An aggregated fuzzy model for the selection of a managed security service provider

SHAHRASBI, Alireza, SHAMIZANJANI, Mehdi, ALAVIDOOST, M. H. and AKHGAR, Babak (2017). An aggregated fuzzy model for the selection of a managed security service provider. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 16 (3), p. 625.

Preview

PDF TheWholePaper.pdf - Accepted Version All rights reserved. Download (2MB) | Preview

Abstract

In this study, by analyzing the related literature, the companies providing security services and, more importantly, the data provided by a group of experts, a novel set of 39 criteria is extracted which assists the Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP) selection process. The set is further categorized into eight general classes. The validity and weights of these criteria are measured by a group of experts in Iran. Due to the large number and often conflicting criteria, and the qualitative nature of the evaluations of the service providers, fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methods (FMCDM) are adopted. In order to demonstrate the application of the proposed model, a numerical example is included, in which eight service providers are evaluated by four decision makers applying fuzzy TOPSIS, fuzzy VIKOR, fuzzy Group ELECTRE, and fuzzy SAW methods. Owing to the variations of the outputs of the applied MCDM methods, they are further analyzed by an aggregation method to propose a unique service provider. A comparison between the output of the aggregation method and the four applied Fuzzy MCDM methods is also made with the help of Euclidean, Hamming, Manhattan and Chebyshev distances. The comparison shows the minimum diversion between the outputs of the Fuzzy TOPSIS and the aggregation method, which indicates the appropriateness of the fuzzy TOPSIS method in this particular problem.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Managed security service provider selection; Information technology services outsourcing; Security outsourcing; Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making; Aggregation method; MCDM methods comparison
Research Institute, Centre or Group - Does NOT include content added after October 2018:	Cultural Communication and Computing Research Institute > Communication and Computing Research Centre
Departments - Does NOT include content added after October 2018:	Faculty of Science, Technology and Arts > Department of Computing
Identification Number:	https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622017500158
Page Range:	p. 625
Depositing User:	Helen Gibson
Date Deposited:	17 Feb 2017 17:31
Last Modified:	18 Mar 2021 15:20
URI:	https://shura.shu.ac.uk/id/eprint/15217

Actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads

Publication Metrics