Tedarikçi Seçiminde Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinin Kullanılması

Öz

Doğru tedarikçinin seçilmesi, işletmelerin rekabet yeteneğinin artırılmasında ve maliyetlerin azaltılmasında, önemli bir etkiye sahiptir. En uygun tedarikçiyi seçme, bir birlerini etkileyen faktörlerin yer aldığı karmaşık bir problem türüdür. Karar verme sürecinde kalite, fiyat, esneklik ve teknoloji gibi birçok tedarikçinin nitel ve nicel performans göstergeleri dikkate alınmaktadır. Tedarikçilerin güçlü ve zayıf yönleri de tedarikçi seçim sürecinde göz önüne alınması gereken diğer faktörlerdir. Literatürde tedarikçi seçim problemini çözmek için çok sayıda ve farklı çok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV) yöntemleri önerilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, bir işletme için en uygun tedarikçileri belirlemede bulanık analitik ağ süreci (BAAS) ve VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) yaklaşımına dayanan bütünleşik bir çözüm
modeli geliştirilmiştir. BAAS, karar verme sürecinde, faktörler arasındaki bağımlılığı ve geri beslemeyi değerlendiren, nicel ve nitel kriterleri dikkate alabilen ÇKKV yöntemlerinden birisidir. Karar verme modelinin kriterleri ve karar ağı yapısı literatür taramasından elde edilen veriler ve uzman kişilerin görüşleri dikkate alınarak belirlenmiştir. Önerilen modelin kriter önem ağırlıkları BAAS ile seçeneklerin sıralanması ise VIKOR ile belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bulanık Analitik Ağ Süreci
• BAAS, Çok Kriterli Karar Verme
• VIKOR, Tedarikçi Seçimi

Kaynakça

1. Ali-Mohammad, A., Mahdi, B. & Zahra, A. (2010). The critical path definition with fuzzy multi criteria decision making, IEEE Xplore-Computer and Automation Engineering (ICCAE), e 2nd International Conference on, 5, 206-210.
2. Aragonés-Beltrán, P., Chaparro-González, F., Pastor- Ferrando, J. P. & Pla-Rubio, A. (2014). An AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)/ANP (Analytic Net- work Process)-based multi-criteria decision approach for the selection of solar-thermal power plant investment projects. Energy.1-17. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.12.016
3. Azizi, H. (2013). A note on “A decision model for ranking suppliers in the presence of cardinal and ordinal data, weight restrictions, and nondiscriminatory factors”. Annals of Operations Research, 211(1), 49-54. DOI 10.1007/s10479-013-1486-1
4. Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F.E. & Giacchetta, G. (2006). A fuzzy-QFD approach to supplier selection, J. Purch. Supply Manage, 12 (1), 14–27. doi:10.1016/j. pursup.2006.02.001
5. Büyüközkan, G. & Çi çi, G. (2012). A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy dematel, fuzzy anp and fuzzy topsis to evaluate green suppliers, Expert Systems with Applications, 39(3), 3000– 3011, doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.08.162
6. Chan, F. T. S.& Kumar, N. (2007). Global supplier developmnet considering risk factors using fuzzy ex- tended AHP-based approach, Omega, 35(4), 417- 431.
7. Chen J. K., Chen I. S. (2008). A Method for Promoting Vision in Secondary Schools: A Novel Hybrid Mo- del based on Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS, Journal of Global Business Issues, 2(2), 83-94.
8. Chou, S.Y. & Chang, Y.-H. (2008). A decision support system for supplier selection based on a strategy- aligned fuzzy SMART approach, Expert Syst. Appl. 34 (4), 2241–2253. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2007.03.001

9. Cristóbal, J.R. San (2011). Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in spain: the Vikor method, Renewable Energy, 36(2), 498-502.
10. Dağdeviren, M., Dönmez, N., Kurt, M. (2006). Bir işletmede tedarikçi değerlendirme süreci için yeni bir model tasarımı ve uygulaması, Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(2), 247-255.
11. Dağdeviren, M. (2007). Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi ile Personel Seçimi ve Bir Uygulama, Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(4), 791-799.
12. Dalalah, D., Hayajneh, M. & Batieha, F. (2011). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for supplier selection. Expert Syst. Appl, 38 (7), 8384–8391. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.031
13. Deng, X., Hu, Y., Deng, Y. & Mahadevan, S. (2014). Supplier selection using AHP methodology extended by D numbers, Expert Systems with Applications,41(1), 156-167.
14. Devi, K., (2011). Extension of VIKOR method in intuitionistic fuzzy environment for robot selection, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14163- 14168.
15. Dey S., Kumar, A., Ray, A. & Pradhan, B. B. (2012). Supplier Selection: Integrated eory using DE- MATEL and Quality Function Deployment methodology, Procedia Engineering 38, 2111–2116. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2012.06.253.
16. Dickson, G. W. (1996). An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions, Journal of Purchasing 2(1): 5-17.
17. Fazlollahtabar, H., Mahdavi, I., Ashoori, M.T., Kaviani, S., Mahdavi-Amiri, N. (2011). A multi-objective decision-making process of supplier selection and order allocation for multi-period scheduling in an electronic market, e International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 52, 1039-1052.
18. Gencer, C., Gürpınar, D. (2007). Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 31(11), 2475-2486.
19. Girubha, J., Vinodh, S. (2012). Application of fuzzy VIKOR and environmental impact analysis for material selection of an automotive component, Materials & Design, 37, 478-486.
20. Ghodsypour, S. H., O‘Brien, C. A, (1998). Decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytical hierarchy process and linear programming, International Journal of Production Economics, 56–57, 199–212.
21. Güneri, A. F., Cengiz, M., Seker, S. (2009). A fuzzy ANP approach to shipyard location selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 7992–7999. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.10.059
22. Ha, S.H., Krishnan, R. (2008). A hybrid approach to supplier selection for the maintenance of a competitive supply chain, Expert Syst. Appl. 34 (2), 1303– 1311. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2006.12.008
23. Hus, T. H., Nian, S. H. (1997). Interactive fuzzy decision aided systems-a case on public transportation system operations, Journal of Transportation Taiwan, 10(4), 79-96.
24. Ivanović, I., Grujičić, D., Macura, D., Jović, J., Bojović, N. (2013). One approach for road transport project selection. Transport Policy, 25, 22-29. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.10.001
25. Jadidi, O., Zolfaghari, S., Cavalieri, S. (2014). A new normalized goal programming model for multi- objective problems: A case of supplier selection and order allocation. International Journal of Production Economics, 148, 158-165. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.10.005
26. Kabak, M., Dağdeviren, M. (2014). Prioritization of renewable energy sources for Turkey by using a hybrid MCDM methodology. Energy Conversion and Management, 79, 25-33. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.11.036
27. Kannan, D., Khodaverdi, R., Olfat, L., Jafarian, A., 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 (2013) 355-367, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.02.010
28. Kannan, D., Jabbour, A. B. L. D. S., Jabbour, C. J. C. (2014a). 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. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.07.023
29. Kannan, D., Kannan, G., Rajendran, S. (2014b). Fuzzy Axiomatic Design Approach based Green Supplier Selection: A Case Study from Singapore. Journal of Cleaner Production,1-15, http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.076
30. Karimi, H., Rezaeinia, A. (2014). Supplier selection using revised multi-segment goal programming model. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 70(5-8), 1227-1234. DOI 10.1007/s00170-013-5368-0
31. Kilic, H. S. (2013). An integrated approach for supplier selection in multi-item/multi-supplier environment. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37(14), 7752-7763.
32. Kumar, S. (2014). A Comprehensive Environment Friendly Approach For Supplier Selection. Omega. Internatıonal Journal of Management Science, 42(1), 109-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2013.04.003
33. Kuo, M.-S., Liang, G.(2011). Combining VIKOR with GRA techniques to evaluate service quality of airports under fuzzy environment, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 304-1312.
34. Lang, T. M., Chiang, J. H., Lan, L.W., (2009), Selection of optimal supplier in supply chain management strategy with analytic network process and choquet integral, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 57, 330–340.
35. Liao, C-.N., Kao, H-.P. (2011). An integrated fuzzy TOPSIS and MCGP approach to supplier selection in supply chain Management, Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (9), 10803–10811. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.02.031
36. Lin, C. T., Chen, C. B., Ting, Y. C. (2011). An ERP model for supplier selection in electronics industry, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 1760–1765.
37. Liou, J.J.H., Chuang, Y.T.(2010). Developing a Hybrid Multi-Criteria Model for Selection of Outsourcing Providers, Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 3755-3761.
38. Liou, J. J.H., Tsai, C.-Y., Lin, R.-H., Tzeng, G.-H. (2011). A modified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improving domestic airlines service quality, Journal of Air Transport Management, 17(2), 57-61.
39. Lious, T. S., Wang, M. J. J. (1992). Ranking fuzzy numbers with integral value, Fuzzy sets and systems, 50(3), 247-255.
40. Nguyen, H. T., Dawal, S. Z. M., Nukman, Y., Aoyama, H. (2014). A hybrid approach for fuzzy multi-att- ribute decision making in machine tool selection with consideration of the interactions of attributes. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(6), 3078- 3090. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.10.039
41. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Compromise Solu- tion by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research 156(2), 445-455. doi:10.1016/ S0377-2217(03)00020-1
42. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G. H. (2007). Extended VIKOR Method in Comparison with Other Outranking Methods, European Journal of Operational Research,178, 514-529. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.020
43. Opricovic, S. (2009). A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning, Water Resources Management, 23, 1549-1561. DOI 10.1007/s11269-008-9340-y.
44. Prakash, T.N. (2003), Land Suitability Analysis for Agricultural Crops: A Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision Making Approach, MSc thesis, ITC Institue.
45. Peters, M. L., Zelewski, S. (2008). Der Analytic Network Process als Technik zur Lösung multikriterieller Entscheidungsprobleme unter Berücksichtigung von Abhaengigkeiten zwischen Kriterien, WiSt, 9, 475-482.
46. Rajesh, G., Malliga, P. (2013). Supplier Selection based on AHP QFD Methodology. Procedia Engineering, 64, 1283-1292. doi: 10.1016/j.pro- eng.2013.09.209.
47. Roshandel, J., Miri-Nargesi, S. S., Hatami-Shirkou- hi, L. (2013). Evaluating and selecting the supplier in detergent production industry using hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37(24), 10170-10181. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.05.043
48. Sarkis, J., Talluri, S. (2002). A model for strategic supplier selection, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 38(1),18–28.
49. Sanayei, A., Mousavi, S.,F., Yazdankhah, A. (2010). Group Decision Making Process For Supplier Selection With VIKOR Under Fuzzy Environment, Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 24-30.
50. Saaty, T. L. (2001). Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback, the Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburg.
51. Saen, R. F. (2010). Developing a new data envelopment analysis methodology for supplier selection in the presence of both undesirable outputs and imprecise data. the International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 51(9-12), 1243-1250. DOI 10.1007/s00170-010-2694-3
52. Sharma, S., Balan, S. (2012). An integrative supplier selection model using Taguchi loss function, TOPSIS and multi criteria goal programming. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 1-8. DOI 10.1007/s10845- 012-0640-y.
53. Shaw K., Shankar, R., Yadav, S.S., akur, L.S. (2012). Supplier selection using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy multiobjective linear programming for developing low carbon supply chain, Expert Systems with Applications, 39(9), 8182-8192.
54. Shemshadi, A., Shirazi, H., Toreihi, M. Tarokh, M.J. (2011). A fuzzy VIKOR method for supplier selection based on entropy measure for objective weighting, Expert Syst. Appl. 38(10), 12160–12167. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.03.027
55. Şenkayas, H., Hekimoğlu, H. (2013). Çok Kriterli Tedarikçi Seçimi Problemine PROMETHEE Yöntem Uygulaması, Verimlilik Dergisi, 2(63).
56. Tavana, M., Khalili-Damghani, K., Abtahi, A. R. (2012). A hybrid fuzzy group decision support framework for advanced-technology prioritization at NASA, Expert Systems with Applications. 40,480– 491 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.040
57. Tavana, M., Momeni, E., Rezaeiniya, N., Mirhedayatian, S. M., Rezaeiniya, H. (2013). A novel hybrid social media platform selection model using fuzzy ANP and COPRAS-G. Expert Syst. Appl., 40(14), 5694- 5702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.05.015
58. Toloo, M., Nalchigar, S. (2011). A new DEA method for supplier selection in presence of both cardinal and ordinal data, Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (12), 14726– 14731. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.05.008
59. Tzeng, G-H., Lin, C-W., Opricovic, S., (2005), Multi- criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportatio, Energy Policy, 33, 1373-1383.
60. Wang, G., Huang, S. H., Dismukes, J. P. (2004). Pro- duct-driven supply chain selection using integrated multi-criteria decision-making methodology, International Journal of Production Economics, 91(1), 1–15.
61. Vatansever, K. (2013). Tedarikçi Seçim Kararlarında Bulanık TOPSIS Yönteminin Kullanımı ve Bir Uygulama. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(3), 155-168.
62. Vinodh, S., Anesh Ramiya, R., Gautham, S. G. (2011). Application of fuzzy analytic network process for supplier selection in a manufacturing organisation. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 272-280. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.06.057
63. Wang, J.-W., Cheng, C.-H., Kun-Cheng, H. (2009). Fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS for supplier selection, Applied So Computing, 9, 377-386.
64. Ware, N. R., Singh, S. P., Banwet, D. K. (2014). A mixed-integer non-linear program to model dynamic supplier selection problem. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(2), 671-678. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.092
65. Wu, C. R., Chang, C. W., Lin, H. L. (2008). A fuzzy ANP-based approach to evaluate medical organizational performance, International journal of information and management sciences, 19(1), 53-74.
66. Wua, H.Y., Tzeng, G.H., Chen, Y.H (2009). A Fuzzy Mcdm Approach For Evaluating Banking Performance Based On Balanced Scorecard, Expert Systems with Applications, 36,10135-10147.
67. Yahya, S., Kingsman, B. (1999). Vendor rating for an entrepreneur development programme: a case study using the analytic hierarchy Process method, Journal of Operational Research Society, 50, 916–930.
68. Yeh, T. M., Huang, Y. L. (2014). Factors in determining wind farm location: Integrating GQM, fuzzy DE- MATEL, and ANP. Renewable Energy, 66, 159-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.12.003
69. Zhao, M., Ren, R. R. (2013). e Decision-Making Model for Aviation Project’s Supplier Selection Based on Improved TOPSIS, InLISS 2012(pp. 1171-1176), Springer, Berlin Heidelberg. DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-32054-5_165
70. Zimmermann, H.J. (1990). Fuzzy Set theory and its Application, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
71. Zouggari, A., Benyoucef, L. (2012). Simulation Based Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach for Group Multi- Criteria Supplier Selection Problem. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 25, 507-519. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2011.10.012