Applying the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) for Software Requirements Prioritization: A Case Study on the Sky-up Synergy Platform
Undergraduate thesis applying the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to turn subjective stakeholder opinions into a mathematically consistent, consensus-based priority framework for IT governance and startup resource allocation, tested on the Sky-Up Synergy case.
Governance says what to control. It does not say what to do first.
Startup and organizational IT decisions often rely on subjective, ad hoc stakeholder judgment when prioritizing requirements and allocating limited resources, creating misalignment between what leadership envisions and what teams actually build.
This subjectivity compounds under time pressure: without a shared, defensible method for ranking priorities, teams default to whoever argues loudest — not what the evidence supports.
Decompose, compare in pairs, weight, then test the reasoning.
A build order that could be handed to the people it affected.
The result is a replicable framework for turning subjective stakeholder opinion into mathematically grounded, consensus-based priority rankings — applied here to Sky-Up Synergy's core epic scope, but structured to generalize to any startup or organization facing the same ad-hoc prioritization problem.