Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfalls🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Decision-making›PROMETHEE II — Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment of Evaluations II
MCDMOutrankingcrisp

PROMETHEE II — Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment of Evaluations II

PROMETHEE-II (PROMETHEE II — Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment of Evaluations II) is a outranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method introduced by Brans, J. P., Vincke, P. in 1985. It turns a decision matrix of alternatives scored on multiple criteria into a structured, reproducible result.

ScholarGate
  1. MCDM
  2. v1
  3. 1 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

PROMETHEE-II
AHPANPBWMCRITICDELPHIENTROPYFUCOMSWARA

When to use it

Φ(a) ∈ [−1,+1]. Higher net flow means the alternative outranks more alternatives than it is outranked by. Φ = Φ⁺ − Φ⁻ gives a complete ranking (PROMETHEE II), unlike PROMETHEE I which yields a partial preorder. The 'usual' preference function is equivalent to BORDA count; richer functions (vshape, level) allow modelling indifference and preference thresholds.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Follows a transparent, reproducible computational procedure that can be audited step by step.
  • Handles multiple criteria of differing scales and units within a single decision matrix.
Limitations
  • May exhibit rank reversal when alternatives are added to or removed from the set.

Sources

  1. Brans, J. P., Vincke, P. (1985). A preference ranking organisation method (The PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision-making). Management Science DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.31.6.647 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 2). PROMETHEE II — Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment of Evaluations II. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/promethee-ii

Related methods

AHPANPBWMCRITICDELPHIENTROPYFUCOMSWARA

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • AHPDecision-making↔ compare
  • ANPDecision-making↔ compare
  • BWMDecision-making↔ compare
  • CRITICDecision-making↔ compare
  • DELPHIDecision-making↔ compare
  • ENTROPYDecision-making↔ compare
  • FUCOMDecision-making↔ compare
  • SWARADecision-making↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Similar methods

PROMETHEEPROMETHEE-IPROMETHEE-IIIPROMETHEE-VPROMETHEE-VIIF-PROMETHEEZ-PROMETHEEELECTRE-II

Related reference concepts

Decision MakingDecision Support SystemsParticipative Decision MakingDelphi TechniqueQ MethodologyWeighted Scores

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — PROMETHEE-II (PROMETHEE II — Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment of Evaluations II). Retrieved 2026-07-20 from https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/promethee-ii · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Brans, J. P., Vincke, P.
Subfamily
Outranking
Year
1985
Type
Outranking (pairwise preference flows — complete ranking)
Value Space
crisp
Uncertainty
None
Compensation
partial
Rank Reversal
Yes
Related methods
AHPANPBWMCRITICDELPHIENTROPYFUCOMSWARA
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account