Project Name: Project Management 2
Table 1. Priorities with respect to Goal
Inconsistency ratio: 0.199 (Inconsistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | Cost | 0.249 |
| 2 | Time/Schedule | 0.218 |
| 3 | Risk | 0.208 |
| 4 | Quality | 0.139 |
| 5 | Resources Availability | 0.097 |
| 6 | Stakeholder Satisfaction | 0.055 |
| 7 | Strategic Alignment | 0.034 |
As shown in the table above, , According to the
Goal ,
Cost
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
Time/Schedule , Risk , Quality , Resources Availability , Stakeholder Satisfaction and Strategic Alignment according to the obtained weights.
Figure 1. Priorities with respect to Goal
Table 2. Weights with respect to Strategic Alignment
Inconsistency ratio: 0.119 (Inconsistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.475 |
| 2 | B | 0.275 |
| 3 | C | 0.158 |
| 4 | D | 0.092 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Strategic Alignment ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.
Figure 2. Priorities with respect to Strategic Alignment
Table 3. Weights with respect to Stakeholder Satisfaction
Inconsistency ratio: 0.104 (Inconsistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.522 |
| 2 | B | 0.277 |
| 3 | C | 0.128 |
| 4 | D | 0.073 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Stakeholder Satisfaction ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.
Figure 3. Priorities with respect to Stakeholder Satisfaction
Table 4. Weights with respect to Resources Availability
Inconsistency ratio: 0.098 (Consistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.561 |
| 2 | B | 0.244 |
| 3 | C | 0.129 |
| 4 | D | 0.066 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Resources Availability ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.
Figure 4. Priorities with respect to Resources Availability
Table 5. Weights with respect to Quality
Inconsistency ratio: 0.173 (Inconsistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.447 |
| 2 | B | 0.262 |
| 3 | C | 0.172 |
| 4 | D | 0.119 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Quality ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.
Figure 5. Priorities with respect to Quality
Table 6. Weights with respect to Risk
Inconsistency ratio: 0.082 (Consistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.383 |
| 2 | B | 0.295 |
| 3 | C | 0.21 |
| 4 | D | 0.112 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Risk ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.
Figure 6. Priorities with respect to Risk
Table 7. Weights with respect to Time/Schedule
Inconsistency ratio: 0.082 (Consistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.483 |
| 2 | B | 0.257 |
| 3 | C | 0.147 |
| 4 | D | 0.113 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Time/Schedule ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.
Figure 7. Priorities with respect to Time/Schedule
Table 8. Weights with respect to Cost
Inconsistency ratio: 0.257 (Inconsistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.505 |
| 2 | B | 0.238 |
| 3 | C | 0.153 |
| 4 | D | 0.104 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Cost ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.
Figure 8. Priorities with respect to Cost
Table 9. Weights with respect to Goal
Inconsistency ratio: 0.177 (Inconsistent matrix)| Rank | Name | Weight |
| 1 | A | 0.466 |
| 2 | B | 0.265 |
| 3 | C | 0.165 |
| 4 | D | 0.105 |
As shown in the table above, According to the
Goal ,
A
is the first priority. Next priorities are assigned to
B , C and D
according to the obtained weights.