The overall rating of each treatment is calculated by multiplying the weights for each rating by the assigned in the previous step. The total score for each treatment is the sum of the individual scores. The alternatives are ranked in order, from the highest score to the lowest. If the process is followed exactly, the alternative with the highest score is the one that is selected. A generic example that follows these steps is illustrated in Table 11-10. After developing ten alternatives, the six decision factors shown in the second row are selected and a relative weight is assigned to each factor so that their total adds up to 100 percent. Then each alternative is scored against each decision factor, and the result is entered in the upper triangle in the appropriate cell. The score is multiplied by the weighting at the top of the column in order to obtain the value entered in the lower triangle. Then all of the values in the lower triangle are summed across the row for each alternative to arrive at a total score. The alternative with the highest score is the one that best addresses all of the selected decision factors. In the case of ties or when two alternatives are very close, a more in-depth evaluation of each alternative is warranted, including a review of what factors are most critical for the specific rehabilitation project. Table 11-. Example worksheet of a selection process incorporating multiple selected decision factors and assigned weightings. Decision Factors in Cost of Cycle Life Traffic Ease Agency Control Proven Design Expected Life Repairing/ Maintaining Initial Total  25 15 20 15 10 15 Weightings Rank 60 60 100 80 90 100 Alternative 1 80 1 15 9 20 12 9 15 60 60 100 80 90 100 80 1 Alternative 2 15 9 20 12 9 15 60 60 70 50 60 40 Alternative 3 57.5 6 15 9 14 7.5 6 6 60 60 70 50 60 40 Alternative 4 57.5 6 15 9 14 7.5 6 6 60 40 100 80 100 90 Alternative 5 76.5 3 15 6 20 12 10 13.5 60 80 40 20 40 20 Alternative 6 45 9 15 12 8 3 4 3 40 60 40 50 50 30 Alternative 7 44 10 10 9 8 7.5 5 4.5 70 80 60 50 80 40 Alternative 8 63 5 17.5 12 12 7.5 8 6 100 100 20 20 40 40 Alternative 9 57 8 25 15 4 3 4 6
The overall rating of each treatment is calculated by multiplying the weights for each rating by the assigned in the previous step. The total score for each treatment is the sum of the individual scores. The alternatives are ranked in order, from the highest score to the lowest. If the process is followed exactly, the alternative with the highest score is the one that is selected. A generic example that follows these steps is illustrated in Table 11-10. After developing ten alternatives, the six decision factors shown in the second row are selected and a relative weight is assigned to each factor so that their total adds up to 100 percent. Then each alternative is scored against each decision factor, and the result is entered in the upper triangle in the appropriate cell. The score is multiplied by the weighting at the top of the column in order to obtain the value entered in the lower triangle. Then all of the values in the lower triangle are summed across the row for each alternative to arrive at a total score. The alternative with the highest score is the one that best addresses all of the selected decision factors. In the case of ties or when two alternatives are very close, a more in-depth evaluation of each alternative is warranted, including a review of what factors are most critical for the specific rehabilitation project. Table 11-. Example worksheet of a selection process incorporating multiple selected decision factors and assigned weightings. Decision Factors Initial Cost Life Cycle Expected Life Ease of Repairing/ Maintaining Traffic Control Proven Design in Agency Total Rank Weightings  25 15 20 15 10 15 Alternative 1 60 15 60 9 100 20 80 12 90 9 100 15 80 1 Alternative 2 60 15 60 9 100 20 80 12 90 9 100 15 80 1 Alternative 3 60 15 60 9 70 14 50 7.5 60 6 40 6 57.5 6 Alternative 4 60 15 60 9 70 14 50 7.5 60 6 40 6 57.5 6 Alternative 5 60 15 40 6 100 20 80 12 100 10 90 13.5 76.5 3 Alternative 6 60 15 80 12 40 8 20 3 40 4 20 3 45 9 Alternative 7 40 10 60 9 40 8 50 7.5 50 5 30 4.5 44 10 Alternative 8 70 17.5 80 12 60 12 50 7.5 80 8 40 6 63 5 Alternative 9 100 25 100 15 20 4 20 3 40 4 40 6 57 8
11%20Pavement%20Rehabilitation%20Strategies.docx