Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Development: A Model Development Based on Turkish Government Agency's Strategic Planning Template

Strategy prioritizing in strategic plans requires evaluating large amount of information and data. Technically, this process is carried out by a heterogeneous planning team within an organization who are generally working in different departments and management levels. This situation creates a significant problem in group decision making and in its process since each and every group members may think their departments’ benefits when making a decision rather than overall organization’s goals and targets. To overcome this situation, this study looks for an alternative way for the group decision making which can enable groups to follow an objective path to overcome subjective views and decisions. Accordingly, the aim of this study is to develop a group decision making model based on the strategic planning template. Strategic planning template chosen for this study belongs one of the Turkish Government Agency operating in mining industry. Developed model was build based on the ANP-VIKOR hybrid method. Findings showed that the new developed model facilitates shorter decision making time, enables to get more benefit out of the group and allows analyzing large amount of rationality for the government agency.


Introduction
Strategy is the determination of the basic long term goals of an enterprise, and the adoption of courses of actions and the allocation of resources necessary to carry out these goals Chandler [6]. Based on this, strategic planning can be defined as the process of determining business, corporate strategies and performance measures on the bases of internal-external environment analysis by developing mission to reach the vision. In the management literature, strategic planning gained more popularity especially after the companies getting larger, more competitive and industries getting more complex and competitive Kelly [10]. Strategic planning involves continuously reviewing the internal and external environment and then making long term and short term decisions to ensure survival company. Indeed, strategic planning is the first and most important step in strategic management that can be affected from some sort of uncertainties. This general plan contains and motivates other types of departmental plans such as human resource planning, financial planning, production planning and marketing planning etc. It is because; strategic plan is the top management level plan which must be obeyed by the other functional management plans Raynor [13]. However, preparing and implementing a strategic plan is a hard job and requires a number of issues to be considered. Technically, successful strategic planning process can only be maintained by carrying out an effective research and analysis, ability to think strategically and consensus within a strategic planning team. Nevertheless, effective strategic decisions require more conditions. For example, objectivity is very important and thus strategy has to be determined according to interest of all departments not for the favour of any particular group and department Shenkar & Luo [15]. Similarly, effective analysis skills are also important since wrong analysis may lead to wrong decisions which in return may cause significant financial, people, commercial, quality, productivity losses and business failures. Likewise, to reach specific targets, strategic planning team develops different strategic alternatives. Different strategies mean different way to reach targets which have different cost, risk and benefit. Strategy selection among these different alternatives is very hard and controversial task especially when the strategic plan requires large amounts of data, analyses Drejer [8]. Despite the fact that there exists a number of strategic decisions making tools which can help groups to achieve strategic decisions such as SWOT analysis, PESTEL analysis, critical success factor analysis, cultural web analysis, process mapping, causes effect analysis, problem definition sheets and brainstorming, many of these tools has a lack of ability in prioritizing strategies because of their non-analytic nature, thus, cannot provide ultimate solution for the group decision making. Besides that, many of these tools were not created based on a particular industry and were not customized for the governmental organizations' cultures and structures. Carlsen & Andersson [5]. Therefore, the aim of this study is set as to design a model for prioritizing strategies of a strategic planning template of a chosen governmental organization. For doing this, Strategic Planning Template of Turkish Government Agency is used as template. This template is prepared by the Turkish government and used in all government's organizations. Therefore, the model which will be proposed in this study will be able to be used by the all Turkish government's organizations. In this context, this study offers several contributions and originality. First of all, most of the strategy prioritization research and studies are conducted in developed countries. Thus, by conducting this study in Turkey, this research will help filling the gap exists in the literature. Secondly, most of the strategy related studies (i.e. strategic planning, strategy prioritization etc.) mostly done in the context of private organizations. However, this study is based on the public organization which gives a new insight in understanding the importance of strategic planning and prioritization of the strategies. In addition, the model which will be provided in this study can be used in other public organizations in Turkey as well as in other developing countries. This can improve the productivity of the public organizations and thus overall economy of the developing countries.
As defined by Robinson [14] strategic planning involves all necessary management disciplines including planning, organizing, and control. Expressed in another way, strategic planning is the course of action that necessitates the definition and implementation of a company's mission by means of synchronizing the capabilities of the company with the demands of the environment Dessler [7]. It is possible to delineate the features of strategic planning as looking out, looking in and looking ahead. Looking out can be described as discovering the external setting of a company in order to determine realizable goals and identify major skills in the company while looking in stands for the evaluation of the internal setting of the company such as the management team which is the key aim, economics, and further fundamental resources to support the given current assets Bonn [3]. Then again, looking ahead can be described as merging the strategy, structures and assets of a company for the purpose of achieving set objectives. This also includes the need for scrutinizing and fine-tuning the process in times of necessity Brinkerhoff [4]. Below, the factors of strategic planning are explained briefly Dessler Despite it is significantly used by the organizations, SWOT Analysis which is a process ideally used alongside many other models and processes to assess an organization and determine the most important issue to focus on has number of weaknesses when it is used by the groups in decision makings. In principle, it is possible to define this problem as an unstructured decision problem. It is a difficult task to categorize these types of problems since they encompass a great deal of vagueness, a number of variables and limitations. The fundamental directive of this problem is prioritizing the options provided by the SWOT elements. In fact, SWOT elements involve various stochastic factors and the majority of which are uncontrollable and act erratically. Therefore, it is not possible to estimate the practicability, costs and time needed for the execution of those elements precisely. In addition, the decisions, mainly the group decisions, are based on human reasoning. No matter if the given humans are professionals, the features of human reasoning involves subjectivity and vagueness. Usually, it is also hard to attain a right consensus. Likewise, human brain is capable of dealing data in small quantities in one time and thus it is rather hard to take healthy group decisions. This calls for the combination of all professionals' views and handling Turkish Government Agency's Strategic Planning Template the decision problem by taking into account all the factors given above. It is important to do this since taking the correct decision regarding the choice of strategy, particularly in the management levels, contributes a considerable degree of added-value to the company. This causes the strategy ranking problem to be considered as very important since the accomplishing the companies' objectives depend on the choosing right strategies. Explanations made in the previous paragraphs confirm the significance of strategy ranking and selection problem. Therefore, mathematical methods should be used in prioritising the strategies. In this way starting from the early 2000s, scholars have commenced to model this decision in a mathematical manner. Initially, they implemented a multi-criteria decision making technique in order to formulate the SWOT elements. First these methods was emerged in 2001, Kangas and others combined SWOT analysis and AHP to prioritize sub-SWOT factors, then evaluate strategies according to prioritized SWOT information. Finish Forest Certification case is analysed by that method (Kangas and others, 2001). In 2003, multi-criteria based strategy selection method is used to compare tourism strategies of two different towns Kajanus & others [17]. Combination of SWOT and AHP methods applied to strategic plan of a medical service to increase their portfolio of clients (Osuna and Aranda [18]. In 2007 Turkish researchers analyzed Turkish textile industry and make strategy suggestions with using SWOT-ANP hybrid method. They prioritize strategy alternatives of a textile firm by using ANP part of this method Yüksel & Dağdeviren[19]. TOPSIS method was used with SWOT analysis to prioritize strategies Ghorbani and others [20]. After these studies, some researchers propose a number of different calculating techniques for SWOT elements which are sorts of group decision techniques for assessments of pairs. Moreover, they recommend that their technique is modelled through the addition of stochastic and fuzzy characteristics which may increase the sensitivity of judgment. However, all of the motioned developments were not enough to provide a better strategic decision making model. Limitations are shown below:  In case a strategy selection problem is considered, following a complete SWOT analysis, a scenario analysis should also be performed. The reason intended for this is that strategic plans are long-standing plans addressing the future. Therefore, developed projects intend for external environment's state of affairs in the future. It is the responsibility of strategy professionals to devise strategies for future circumstances through the employment of estimation methods and workshop methods. They contribute the information they gather through this onto the results of the SWOT analysis when they are assessing the strategy options. Nevertheless, the analytic strategy selection methods in the literature do not involve any scenario analysis. The sole analysis criteria for them are the SWOT analysis results. It is a fact that modelling scenario analysis in an analytical way is a difficult task. However, taking scenario analysis into account also enhances the soundness of the model. The mere research which takes scenario analysis into account when modelling the strategy selection problem is that of Leskinen & others [11]. Nonetheless, the work of Leskinen & others [11] could not succeed in generating sufficient effect on other scholars towards enhancing the studies in this direction.  All strategy selection hybrid techniques available in the literature have two levels, which are SWOT analysis and alternative strategies. Each strategic technique is formed to arrange strategies of a strategic plan according to the importance degrees. In fact, prioritization of strategies in a strategic plan is a more difficult and problematical issue.  In the strategic planning methodology, strategy concept is divided into three levels, which are strategic goals, strategic targets and strategies. Moreover, each technique used for prioritization or selection of strategy is formed in order to assess a considerable deal of strategic information.
Contemplating from this point of view, it can be suggested that present analytic strategy selection or prioritization methods are insufficient in terms of coverage.  Theoretically, it is a difficult task to perform pair-wise comparison for assessing the SWOT factors, secondary factors and alternative strategies. While a number of scholars propose a number of alternative data comparison methods they are not efficient in providing the results.
As a consequence of these results, this study concentrates on establishing a multi-criteria decision making technique incorporated with strategic goals, strategic targets and strategies prioritization technique for the course of strategic planning.

Materials and Methods
Since the task at hand is to model a strategy ranking component of a strategic plan, a strategic planning template needs to be employed. Strategic planning templates are outlines which are used for devising plans based on a pattern. The template used in this research is called as the Strategic Plan Guide of Government Agencies that is summarized in Table 1. provided by the Turkish Government. In Turkey, every governmental agency needs to devise strategic plans according to the Government Financial Audit and Control Law (Law no. 5018). This strategic plan comprise of the objectives of the governmental agency in the medium and long term, fundamental principles and policies, objectives and priorities, performance measures, strategies that should be performed to accomplish them.

ANP-VIKOR Hybrid Strategy Prioritization Method
In a strategic planning course, a fundamental task is to choose the strategy to prioritize. In principle, the entire process of planning is performed in order to choose the correct strategies. Typically, it is the job of the strategic planning team to deal with the selection of the strategy through a number of workshop methods such as brainstorming, Delphi method, cause-and-effect schemas or assessment matrices. The mentioned techniques fall short in performing perfectly in a short interval, with the involvement of the entire team and in an objective manner. In the current research, a multi-criteria decision support technique is generated for making a healthy group decision and negotiation course available.
In principle, this model comprises of the incorporation of ANP and VIKOR techniques to strategic planning information. Figure 1 Baylan & Erensal [2] illustrates strategic decision hierarchy of strategic planning template. It also gives idea how ANP-VIKOR technique can be used in government agencies' strategic planning: ANP-VIKOR hybrid strategy prioritization technique consists of two levels. In the first level of the technique, ANP method is used for prioritizing strategic targets. A systematic network which combines vision statement, fundamental SWOT elements, secondary SWOT elements, strategic goals and strategic targets is developed for the construction of the first part. Figure 2 Baylan & Erensal [2] which is the Analytic Network Model of Strategic Target Prioritization Process presents how this information can be used in the construction of the first part of the model.
The ultimate objective of this part is to understand the strategic targets of the company and prioritize these targets in order to their importance. In doing this, first of all, strategic objectives which are determined based on the SWOT factors should be compared pairwise. Following to this, sub-SWOT factors should be compared pairwise in order to further prioritize the strategies. Pairwise comparison questions of this network model are listed in Appendix. For example pairwise comparisons table for strategic goals with respect to vision statement is as below; As an example of model, strategic goal statements of General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration's (2015-2019) strategic plan STRATEGIC GOAL 1: Producing information on land and on the seas in the field of geology according to our country's requirements and ensuring that the earth's crust is understood and utilized efficiently. STRATEGIC GOAL 2: Conducting exploration and research activities in accordance with the national and international production, consumption, import, export criteria and critical raw material predictions on minerals and energy raw materials and contributing to the assurance of reserve reliability in our country.
STRATEGIC GOAL 3: Conducting technological studies in accordance with our country's requirements, developing, diversifying and expediting analysis/testing services; in the field of geology and mining.
STRATEGIC GOAL 4: Researching and promoting the history of nature and contributing to the efforts for protecting geological heritage. STRATEGIC GOAL 5: Developing and strengthening the corporate structure Pairwise comparison questions of ANP part of decision model represented in Appendix Table 13. As an example, pairwise comparisons table for strategic goals with respect to vision statement is as below; After construction of pairwise comparison matrices, consistency ratio is to be calculated. Consistency ratio measures how much consistent the experts scaled pairwise comparison matrices. To calculate consistency ration two formula needed as below; . . = . . (2) C.I.: Consistency index : Eigen value of pairwise comparison matrix : Number of elements in pairwise comparison matrix . . ∶ Random consistency index. R.I. is derived from Random Consistency Index as shown in Table 3.
. : Consistency ratio of pairwise comparison matrix These pairwise comparisons (show its scale in Table 2) are supposed to be made by strategic planning team. This evaluation process allows speed decision making, possibility of deciding without any hierarchic pressure and ability of evaluating large number of information. After pairwise comparison tables are filled eigenvectors of every table are calculated to allocate initial supermatrix of ANP model.
Following to pairwise comparison, results must be entered to Supermatrix in order to prioritize the strategies that is shown in Table 3 Baylan & Erensal [2]. Elements of Supermatrix form of ANP model are listed as below; V: Vision statement of foundation. S: Strengths cluster of foundation as a general caption.
We: Weaknesses cluster of foundation as a general caption.
O: Opportunities cluster of foundation as a general caption.
T: Threats cluster of foundation as a general caption. S 1 ,,,,,S k : Each strength statement of foundation. k is number of strength statements.
We 1 ,,,,,We v : Each weaknesses statement of foundation. v is number of weaknesses statements.
O 1 ,,,,,,O z : Each opportunity statement of foundation. z is number of opportunity statements.
T 1 ,,,,,,T y : Each threat statement of foundation. y is number of threat statements.
SG 1 ,,,,,,SG s: Each strategic goals of foundation. s is number of strategic goal statements.
ST 1 ,,,,,,ST g : Each strategic target of foundation. g is number of strategic target statements. Limit matrix operations are performed to initial supermatrix of ANP model, than Limiting Global Supermatrix is obtained and shown in Table 4 Baylan & Erensal [2]. Limitin Global Supermatrix gives same global priority vector in the same column which involves priority ratios of strategic plan elements To continue second layer of decision model, priority values of strategic targets are (ST1, ST2,,,,, STg) needed. They are normalized to distribute their weights to performance targets. To achieve this Global Priority Vector should be performed: � Weights of strategic targets are supposed to be extracted from Global Priority Vector for normalizing. Weights of Strategic targets are derived from the above formula; WST is symbolized form of Weight of Strategic target. In strategic plan Strategic targets have their own performance targets and in second layer of decision performance target's priorities are supposed to be used. Therefore, normalized WST values are calculated at the end of first layer of decision method for finding out weights of every performance target by distributing their own priority ratio on their performance targets.
Strategic Target Weight Vector is calculated as below; After strategic target's weight is normalized by a simple operation, Figure 3 Baylan & Erensal [2] shows that they are distributed related performance targets. Performance target's weights are symbolized with WPTu; With the determination of performance target's weights, ANP part of ANP-VIKOR strategy prioritization method is ended. Namely, the results of ANP are used for the VIKOR model.
VIKOR part of this method aims to prioritize strategy alternatives of firms. VIKOR method is used in this model it is because negotiation of strategic planning team is an important factor. Model's inputs are described as below; Decision Criteria: Performance indicators of strategic plan are assumed as decision criteria of VIKOR model. Their weights come from result ANP model results which is distribution of strategic target normalized prioritization values on performance targets.
Decision Alternatives: All strategy alternatives of strategic targets are assumed as decision alternatives of VIKOR model.
Decision Alternatives Impact on Decision Criteria: Technically, strategies are developed to reach performance target. But strategy alternatives are not developed clear enough to get their forecast of the impact on performance targets. Technically, strategies are developed to perform by the foundation. They are usually broken down into projects to enter into details. In this method, this hint is used. To forecast the strategy impact on performance targets, strategies are broken down into projects. Basically, strategy impact on performance targets can be measured by using following formulas: Strategy impact on performance target (SPju)= Performance Target (PTu) X Strategy Feasibility Ratio(STRFj) X Strategy Impact on Performance Target Ratio(STRIju) Those ratios above defined as percentages. percentage calculation involves project feasibility analysis. Projects total feasibilities are calculated by depending on project technical, financial, duration and resource feasibility and in doing this, following parameters can be used. Table 5 Baylan & Erensal [2] represents Project Feasibility Coefficients which will be used find Strategy Feasibility Ratio. 16 Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Development: A Model Development Based on Turkish Government Agency's Strategic Planning Template After those calculations ratio is derived for each strategy. (STRI m ) value is estimated by some project output forecasting methods. PIPT mpr : Project Impact on Performance Target (When making these calculations, synergy of projects must be considered. It is because this formula is deriving for cumulative impact of projects). After decision elements of VIKOR method is determined properly, initial VIKOR table which is shown in Table 6 Baylan & Erensal [2] can be constructed to find(SP ju ) the effect of strategy performance of j on performance target u. Initial VIKOR Condition 1 -Acceptable advantage: In ranking with STR 2 and Q, STR 2 is at the second place.
DQ 1/(m-1) m is number of decision alternatives in table.
Condition 2-Acceptable balance for decision making: For being an balanced and agreed solution (for STR 1 ), it must be ranked at the first place on S j and R j list [22] If one condition is not satisfied, we consider those two other conditions below; Unless only second condition is satisfied, STR 1 in the first sequence and STR 2 in the second sequence are determined as best common agreed solution.
Unless first condition is satisfied, rank list at the end of step 11 is involved by best agreed solution set. Max m is determined by the equation below; After strategies are prioritised they are distributed to their related strategic target, if it fits the conditions, Q values of strategy alternatives are sequenced in an increasing order (otherwise other calculations to be made), then they are allocated to related strategies of strategic targets. Thus, most appropriate strategy combination can be selected easily.
Following to finalising the VIKOR application, Strategy Prioritisation Results of ANP-VIKOR Hybrid Method can be drawn as on Table 7 Baylan & Erensal [2].

Application of Model: Case Study Application of ANP-VIKOR Hybrid Method to General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration's (2015-2019) Strategic Plan
In Turkey, there is big government foundation which is in charge of mine research and exploration which is called "General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration". This general directorate is hierarchically connected to "Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources" GDMRE has 12 regional directorates in the country. Mission statement of GDMRE is "Producing and deploying knowledge to contribute the nation's welfare by conducting the research, analyze and infrastructure development activities on earth sciences and mining. Table  8 Baylan & Erensal [2] summarizes Fundamental Strategies and Strategic Areas of General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (GDMRE) [21] . That information is evaluated by ANP method and strategic targets prioritization model is solved by superdecisions software and network representation of mode is illustrated on Figure 4 Baylan & Erensal [2]   After strategic targets are prioritised by ANP method, their normalised values are distributed on their related performance targets. Table 10 Baylan & Erensal [2] represents the prioritized strategic targets. Example of Strategic target weight distribution on related performance targets represented on Table 11 Baylan & Erensal [2] In Turkey, strategic planning plans which are open public version do not involve all strategy alternatives. They only involve only selected strategy alternatives for particular strategic targets. Because of this circumstance, in this study, 61 new strategies are developed for strategic targets by experts. There are 21 strategic targets in the original plan. Almost three strategies are assigned on each strategic target. Each strategy is broken down into projects and their feasibilities are forecasted. Sub-projects of strategies and their feasibility ratios are shown in Table 11 Baylan & Erensal [2]. Table 10. Example of Strategic target weight distribution on related performance targets [21]   where researchers who can make professional academic level of scientific researches will work and that will be supported by the MTA budget.
1 0 0,751 0,048 STR 2 : To make arrangements to ensure the periodic appointment of worldwide foreign academicians who are specialized in the field of geosciences in the MTA and to provide appropriate environment in which they can work.
Initial VIKOR model of ANP-VIKOR Hybrid Method is constructed with respect to matrix represented on Table 15 Baylan & Erensal [2].
At the end of VIKOR calculations all strategy alternatives are sequenced according to increasing order of their Q values, because it satisfies the last step of VIKOR conditions. An example of strategy prioritization table is below which belongs to first strategic target. This strategic target has three different strategies. Strategy 1 that is underlined has the smallest Q value and that makes its priority and rank uppermost. That means Reaching the best way of "Conducting scientific studies to explain geological formations and events" strategic target is the strategy alternative "Within the MTA, to establish a scientific research center where researchers who can make professional academic level of scientific researches will work and that will be supported by the MTA budget". And strategy 2 and strategy 3 comes after that. In this method, it should be noted that priority values of strategies are found out as global values for strategic targets. That means strategies are not ranked by considering their own strategic targets. ANP-VIKOR method prioritize strategies by considering all strategic targets. Other prioritization tables are represented in Appendix.

Results and Discussion
In this study, ANP-VIKOR Strategy Prioritization method is applied to General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration's (2015-2019) strategic plan. ANP part of method is applied to original strategic plan information which are vision statement, SWOT analysis, strategic goals and strategic targets. In VIKOR model of method, original performance targets are assigned as decision criteria and strategies made up by experts are assumed as decision alternatives because whole real strategy alternatives are not included in strategic plan and also they are not very suitable to be broken down into projects. In application part, whole original strategic plan information is presented because some strategic information was very specific.
ANP-VIKOR Strategy prioritization method changes and improves traditional strategy prioritization process. During application study, effect of ANP-VIKOR Strategy Prioritization Method on experts and decision process is observed. Followings are the results:  Without applying any pressure on the strategic planning team, individuals were able to analyze the SWOT analysis factors, strategic targets and performance targets in an analytic manner through paired comparisons.  The ANP-VIKOR hybrid method combines with a mathematical, the vision of the corporation of which a strategies plan is made, the SWOT analysis, strategic purposes, strategic targets, performance targets and strategy alternatives.  The ANP-VIKOR hybrid method enables the strategic planning team to assess excessive SWOT analysis and strategy information in a short amount of time.


The pairwise comparisons part of the method ensures that the strategic planning team eliminates the unimportant SWOT factors, strategic targets, strategic objectives and performance targets. That's because the pair comparisons use the 1-9 scale. This scale provides that very unimportant and inefficient factors are disclosed through comparison with other factors.  The pairwise comparisons section of the method enables the members of the strategic planning team to make a mind exercise on the SWOT factors, strategic targets and performance targets before developing strategy alternatives. This analytic working phase enables the strategic planning team to produce more efficient strategy alternatives.


The pair comparisons section of the method enables the members of the strategic planning team to make a mind exercise on the SWOT factors, strategic targets and performance targets before developing strategy alternatives. This analytic working phase enables the strategic planning team to produce more efficient strategy alternatives.  The fact that all strategic plan components are dynamically bound to each other via a mathematical model enables the strategic planning team to conduct a sensitivity analysis on the strategic plan components. In other words, if the pairwise comparison values in the ANP-VIKOR model or if the strategy feasibility values in the VIKOR section are changed, such numerical changes can amend the priority sequences of the strategy. This enables the strategic planning team to test various ideas in the model.  The ANP-VIKOR hybrid method provides a dynamic strategy control to the strategic planning team. If a strategy cannot manifest sufficient performance during a strategy planning period that was selected as the most efficient one for a particular strategic target (that's because the feasibility coefficient and yielded outputs of a strategy are previously estimated in percentage), the second most efficient strategy can be commissioned without losing time.


At the end of the strategic planning period, the success of the strategies are measured by the extent, to which corporate targets could be reached. In a traditional strategic planning phase, no importance coefficient is assigned to performance targets through an analytic method. In the new ANP-VIKOR hybrid method however, the performance targets are distributed the importance coefficients of the strategic targets, which have been prioritized in the ANP model. This procedure enables the strategic planning team to measure the success of the strategies according to the weighted performance targets.  Traditionally in strategic plans, the strategy alternatives are only selected through assessment according to the strategic targets that they are affiliated with (there are specific strategy alternative groups that are produced for reaching individual strategic targets). However, the VIKOR section of the new ANP-VIKOR hybrid method enables the strategy alternatives to be assessed according to all performance targets.
This proposed method may cause some difficulties while implementation process. Extracting expert opinions in a very systematic way may requires teaching some details of ANP-VIKOR Hybrid Strategy Rankings method. Namely, some strategy experts are required to know some mathematical and algorithmic concepts. Besides that some experts involved in strategic planning team might prefers simpler methods that are like brainstorming, cause-effect diagrams, and fishbone diagrams. In those cases, a short training program about that novel method should be carried out.
Strategy ranking decision method development is multidisciplinary subject. Therefore, this study has two improving directions. Especially, for government foundations strategic planning guide, it can be said that some structured SWOT analysis template, strategic goals and targets template could be modelled for some similar foundations like municipalities, government hospitals, and government universities. These templates increase the speed of strategic planning process and also provide ease to use ANP-VIKOR strategy prioritization method. Actually, these templates could be combined with this novel method and used professionally for those similar government foundations. Secondly, improving direction is dealing with uncertainties. Human judgments and strategy impacts may also be considered as uncertain. Both of them may be evaluated in fuzzy or stochastic environment. To increase the precision of pairwise comparisons, fuzzy-ANP method could be used and also fuzzy-VIKOR method could be used while forecasting strategies impacts on performance targets. On the other hand, future impacts of strategies on performance targets can be modelled stochastic. In literature, analytic strategy ranking methods do not involve evaluation future scenario alternatives. They only deal with current situation analysis. If they add future scenarios in the model, they can consider future performance of strategy alternatives while prioritizing them.    To realize the procurement of remote sensing work of 700.000 km 2 by means of service procurement from consulting firms in the field of GIS.