A Structured Approach for Selecting MCDA Methods in the Prioritization of Military Systems Requirements

Prioritization of requirements is a key activity in the development of complex systems, particularly Sistemas e Materiais de Emprego Militar (SMEM, Portuguese for Military Systems and Materiel), whose requirements encompass operational performance, technological maturity, industrial capability, logistics, and life-cycle considerations. The decision making process for such systems is characterized by multi-stakeholder involvement, conflicting goals, uncertainties, and lengthy acquisition process, thus a need for clear and efficient decision support methods is evident. Although Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methods have been widely used for requirements prioritization, the selection of an appropriate MCDA method is often driven by methodological familiarity or researcher preference rather than by its suitability to the characteristics of the decision problem.

This paper proposes a systematic procedure for selecting the most appropriate MCDA technique for SMEM requirements prioritization. The procedure is based on the generalized framework proposed by Wątróbski et al., in which both decision problems and MCDA methods are represented through a common hierarchical structure of descriptors. The research combines a Systematic Literature Mapping (SLM) to identify the current state of the art in MCDA-based requirements prioritization with an expert assessment of the decision context. The SLM identified 28 relevant studies through a systematic selection process. The analysis shows that AHP and its variants remain the most frequently adopted approaches, while fuzzy and hybrid methods have gained increasing attention for addressing uncertainty and group decision-making. However, the choice of MCDA methods is rarely supported by a structured justification regarding their suitability for the specific decision context.

To characterize the decision problem, a questionnaire derived from the descriptor hierarchy was applied to 41 Brazilian Army specialists with experience in defense acquisition, systems engineering, requirements engineering, and life-cycle management. Their responses were aggregated to establish the reference descriptor profile of the decision context. This profile was then compared with a database of 56 MCDA methods characterized within the same generalized framework. Using descriptor-based filtering and a global dissimilarity measure, the methods presenting the highest structural compatibility with the identified decision context were selected.

The results indicate that Fuzzy PROMETHEE I provides the highest compatibility, followed by Fuzzy PROMETHEE II and PAMSSEM I as alternative solutions. Beyond identifying the most suitable method, the proposed protocol offers a transparent, systematic, and reproducible procedure for MCDA method selection, reducing reliance on subjective or ad hoc decisions and strengthening the methodological rigor and governance of requirements prioritization. Although developed for SMEM, the proposed approach is sufficiently generic to support MCDA method selection across other engineering domains characterized by uncertainty, multiple stakeholders, and complex decision-making.