Research Article
A Decision-Making Approach for Ranking Tertiary Institutions’ Service Quality Using Fuzzy MCDM and Extended HiEdQUAL Model
Table 7
Ranking of the four higher institutions by the MCDM methods.
| | S/no | Alternatives | TOPSIS | Ranking | Compensatory AND | Ranking | Yager’s min-max Values | Ranking | OWA values | Ranking |
| | 1. | Higher Institution A | 0.1595 | 4 | 0.0000720 | 4 | 2.2218 | 3 | 4.4604 | 4 | | 2. | Higher Institution B | 0.9702 | 1 | 0.0021611 | 1 | 2.6640 | 1 | 5.9875 | 1 | | 3. | Higher Institution C | 0.3416 | 3 | 0.0001701 | 3 | 2.2832 | 2 | 4.8436 | 3 | | 4. | Higher Institution D | 0.4307 | 2 | 0.0002781 | 2 | 2.0762 | 4 | 4.9791 | 2 |
|
|
