Porównaj metody

	Uwarstwiona Metoda Najlepsza-Najgorsza (Stratified Best Worst Method)	AHP-BOCR	Best Worst Method with Sorting
Dziedzina	Podejmowanie decyzji	Podejmowanie decyzji	Podejmowanie decyzji
Rodzina	MCDM	MCDM	MCDM
Rok powstania	2015	2008	2015
Twórca	Jafar Rezaei and collaborators	Thomas L. Saaty (AHP); BOCR framework development extended AHP	Jafar Rezaei
Typ	Hierarchical pairwise comparison with layer-wise best-worst	Hierarchical pairwise comparison with strategic perspective	Pairwise comparison weighting with sorting
Źródło pierwotne	Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 229, 976-985.	Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98.	Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 229, 976-985.
Inne nazwy	Stratified BWM	AHP-BOCR, Strategic Criteria AHP	BWM-Sort
Pokrewne	4	5	6
Podsumowanie	Stratified BWM is an extension of the Best Worst Method that applies the BWM logic recursively across multiple hierarchical layers. Instead of weighting criteria at a single level, it identifies the best and worst criterion within each level of a hierarchy, then aggregates weights across levels. This enables more realistic modeling of complex decision problems with natural hierarchical structures.	AHP-BOCR is an extension of the Analytic Hierarchy Process that incorporates strategic perspectives through the BOCR framework: Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks. Instead of optimizing a single objective, AHP-BOCR decomposes decisions into four strategic dimensions and uses a formula (Benefits × Opportunities) / (Costs × Risks) to synthesize a strategic priority. This approach is particularly suited to long-term, complex decisions with multiple stakeholder perspectives.	BWM-Sort is a variant of the Best Worst Method introduced by Jafar Rezaei around 2015. It combines pairwise comparison of criteria with alternative sorting, enabling decision-makers to prioritize both evaluation dimensions and final ranked outcomes in a single integrated framework.