Customer-involved design concept evaluation (CDCE) is a key issue for developing new product welcomed by customers, but seldom studies have considered the integrated utilization of objective design values (DVs) and customers’ subjective preference values (PVs). Our previous study has attempted to fuse with DVs and PVs in CDCE, while this is only limit to few situations under benefit-like and cost-like evaluation criteria. For better CDCE, this study further fuses with DVs and PVs in more complex situations, and puts forward an improved version of rough distance to redefined ideal solution (RD-RIS II) in multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) scope to select the optimal concept. Different from old RD-RIS in previous study, RD-RIS II not only supports the ideal solution definition (ISD) processes for both quantitative and qualitative evaluation criteria, and but more importantly, it utilizes more useful information (value, feature, number and impact) from DVs and PVs to redefine the new positive ideal solution (PIS) and negative ideal solution (NIS). Through the rough distance calculation, the alternative which is close to PIS and far away from NIS is selected as the best one. Besides, the feasibility of RD-RIS II is validated via the application in real design evaluation example, and three empirical comparisons confirm that RD-RIS II makes more comprehensive decision than other MCDM-based evaluation methods, especially when the choices of customers and designers are conflicting, therefore it could provide more reasonable evaluation result which has better credibility and stability than others.

客户参与的设计概念评估（CDCE）是开发受客户欢迎的新产品的关键问题，但很少有研究考虑客观设计值（DVs）和客户主观偏好值（PVs）的综合利用。我们之前的研究试图在 CDCE 中与 DV 和 PV 融合，而这仅限于在类收益和类成本的评估标准下的少数情况。为了获得更好的CDCE，本研究进一步融合了更复杂情况下的DVs和PVs，并在多准则决策（MCDM）范围内提出了粗糙距离重新定义理想解（RD-RIS II）的改进版本来选择最佳概念。与以往研究中旧的 RD-RIS 不同，RD-RIS II 不仅支持定量和定性评估标准的理想解决方案定义 (ISD) 流程，更重要的是，它利用来自 DV 和 PV 的更多有用信息（价值、特征、数量和影响）来重新定义新的解决方案。正理想解（PIS）和负理想解（NIS）。通过粗略的距离计算，选择接近PIS和远离NIS的备选方案作为最佳方案。此外，RD-RIS II 的可行性通过在实际设计评估实例中的应用得到验证，三个实证比较证实 RD-RIS II 比其他基于 MCDM 的评估方法做出更全面的决策，尤其是在客户和设计师的选择时是矛盾的，