A is exactly as important as criterion B, this pair receives an index of 1. If A is much more important than B, the index is 99. All degrees are possible in between when comparing A to B. For a “less important” relationship, the fractions would be closer to 50 points. The values are entered row by row into a cross-matrix. The diagonal of the matrix contains only values of 1. The right upper half of the matrix is filled until each criterion has been compared to every other one [1].
•Step 2—Calculating the criteria weights: The weights of the individual criteria are calculated. First, a normalized comparison matrix is created: each value in the matrix is divided by the sum of its column. To get the weights of the individual criteria, the mean of each row of this second matrix is determined. These weights are already normalized; their sum is 1.
•Step 3—Assessment of the consistency matrix: A statistically reliable estimate of the consistency of the resulting weights is made.
4.1.How objectives and criteria are determined
Theoretically, each level of the hierarchy consists of multi-dimensional alternative choices or decision elements, as noted in Figure 1 as Level 1. Multi-criteria objectives that lead to multiple subcriteria are shown in Level 2. At the bottom of the figure, multiple output results from multiple actions are shown in Level 3.
Figure 1.HDM conceptual framework.
The decision element at a specific level has an impact on several elements at the next nod level in the connecting lines. Let’s say, we are seeking to make an operational level decision to produce a cloud model of technology that contributes to several or maybe all subcriteria at the target level. Consequently, reaching our fulfillment level (i.e., the goal) that contributes to several or all the objectives. Figure 1 depicts how the goal, criteria and alternatives are related.
The process of evaluation between each internal relationship in such a hierarchy requires assigning a numerical value to each branch of the hierarchical network structure, as shown in Figure 1. The values are assigned to represent the relative contribution of one element to the next on different levels. As this process is completed, an evaluation model is developed to obtain the relative measure of effectiveness for each element at the bottom of the decision hierarchy, in terms of the elements at the top. In other words, each of the items (that makes Level 2) has a percentage value if the sum is equal to 1. Also, the sum value of each subcriteria is equal to the respective criteria at Level 2 (i.e., the upper limit for the number of relationships is defined by the product of the number of elements at the sublevels).
4.2.Use of experts and Delphi
The Delphi method is a structured communication technique (or process) developed to be systematic and interactive with an iterative component that relies on a panel of experts. The experts are preselected based on predefined criteria; each answers questionnaires or completes pairwise comparisons of an HDM model in two or more rounds. After each round, a facilitator provides an anonymized summary of the experts’ judgments in a result table. Results from the previous round are provided as well, as are the reasons for the judgments [2].
Experts are encouraged to revise their earlier answers after considering the replies of the other members in the panel. The objective during this process is to decrease and converge towards the “most reasonable” answer or judgement. Finally, the process is stopped after a predefined stop criterion, e.g., number of rounds, achievement of consensus, or stability of results (i.e., reduced inconsistency level).
The Delphi method is based on the principle that decisions from a structured group of individuals are more accurate than those from unstructured groups. The technique can also be adapted for use in face-to-face meetings; it is called the mini-Delphi. The Delphi method has been widely used for business forecasting, which is commonly used among fund managers and stock picking analysts and has certain advantages over another structured forecasting approach.
There are four key characteristics to implement a successful Delphi technique:
(1)Anonymity of the participants;
(2)Structuring of information flow;
(3)Regular feedback;
(4)Role of the facilitator.
4.3.Cloud computing models
Cloud-computing providers offer services in three main different models: IaaS, PaaS and SaaS, which are often portrayed as being layers in a stack. However, such an understanding should not lead to the misconception that these platforms need to be implemented in coordination or in an order.
Thus, it is common to implement the SaaS without using the underlying PaaS or IaaS layers. It is also equally possible to run a program on IaaS and access it directly, without wrapping it as a SaaS [3].
The following definitions are based on The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing:
•“Software as a Service (SaaS). The capability provided to the consumer is to use the provider’s applications running on a cloud infrastructure. The applications are accessible from various client devices through either a thin client interface, such as a web browser (e.g., web-based email), or a program interface. The consumer does not manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure including network, servers, operating systems, storage, or even individual application capabilities, with the possible exception of limited user-specific application configuration settings.
•Platform as a Service (PaaS). The capability provided to the consumer is to deploy onto the cloud infrastructure consumer-created or acquired applications created using programming languages, libraries, services, and tools supported by the provider. The consumer does not manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure including network, servers, operating systems, or storage, but has control over the deployed applications and possibly configuration settings for the application-hosting environment.
•Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). The capability provided to the consumer is to provision processing, storage, networks, and other fundamental computing resources where the consumer is able to deploy and run arbitrary software, which can include operating systems and applications. The consumer does not manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure but has control over operating systems, storage, and deployed applications; and possibly limited control of select networking components (e.g., host firewalls).” [