An integrated fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS model for supplier evaluation
Abstract
In today’s modern supply chains, the adequate suppliers’ choice has strategic meaning for entire companies’ business. The aim of this paper is to evaluate different suppliers using the integrated model that recognizes a combination of fuzzy AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) and the TOPSIS method. Based on six criteria, the expert team was formed to compare them, so determination of their significance is being done with fuzzy AHP method. Expert team also compares suppliers according to each criteria and on the base of triangular fuzzy numbers. Based on their inputs, TOPSIS method is used to estimate potential solutions. Suggested model accomplishes certain advantages in comparison with previously used traditional models which were used to make decisions about evaluation and choice of supplier.
References
Aggarwal, R., & Singh, S. (2013). AHP and Extent Fuzzy AHP Approach for Prioritization of Performance Measurement Attributes. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 73, 145-151.
Anagnostopoulos, K. P., Gratziou, M., & Vavatsikos, A. P. (2007). Using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for selecting wastewater facilities at prefecture level. European Water, 19(20), 15-24.
Ayhan, M. B. (2013). A Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection problem: a case study in a gear motor company. International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains 4(3), (2013), pp. 11-23.
Ballı, S., & Korukoğlu, S. (2009). Operating system selection using fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods. Mathematical and Computational Applications, 14(2), 119-130.
Barbarosoglu, G., & Yazgac, T. (1997). An application of the analytic hierarchy process to the supplier selection problem. Production and inventory management journal, 38(1), 14.
Benyoucef, M., & Canbolat, M. (2007). Fuzzy AHP-based supplier selection in e-procurement. International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 3(2), 172-192.
Bhutta, K. S., & Huq, F. (2002). Supplier selection problem: a comparison of the total cost of ownership and analytic hierarchy process approaches. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 7(3), 126-135.
Bronja, H., & Bronja, H. (2015). Two-phase selection procedure of aluminized sheet supplier by applying fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methodology. Tehnički vjesnik, 22(4), 821-828.
Chan, F. T., & Kumar, N. (2007). Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega, 35(4), 417-431.
Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European journal of operational research, 95(3), 649-655.
Chen, C. T., Lin, C. T., & Huang, S. F. (2006). A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management. International journal of production economics, 102(2), 289-301.
Chen, S. J., & Hwang, C. L. (1992). Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Berlin: Springer
Davoudi, M. R., & Sheykhvand, K. (2007). Enterprise Architecture Analysis Using AHP and Fuzzy AHP. In Proceedings of 2011 4th IEEE International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology (ICCSIT 2011). VOL07 (pp. 202-207).
Ertugrul, I.; Karakasoglu, N. (2006). The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for supplier selection and an application in a textile company. Proceedings of 5th international symposium on intelligent manufacturing systems, pp. 195-207.
Fazlollahtabar, H., Eslami, H., & Salmani, H. (2010). Designing a fuzzy expert system to evaluate alternatives in fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 3(04), 409.
Haq, A. N., & Kannan, G. (2006). Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process for evaluating and selecting a vendor in a supply chain model. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 29(7-8), 826-835.
Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24.
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attributes decision making methods and applications.Berlin: Springer.
Kabir, G., & Hasin, M. A. A. (2011). Comparative analysis of AHP and Fuzzy AHP models for multicriteria inventory classification. International Journal of Fuzzy Logic Systems, 1(1), 1-16.
Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., & Ruan, D. (2004). Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: The case of Turkey. International Journal of Production Economics, 87(2), 171-184.
Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., & Ulukan, Z. (2003). Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logistics Information Management, 16(6), 382-394.
Karpak, B., Kumcu, E., & Kasuganti, R. R. (2001). Purchasing materials in the supply chain: managing a multi-objective task. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 7(3), 209-216.
Kilincci, O., & Onal, S. A. (2011). Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company. Expert systems with Applications, 38(8), 9656-9664.
Lee, A. H. (2009). A fuzzy supplier selection model with the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. Expert systems with applications, 36(2), 2879-2893.
Mahmoodzadeh, S., Shahrabi, J., Pariazar, M., & Zaeri, M. S. (2007). Project selection by using fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS technique. International Journal of Human and social sciences, 1(3), 135-140.
Mikhailov, L. (2003). Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgements. Fuzzy sets and systems, 134(3), 365-385.
Nooramin, A. S., Kiani Moghadam, M., Moazen Jahromi, A. R., & Sayareh, J. (2012). Comparison of AHP and FAHP for selecting yard gantry cranes in marine container terminals. Journal of the Persian Gulf, 3(7), 59-70.
Nydick, R. L., & Hill, R. P. (1992). TJsing the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Structure the Supplier Selection Procedure.
Özdağoğlu, A., & Özdağoğlu, G. (2007). Comparison of AHP and fuzzy AHP for the multi-criteria decision making processes with linguistic evaluations.
Prasad Raja S.V.S.; Chalapathi Venkata P. (2013). Evaluation of Impact of Safety Training Programme in Indian Construction Industry – Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach, International Journal of Engineering, Business and Enterprise Applications, 7(1), pp. 49-54.
Saaty, T. L. (1986). Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Management science, 32(7), 841-855.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International journal of services sciences, 1(1), 83-98.
Saaty, T. L. (2003). Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European journal of operational research, 145(1), 85-91.
Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European journal of operational research, 48(1), 9-26.
Saaty, T. L. (1988). What is the analytic hierarchy process? (pp. 109-121). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process”, Mc Graw‐Hill, NewYork
Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2012). Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process (Vol. 175). Springer Science & Business Media.
Shukla, R. K., Garg, D., & Agarwal, A. (2014). An integrated approach of Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS in modeling supply chain coordination. Production & Manufacturing Research, 2(1), 415-437.
Srichetta, P., & Thurachon, W. (2012). Applying Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process to Evaluate and Select Product of Notebook Computers. International Journal of Modelling and Optimization. Department of Computer Science and Information Technology, Faculty of Science, Udon Thani Rajabhat University.
Stević Ž.; Vesković S.; Vasiljević M.; Tepić G. (2015a). The selection of the logistics center location using AHP method. / University of Belgrade, Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, LOGIC,/ Belgrade, pp. 86-91
Stević Ž.; Božičković Z.; Mićić B. (2015b). Optimization of the import of Chipboard - a case study, International Journal of Engineering, Business and Enterprise Applications, 14(1), September-November, pp. 19-23
Stević Ž.; Alihodžić A.; Božičković Z.; Vasiljević M.; Vasiljević Đ. (2015c). Application of combined AHP-TOPSIS model for decision making in management. / 5th International conference „Economics and Management -based On New Technologies“ EMONT /Vrnjačka Banja, Serbia, pp. 33-40
Sun, C. C. (2010). A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert systems with applications, 37(12), 7745-7754.
Vaidya, O. S., & Kumar, S. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. European Journal of operational research, 169(1), 1-29.
Verma, R., & Pullman, M. E. (1998). An analysis of the supplier selection process. Omega, 26(6), 739-750.
Wang, Y. M., & Chin, K. S. (2011). Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: A logarithmic fuzzy preference programming methodology. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 52(4), 541-553.
Wang, Y. M., Luo, Y., & Hua, Z. (2008). On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 186(2), 735-747.
Weber, C. A., Current, J. R., & Benton, W. C. (1991). Vendor selection criteria and methods. European journal of operational research, 50(1), 2-18.
Xu, Z., & Liao, H. (2014). Intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 22(4), 749-761.
Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), pp. 338-353.
Zeydan, M., Çolpan, C., & Çobanoğlu, C. (2011). A combined methodology for supplier selection and performance evaluation. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 2741-2751.
Zhang, L. (2010). Comparison of classical analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach and fuzzy AHP approach in multiple-criteria decision making for commercial vehicle information systems and networks (CVISN) project.
Zhu, K. J., Jing, Y., & Chang, D. Y. (1999). A discussion on extent analysis method and applications of fuzzy AHP. European journal of operational research, 116(2), 450-456.
The Author wishes to submit the Work to SJM for publication. To enable SJM to publish the Work and to give effect to the parties’ intention set forth herein, they have agreed to cede the first right to publication and republication in the SJM Journal.
Cession
The Author hereby cedes to SJM, who accepts the cession, to the copyright in and to the paper.
The purpose of the cession is to enable SJM to publish the Work, as first publisher world-wide, and for republication in the SJM Journal, and to grant the right to others to publish the Work world-wide, for so long as such copyright subsists;
SJM shall be entitled to edit the work before publication, as it deems fit, subject to the Authors approval
The Author warrants to SJM that:
- the Author is the owner of the copyright in the Work, whether as author or as reassigned from the Author’s employee and that the Author is entitled to cede the copyright to SJM;
- the paper (or any of its part) is not submitted or accepted for publication in any other Journal;
- the Work is an original work created by the Author;
- the Author has not transferred, ceded, or assigned the copyright, or any part thereof, to any third party; or granted any third party a licence or other right to the copyright, which may affect or detract from the rights granted to SJM in terms of this agreement.
The Author hereby indemnifies the SJM as a body and its individual members, to the fullest extent permitted in law, against all or any claims which may arise consequent to the warranties set forth.
No monetary consideration shall be payable by SJM to the Author for the cession, but SJM shall clearly identify the Author as having produced the Work and ensure that due recognition is given to the Author in any publication of the Work.
Should SJM, in its sole discretion, elect not to publish the Work within 1 year after the date of this agreement, the cession shall lapse and be of no further effect. In such event the copyright shall revert to the Author and SJM shall not publish the Work, or any part thereof, without the Author’s prior written consent.