How to make the right choice when buying an apartment? Try to solve this issue from a scientific point of view using the mathematical method for finding the optimal option.
According to the quality indicator, the "Social infrastructure" apartment received only 8Balls, despite the fact that on the first floor of the house there is a shop, near the small square and school with a sports field. All spoiled the TEC pipe sticking in front windows. Hatting a little daughter really liked the playground in the neighboring yard, adults were inexorab.
The lively avenue can be seen only from the loggia, and from other windows the panorama of the city opens. It is especially good in the evening illuminated Gazprom building. The store is not very close, but it is near the neighboring school there is a little stadium who really liked the sports dad. Vitoga-10Ballles unanimously according to the qualitative indicator "View from the window".
The apartment received 9balls according to the qualitative indicator "Social infrastructure". Despite the industrial landscape under the windows - a huge garage and pipes of the CHP and the remoteness of the store from home, grandmother really liked. It turned out to be important for her that in the Vorontsov Park, a ten minute walk, there is a small operating church.
Remember the porched phrase: "Let there be an abundance ..."? And who could think that abundance would bring so much unexpected problems with him! Many of us have already managed to make sure that the abundance of goods on the market creates the so-called choice problem.
Not far left the time about which the elderly has already begun to forget, and young and do not know when, when buying furniture, refrigerator, car and many other things, the main question "Where and how to get the right thing?". I had to stand for hours and even for years in line, coming every day marked.
Now the situation has changed noticeably: there are practically no queues, there are many products. However, it is sometimes very difficult to decide on the purchase, even if the price does not bother, another modern problem is the problem of choice. For example, as a large number of vacuum cleaners, choose a small, inexpensive, beautiful, economical, silent, durable and well-working. The same dilemma arises when buying an apartment, choosing a place of work and residence, type of commercial activity or a way to store savings, kindergarten and school for a child, vacation venue and so on.
Simplify the procedure for selecting, make it visual, and the result reliable allows the technique that has been successfully used in the technique when searching for the optimal option. We will explain her essence using the table. The technique provides for a sequential execution of a series of actions (steps).
Step one - Determination of the most significant properties (quality indicators) required to compare options. The number of these indicators (n) is set within 5-8. Accidentally, when choosing a brand of vacuum cleaner, the main criteria will be economy, efficiency, price, and so on. But if it is supposed to use the subject as an element of the interior, the color and form are also important.
Step two - Assessment of the importance (weight) of the selected indicators. For example, in the case of the same vacuum cleaner, it should be found out that and how much for the buyer is more significant: low price or greater suction force. Thus, the coefficient of weights is determined (a). Its value is taken in the range from0 to1 (0.05; 0.15; 0.35 ...). It is clear that the more important than the quality indicator, the more evaluating its factor of the weigher. True, there is one limitation: the sum of coefficients for all essential properties (A1, A2, ... An) should be equal to 1.
Step Third - Comparison of alternative options: How fully each of them meets the requirements of this quality indicator, resulting in a preliminary assessment (b) on a 10-point scale. The option that turns out to be the best is maximum evaluation. So, the cheapest vacuum cleaner will necessarily receive 10 points in terms of "low price", and according to the "power of suction", for example, 7, because its power is inferior to others.
Step fourth - calculation of the final estimate (c) of the option for each of the indicators. This requires primary estimates (B1, B2 ... BN) to multiply onto their coefficients A1, A2 ... Ан. If on the fifth quality indicator (A5) in the second embodiment, the warehouse coefficient is 0.3, and the primary assessment (B5) 8 points, then the final (B5) will be 2.4 points.
Pitch fifth - Calculation of the sum of the final estimates (c) of each competing option, which is carried out by adding all final estimates (B1, B2 ... BN) for all quality indicators.
Step Six - The choice of the best option, the definition of the "winner". It is enough to compare the amounts received and record the results in the table.
A specific example of how it is impossible to illustrate the resolution of the problematic selection situation using the described method.
A young family (husband, wife and five-year-old daughter) After a long thought accepted a strategic decision to buy a new apartment. Immediately there were tactical questions "What should she be, how to find it and where to buy?". On an expanded family council (the presence of the grandmother is explained by its active participation in the education of granddaughter) after long discussions, wishes and financial capabilities, a sufficiently modest list of mandatory claims were identified, which should satisfy the new apartment: three separate rooms, a useful area of 45-50 m2, a loggia or balcony, separate bathroom and kitchen at least 7m2; Parquet floors in residential rooms, ordinary decoration of the apartment (windows, doors, wallpapers and plumbing), moderate price; Any floor, in addition to the first and last, district of the metro station "Academic" - "Kaluga", no more than 15 minutes of walking; Brick house, panel, etc., but surely new, windows should not look north.
The set of requirements for the apartment is obvious and does not require explanation.
The decision of the other tactical issues was entrusted with a real estate company. Quakely surprised, she had not prompted not one after a week, but three apartments that satisfied the stated wishes, but differed (cm.risunki) from each other area, layout, kitchen size, floor, environment, etc.
Explanation of apartments
| Premises | Apartments | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| First, Figure 1 | Second, Figure 2 | Third, Figure 3 | |
| Living room, m2. | 22,1 | 18.3 | 17.9 |
| Kitchen, m2. | 8.0 | 7.5 | 8,7 |
| Bedroom, m2. | 14.8. | 11.6. | 12.7 |
| Children's, m2. | 9,4. | 10.5 | 11.3. |
| Balcony, m2. | - | 3.5 | 2,3. |
| Loggia, m2. | 6.7 | — | 7,2 |
| Total area, m2 | 64.5 | 70.5 | 70.6 |
| Useful area, m2 | 46.3. | 40.4 | 41.9 |
| Floor | Fourth | Tenth | Sixth |
The case helped them to get acquainted with this technique. The "scientific" method came as it is impossible by the way.
Characteristics, or quality indicators, apartments (where windows are watching, what floor, far away to the store, etc.) presented in the form of a table "Quality Indicators", marking as an asterisk their importance (the more asterisks, the more significant).
Filling the table passed without special disagreements. Now it remains to choose the best of the offered apartments. Once again, carefully reviewed, checked their records and came to the conclusion that all three apartments have equal conditions.
Next, the situation developed on the system of steps, as a result of which a summary table "The results of choosing the best apartment" appeared.
The first step is chosen eight most significant quality criteria by adding new important indicators. In order not to have any difficulties in determining primary estimates (b), the wording was given, if possible, concrete. For example, "Maximum kitchen size" means that the preference for this indicator will have an apartment with the greatest cuisine (10balls).
Invented a new criterion "convenient layout", taking into account the size of residential rooms, their location, utility premises, etc. The "Social infrastructure" is repelled by the environment (view from the windows of the apartment, the landscape of the entrance, the proximity of the stores, the availability of places for walking and sports activities, etc.).
The second step (definition of coefficients A) did not cause significant differences. A rather high rating was obtained by a "balcony / loggia". The fact is that the head of the family-avid athlete, and the prospect of remove the simulator from the apartment on the loggia seemed to everyone very tempting.
The third step caused prolonged disputes. But since there were a lot of estimates, the compromise was found.
The fourth and fifth steps (calculation and summation of estimates) occupied almost a few minutes.
The sixth step, the last, allowed to make the final choice. The "winner" with the amount of 9.15 Bull was the first apartment. Now in this apartment, our young family is engaged.
An incredulous reader can say that a person is trusted to make mistakes. Ito is absolutely fair. But if you want to get a reliable result, it will be very carefully considering the search for the optimal option and thereby minimize possible errors. This method is applicable both for collective selection and in the permissions of one person. It should be noted that when the participants in the discussion of options do not reach agreement on many issues, it is necessary to apply a more complex method "Ranking of the opinion of experts", but this is already the topic of another conversation.
A person always dreams that in the new year life will be better, incomes are greater, taxes are smaller, the prices are lower, the summer is warmer, the husband is smarter, the wife is younger ... and the new century comes, then the wishes become more ambitious. We hope that readers of our magazine will come true, and only the problems of the choice will be the most difficult, which they will safely decide, including with the help of the considered technique.
Results of comparison options
| Quality indicators | Welcome coefficients (a) | Preliminary (b) and final (c) assessment of quality indicators for compared options | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First | Second | The third | |||||
| First | A1. | B1. | IN 1 | B1. | IN 1 | B3. | IN 1 |
| Second | A2. | B2. | AT 2 | B2. | AT 2 | B3. | AT 2 |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| Last | AN. | BN | BN | BN | BN | BN | BN |
| Total (sum) | one | - | IN | - | IN | - | IN |
Quality indicators of apartments
| Quality indicators | Apartments | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| First, Figure 1 | Second, Figure 2 | Third, Figure 3 | |
| Useful area, m2 ** | 46.3. | 40.4 | 41.9 |
| Total area, m2 | 64.5 | 70.5 | 70.6 |
| The cost of the apartment, thousand $ *** | fifty | 46. | 42. |
| Room sizes, m2 ** | 22,1 + 14,8 + 9.4 | 18.3 + 11,6 + 10.5 | 17,9 + 12.7 + 11.3 |
| Kitchen size, m2 ** | 8.0 | 7.5 | 8,7 |
| Way to metro, min * | fifteen | five | 10 |
| Plate in the kitchen | Gas | Electric | Gas |
| Balcony / Loggia, M2 * | Loggia (6.7) | Balcony (3.5) | Loggia (7.2) Balcony (2,3) |
| Floor | Fourth | Tenth | Sixth |
| Nearest store, m | In the House | 100 | 150. |
| Social infrastructure * | Pipes CHP, School, Residential buildings, Sportsport | House "Gazprom", Square, courtyard with "shells" | Garage, courtyard with a playground and a 14-storey house |
| Where windows come out | North and Southwest | East and West. | East and West. |
The results of choosing the best apartment
| Quality indicators of apartments | Coefficient of exercise | Primary (b) and final (c) estimates of the quality of apartments | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First | Second | Third | |||||
| BUT | B. | IN | B. | IN | B. | IN | |
| Maximum useful area | 0.15 | nine | 1,35 | eight | 1,2 | 10 | 1.5 |
| Minimum cost of an apartment | 0.20 | 10 | 2.0 | nine | 1,8. | eight | 1,6 |
| Convenient layout | 0.15 | eight | 1,2 | 6. | 0.9 | 10 | 1.5 |
| Maximum kitchen size | 0.15 | 10 | 1.5 | eight | 1,2 | nine | 1,35 |
| Minimum path to the subway | 0.10. | eight | 0.8. | 10 | 1.0 | 6. | 0,6 |
| Where windows come out | 0.05 | eight | 0.4. | 7. | 0.35 | 10 | 0.5 |
| Social infrastructure | 0.10. | nine | 0.9 | 10 | 1.0 | eight | 0.8. |
| Balcony / Loggia | 0.10. | 10 | 1.0 | 6. | 0,6 | eight | 0.8. |
| Total (amount e) | 1.0 | - | 9,15 | - | 8.05 | - | 8,65 |