Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİRLİK, RİSKLER VE SEZGİSEL BULANIK ORTAM ALTINDA SIRALAMA PROBLEMLERİ İÇİN ÇOK KRİTERLİ GRUP KARAR VERME YÖNTEMİ

Year 2023, Issue: 56, 123 - 137, 22.05.2023

Fatma Selen Madenoğlu

https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1129214

Abstract

Bu makale, sezgisel bulanık bir ortamda sıralama problemlerini düzgün bir şekilde yönetmek için bir grup karar verme mekanizması sunmaktadır. Sezgisel bulanık küme teorisi kapsamında çok kriterli karar verme (MCDM) yöntemi olan TOPSIS kullanılmaktadır. Bu çözüm tekniğinde karar verme problemlerinde kullanılan birtakım kriterler, karar vericiler grubunun tercihleri ve karar vericilerin önem düzeyleri incelenmektedir. Yöneticiler, sıralama yöntemlerini tedarikçi değerlendirme kararlarını vermek için güvenilir bir teknik olarak kullanır. Ayrıca, COVID-19 döneminden sonra tedarik zinciri malzeme sıkıntısı, ulaşım sorunları vb. sıkıntılardan muzdariptir, pratik ve kapsamlı bir araca olan ihtiyaç açıktır. Prosedürü adım adım detaylandırarak önerilen tekniğin uygulanabilirliğini göstermek için, COVID-19 sonrası dönemde sürdürülebilirliği ve riskleri dikkate alan bir tedarikçi seçimi sorununa ilişkin örnek bir vaka kullanılmıştır. Sonuçlar, sunulan metodolojinin diğer alanlara da uygulanabilir olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Çok kriterli karar verme Sezgisel Bulanık Kümeler TOPSIS Sürdürülebilirlik Risk

References

  • Alikhani, R., Torabi, S. A. and Altay, N. (2019). “Strategic supplier selection under sustainability and risk criteria”. International Journal of Production Economics, 208, 69-82.
  • Amiri, M. P. (2010). “Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods”. Expert systems with applications, 37(9), 6218-6224.
  • Atanassov, K. (1986). “Intuitionistic fuzzy sets”. Fuzzy sets and systems 20 (1), 87-96.
  • Bilgili, F., Zarali, F., Ilgün, M. F., Dumrul, C. and Dumrul, Y. (2022). “The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using intuitionistic fuzzy-TOPSIS method”. Renewable Energy, 189, 1443-1458.
  • Boran, F. E., Genç, S., Kurt, M. and Akay, D. (2009). “A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS method”. Expert systems with applications, 36(8), 11363-11368.
  • Chamodrakas, I. and Martakos, D. (2011). “A utility-based fuzzy TOPSIS method for energy efficient network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks”. Applied Soft Computing, 11(4), 3734-3743.
  • Chan, F. T., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M. K., Lau, H. C. and Choy, K. (2008). “Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach”. International Journal of production research, 46(14), 3825-3857.
  • Chang, B., Chang, C. W. and Wu, C. H. (2011). “Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria”. Expert systems with Applications, 38(3), 1850-1858.
  • Chen, W. and Zou, Y. (2017). “An integrated method for supplier selection from the perspective of risk aversion”. Applied Soft Computing, 54, 449-455.
  • Chen, Z., Ming, X., Zhou, T. And Chang, Y. (2020). “Sustainable supplier selection for smart supply chain considering internal and external uncertainty: An integrated rough-fuzzy approach”. Applied Soft Computing, 87, 106004.
  • Chou, S. Y. and Chang, Y. H. (2008). “A decision support system for supplier selection based on a strategy-aligned fuzzy SMART approach”. Expert systems with applications, 34(4), 2241-2253.
  • Chou, Y. C., Yen, H. Y., Dang, V. T. and Sun, C. C. (2019). “Assessing the human resource in science and technology for Asian countries: Application of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS”. Symmetry, 11(2), 251.
  • Dhiman, H. S. and Deb, D. (2020). “Fuzzy TOPSIS and fuzzy COPRAS based multi-criteria decision making for hybrid wind farms”. Energy, 202, 117755.
  • Fagundes, M. V., Hellingrath, B. andFreires, F. G. (2021). “Supplier selection risk: a new computer-based decision-making system with fuzzy extended AHP”. Logistics, 5(1), 13.
  • Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K. (1981). “Methods for multiple attribute decision making”, In Multiple attribute decision making (pp. 58-191), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  • Heizer, J. H. and Render, B. (2004). “Principles of operations management”. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
  • Kannan, D., Khodaverdi, R., Olfat, L., Jafarian, A. and Diabat, A. (2013). “Integrated fuzzy multi criteria decision making method and multi-objective programming approach for supplier selection and order allocation in a green supply chain”. Journal of Cleaner production, 47, 355-367.
  • Kannan, D., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L. and Jabbour, C. J. C. (2014). “Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: Using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company”. European Journal of operational research, 233(2), 432-447.
  • Krohling, R. A. And Campanharo, V. C. (2011). “Fuzzy TOPSIS for group decision making: A case study for accidents with oil spill in the sea”. Expert Systems with applications, 38(4), 4190-4197. Lee, A. H., Kang, H. Y., Hsu, C. F. and Hung, H. C. (2009). “A green supplier selection model for high-tech industry”. Expert systems with applications, 36(4), 7917-7927.
  • Li, G. D., Yamaguchi, D. and Nagai, M. (2007). “A grey-based decision-making approach to the supplier selection problem”. Mathematical and computer modelling, 46(3-4), 573-581.
  • Kumar, A., Jain, V. and Kumar, S. (2014). “A comprehensive environment friendly approach for supplier selection”. Omega, 42(1), 109-123.
  • Kuo, M. S., Tzeng, G. H. and Huang, W. C. (2007). “Group decision-making based on concepts of ideal and anti-ideal points in a fuzzy environment”. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45(3-4), 324-339.
  • Kuo, R. J., Wang, Y. C. and Tien, F. C. (2010). “Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection”. Journal of cleaner production, 18(12), 1161-1170.
  • Onu, P. U., Quan, X., Xu, L., Orji, J. and Onu, E. (2017). “Evaluation of sustainable acid rain control options utilizing a fuzzy TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis model frame work”. Journal of cleaner production, 141, 612-625.
  • Rouyendegh, B. D., Yildizbasi, A. And Üstünyer, P. (2020). “Intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method for green supplier selection problem”. Soft Computing, 24(3), 2215-2228.
  • Salih, M. M., Zaidan, B. B., Zaidan, A. A. and Ahmed, M. A. (2019). “Survey on fuzzy TOPSIS state-of-the-art between 2007 and 2017”. Computers & Operations Research, 104, 207-227.
  • Saputro, T. E., Figueira, G. and Almada-Lobo, B. (2022). “A comprehensive framework and literature review of supplier selection under different purchasing strategies”. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 108010.
  • da Silva, E. M., Ramos, M. O., Alexander, A. and Jabbour, C. J. C. (2020). “A systematic review of empirical and normative decision analysis of sustainability-related supplier risk management”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 244, 118808.
  • Szmidt, E., and Kacprzyk, J. (2002). “Using intuitionistic fuzzy sets in group decision making”. Control and Cybernetics, 31, 1037–1053.
  • Şengül, Ü., Eren, M., Shiraz, S. E., Gezder, V. and Şengül, A. B. (2015). “Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey”. Renewable energy, 75, 617-625.
  • Qin, J., Liu, X. and Pedrycz, W. (2017). “An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment”. European Journal of Operational Research, 258(2), 626-638.
  • Ting, S. C. and Cho, D. I. (2008). “An integrated approach for supplier selection and purchasing decisions”. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal.
  • Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Zavadskas, E. K. and Zolfani, S. H. (2017). “Integrated QFD-MCDM framework for green supplier selection”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 3728-3740.
  • Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Pamucar, D. And Abad, M. D. (2019). “A risk-based integrated decision-making model for green supplier selection: A case study of a construction company in Spain”. Kybernetes.
  • Yazdi, M., Korhan, O. and Daneshvar, S. (2020). “Application of fuzzy fault tree analysis based on modified fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS for fire and explosion in the process industry”. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics, 26(2), 319-335.
  • Yu, C., Shao, Y., Wang, K. and Zhang, L. (2019). “A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment”. Expert Systems with Applications, 121, 1-17. Zadeh, L.A. (1965) “Fuzzy sets”. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353.
  • Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M. and Schultmann, F. (2016). “Sustainable supplier management–a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development”. International journal of production research, 54(5), 1412-1442.
  • Zyoud, S. H., Kaufmann, L. G., Shaheen, H., Samhan, S. and Fuchs-Hanusch, D. (2016). “A framework for water loss management in developing countries under fuzzy environment: Integration of Fuzzy AHP with Fuzzy TOPSIS”. Expert Systems with Applications, 61, 86-105

A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT

Year 2023, Issue: 56, 123 - 137, 22.05.2023

Fatma Selen Madenoğlu

https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1129214

Abstract

This paper presents a group decision-making mechanism to properly manage outranking problems in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment. TOPSIS, outranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method, is utilized under intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. A set of criteria employed in decision-making problems, the preferences of a group of decision-makers, and the importance levels of decision-makers are examined in this solution technique. Managers use the outranking methods as a reliable technique for making supplier evaluation decisions. Furthermore, the supply chain suffers from the shortage of materials, transportation problems etc. post COVID-19 era, the need for a practical, and exhaustive tool is explicit. An illustrative case on a supplier selection problem considering sustainability and risks in the post-COVID-19 era is used to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed technique by detailing the procedure step by step. The results show that the presented methodology is applicable to the other areas.

Keywords

Multi-criteria decision making Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets TOPSIS Sustainability Risk Multi-criteria decision making, Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets, TOPSIS, Sustainability, Risk

References

  • Alikhani, R., Torabi, S. A. and Altay, N. (2019). “Strategic supplier selection under sustainability and risk criteria”. International Journal of Production Economics, 208, 69-82.
  • Amiri, M. P. (2010). “Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods”. Expert systems with applications, 37(9), 6218-6224.
  • Atanassov, K. (1986). “Intuitionistic fuzzy sets”. Fuzzy sets and systems 20 (1), 87-96.
  • Bilgili, F., Zarali, F., Ilgün, M. F., Dumrul, C. and Dumrul, Y. (2022). “The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using intuitionistic fuzzy-TOPSIS method”. Renewable Energy, 189, 1443-1458.
  • Boran, F. E., Genç, S., Kurt, M. and Akay, D. (2009). “A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS method”. Expert systems with applications, 36(8), 11363-11368.
  • Chamodrakas, I. and Martakos, D. (2011). “A utility-based fuzzy TOPSIS method for energy efficient network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks”. Applied Soft Computing, 11(4), 3734-3743.
  • Chan, F. T., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M. K., Lau, H. C. and Choy, K. (2008). “Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach”. International Journal of production research, 46(14), 3825-3857.
  • Chang, B., Chang, C. W. and Wu, C. H. (2011). “Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria”. Expert systems with Applications, 38(3), 1850-1858.
  • Chen, W. and Zou, Y. (2017). “An integrated method for supplier selection from the perspective of risk aversion”. Applied Soft Computing, 54, 449-455.
  • Chen, Z., Ming, X., Zhou, T. And Chang, Y. (2020). “Sustainable supplier selection for smart supply chain considering internal and external uncertainty: An integrated rough-fuzzy approach”. Applied Soft Computing, 87, 106004.
  • Chou, S. Y. and Chang, Y. H. (2008). “A decision support system for supplier selection based on a strategy-aligned fuzzy SMART approach”. Expert systems with applications, 34(4), 2241-2253.
  • Chou, Y. C., Yen, H. Y., Dang, V. T. and Sun, C. C. (2019). “Assessing the human resource in science and technology for Asian countries: Application of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS”. Symmetry, 11(2), 251.
  • Dhiman, H. S. and Deb, D. (2020). “Fuzzy TOPSIS and fuzzy COPRAS based multi-criteria decision making for hybrid wind farms”. Energy, 202, 117755.
  • Fagundes, M. V., Hellingrath, B. andFreires, F. G. (2021). “Supplier selection risk: a new computer-based decision-making system with fuzzy extended AHP”. Logistics, 5(1), 13.
  • Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K. (1981). “Methods for multiple attribute decision making”, In Multiple attribute decision making (pp. 58-191), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  • Heizer, J. H. and Render, B. (2004). “Principles of operations management”. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
  • Kannan, D., Khodaverdi, R., Olfat, L., Jafarian, A. and Diabat, A. (2013). “Integrated fuzzy multi criteria decision making method and multi-objective programming approach for supplier selection and order allocation in a green supply chain”. Journal of Cleaner production, 47, 355-367.
  • Kannan, D., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L. and Jabbour, C. J. C. (2014). “Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: Using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company”. European Journal of operational research, 233(2), 432-447.
  • Krohling, R. A. And Campanharo, V. C. (2011). “Fuzzy TOPSIS for group decision making: A case study for accidents with oil spill in the sea”. Expert Systems with applications, 38(4), 4190-4197. Lee, A. H., Kang, H. Y., Hsu, C. F. and Hung, H. C. (2009). “A green supplier selection model for high-tech industry”. Expert systems with applications, 36(4), 7917-7927.
  • Li, G. D., Yamaguchi, D. and Nagai, M. (2007). “A grey-based decision-making approach to the supplier selection problem”. Mathematical and computer modelling, 46(3-4), 573-581.
  • Kumar, A., Jain, V. and Kumar, S. (2014). “A comprehensive environment friendly approach for supplier selection”. Omega, 42(1), 109-123.
  • Kuo, M. S., Tzeng, G. H. and Huang, W. C. (2007). “Group decision-making based on concepts of ideal and anti-ideal points in a fuzzy environment”. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45(3-4), 324-339.
  • Kuo, R. J., Wang, Y. C. and Tien, F. C. (2010). “Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection”. Journal of cleaner production, 18(12), 1161-1170.
  • Onu, P. U., Quan, X., Xu, L., Orji, J. and Onu, E. (2017). “Evaluation of sustainable acid rain control options utilizing a fuzzy TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis model frame work”. Journal of cleaner production, 141, 612-625.
  • Rouyendegh, B. D., Yildizbasi, A. And Üstünyer, P. (2020). “Intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method for green supplier selection problem”. Soft Computing, 24(3), 2215-2228.
  • Salih, M. M., Zaidan, B. B., Zaidan, A. A. and Ahmed, M. A. (2019). “Survey on fuzzy TOPSIS state-of-the-art between 2007 and 2017”. Computers & Operations Research, 104, 207-227.
  • Saputro, T. E., Figueira, G. and Almada-Lobo, B. (2022). “A comprehensive framework and literature review of supplier selection under different purchasing strategies”. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 108010.
  • da Silva, E. M., Ramos, M. O., Alexander, A. and Jabbour, C. J. C. (2020). “A systematic review of empirical and normative decision analysis of sustainability-related supplier risk management”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 244, 118808.
  • Szmidt, E., and Kacprzyk, J. (2002). “Using intuitionistic fuzzy sets in group decision making”. Control and Cybernetics, 31, 1037–1053.
  • Şengül, Ü., Eren, M., Shiraz, S. E., Gezder, V. and Şengül, A. B. (2015). “Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey”. Renewable energy, 75, 617-625.
  • Qin, J., Liu, X. and Pedrycz, W. (2017). “An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment”. European Journal of Operational Research, 258(2), 626-638.
  • Ting, S. C. and Cho, D. I. (2008). “An integrated approach for supplier selection and purchasing decisions”. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal.
  • Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Zavadskas, E. K. and Zolfani, S. H. (2017). “Integrated QFD-MCDM framework for green supplier selection”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 3728-3740.
  • Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Pamucar, D. And Abad, M. D. (2019). “A risk-based integrated decision-making model for green supplier selection: A case study of a construction company in Spain”. Kybernetes.
  • Yazdi, M., Korhan, O. and Daneshvar, S. (2020). “Application of fuzzy fault tree analysis based on modified fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS for fire and explosion in the process industry”. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics, 26(2), 319-335.
  • Yu, C., Shao, Y., Wang, K. and Zhang, L. (2019). “A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment”. Expert Systems with Applications, 121, 1-17. Zadeh, L.A. (1965) “Fuzzy sets”. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353.
  • Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M. and Schultmann, F. (2016). “Sustainable supplier management–a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development”. International journal of production research, 54(5), 1412-1442.
  • Zyoud, S. H., Kaufmann, L. G., Shaheen, H., Samhan, S. and Fuchs-Hanusch, D. (2016). “A framework for water loss management in developing countries under fuzzy environment: Integration of Fuzzy AHP with Fuzzy TOPSIS”. Expert Systems with Applications, 61, 86-105
There are 38 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Finance
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Fatma Selen Madenoğlu 0000-0002-5577-4471

Early Pub Date May 10, 2023
Publication Date May 22, 2023
Acceptance Date December 29, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2023 Issue: 56

Cite

APA Madenoğlu, F. S. (2023). A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi(56), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1129214
AMA Madenoğlu FS. A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. PAUSBED. May 2023;(56):123-137. doi:10.30794/pausbed.1129214
Chicago Madenoğlu, Fatma Selen. “A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT”. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, no. 56 (May 2023): 123-37. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1129214.
EndNote Madenoğlu FS (May 1, 2023) A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 56 123–137.
IEEE F. S. Madenoğlu, “A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT”, PAUSBED, no. 56, pp. 123–137, May 2023, doi: 10.30794/pausbed.1129214.
ISNAD Madenoğlu, Fatma Selen. “A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT”. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 56 (May 2023), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1129214.
JAMA Madenoğlu FS. A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. PAUSBED. 2023;:123–137.
MLA Madenoğlu, Fatma Selen. “A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT”. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, no. 56, 2023, pp. 123-37, doi:10.30794/pausbed.1129214.
Vancouver Madenoğlu FS. A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR OUTRANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. PAUSBED. 2023(56):123-37.
 Download Cover Image