**5. Conclusions**

This paper has addressed issues related to the calculation and exploitation of the PCCM decisional tool employed in group decision making with AHP.

There are two particular contributions to the literature:


The case study proved that compatibility substantially improves, reaching values close to those of the AIJ procedure. Consistency also improved, guaranteeing that the judgments of the consensus matrix belong to the consistency stability intervals of all decision makers.

Although the proposal made in this paper has been focused on improving the compatibility of the PCCM, the procedure can be adapted and applied to any consensus matrix.

Future research will seek to establish other criteria that determine the sequence in which the judgments of the group consensus matrix are selected for modification. At the same time, future extensions of this research will include a comparison of the proposal set out in this paper with the recently published improvements made by the authors of [23] to their methodology.

**Author Contributions:** The paper has been elaborated jointly by the four authors.

**Funding:** This research was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness and FEDER funding, project ECO2015-66673-R.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors would like to acknowledge the work of English translation professional David Jones in preparing the final text.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
