Talk:Decision-matrix method

Engineering Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is much more to Pugh methods—good and bad—than is contained in this very brief page.

For instance, I have found that the Pugh method's greatest strength does not lie in its ability to rank alternatives, but in its ability to highlight strong and weak aspects of various designs. The design team can then use the Pugh analysis to try to combine the strong features of each.

On the minus side, Pugh analysis does little to reduce the subjective nature of the comparison; it only puts the subjectivity down on paper. Worse, people often average scores or multiply weights against the scores, operations that are not mathematically valid given the kind of ranking that is performed and that can lead to incorrect results.

Would anyone object to seeing the page updated to contain this sort of information? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thopper (talk • contribs) 07:51, 20 March 2007.

External links

I've removed the following external links from this article per WP:EL. If these websites are used as sources for this article, please see Wikipedia:Footnotes to see how to reference sources. --SueHay 16:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pugh method - umass.edu
General Morphological Analysis: A General Method for Non-Quantified Modelling From the Swedish Morphological Society

The swemorph links have been spammed by editors with coi on over a hundred articles. --Ronz 17:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]