Facility Location Selection for a Public Organization by Stochastic Multi-criteria Acceptability Analysis

Öz

The facility location problem, especially in the last 50 years, is an area where too many studies occur. Rapidly evolving technology, environmental factors, the necessity to reduce operation costs required to compete and many factors such as changes in customer perception of satisfaction force cost effective solutions by using scientific methods for these problems. In this study, a real life public sector facility location problem is examined. The problem fundamentally originated from the desire of public sector to downsize the number of service centers stationed in various cities and towns countrywide. Existing facilities are sorted in two groups as facilities which stay opened and facilities which should be closed according to criteria determined by general management. In the study Stochastic Multi-Criteria Acceptability Analysis-TRI (SMAA-TRI) is used as the method

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Facility location selection, MCDM, SMAA

Stokastik Çok Kriterli Kabul Edilebilirlik Analizi İle Bir Kamu Kurumu İçin Tesis Yeri Seçimi

Öz

Tesis yeri seçimi, özellikle son 50 yıldır birçok çalışmanın yapıldığı bir problem sahasıdır. Hızla gelişen teknoloji, çevresel etkenler, rekabet için işletme maliyetlerinin azaltılması gerekliliği, müşterilerin memnuniyet algılarındaki değişim gibi birçok faktör bu problemler için bilimsel yöntemler kullanılarak maliyet etkin çözümler bulunmasını gerektirmektedir. Bu çalışmada, bir kamu kurumuna ait tesis yeri seçimi problemi için çözüm önerilmiştir. Problem, temel olarak kamu kurumunun ülke genelinde il ve ilçelerde konuşlu hizmet merkezi sayısını azaltmak istemesinden kaynaklanmaktadır. Mevcut tesisler kamu kurumunun genel yönetimi tarafından belirlenen kriterlere göre değerlendirilmiş, açık tutulması gerekenler ve kapatılması gerekenler olarak iki sınıfa ayrılmıştır. Çalışmada yöntem olarak Stokastik Çok Kriterli Kabul Edilebilirlik AnaliziTRI (SMAA-TRI) kullanılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tesis yeri seçimi, ÇKKV, SMAA

Kaynakça

1. Badri, M.A. (1999) “Combining the Analytic Hie- rarchy Process and Goal Programming for Global Faci- lity Location Allocation Problem” International Journal of Production Economics, 62(3):237-248.
2. Blin, J.M. (1974) “Fuzzy Relations in Group Decisi- on Theory” Journal of Cybernetics, 4:17-22.
3. Chou, T.Y., Hsu, C.L. ve Chen, M.C. (2008) “A fuzzy Multicriteria Decision Model for International Tourist Hotels Location Selection” International Journal of Hospi- tality Management, 27:293-301.
4. Farahani, R.Z., Steadie, Seifi M. ve Asgari, N. (2010) “Multiple Criteria Facility Location Problems: A Survey” Applied Mathematical Modelling, 34:1689-1709.
5. Figueira, J., Greco, S. ve Ehrgott, M. (Eds.) (2005) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, New York, Springer Science&Business Media, Inc.
6. Güneri, A.F., Cengiz, M. ve Şeker, S. (2009) “A fuzzy ANP Approach for Shipyard Location Selection” Expert Systems with Applications, 36:7992-7999.
7. Hokkanen, J., Lahdelma, R., Miettinen, K. ve Salmi- nen, P. (1998) “Determining the Implementation Order of a General Plan by Using a Multicriteria Method” Jour- nal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 7(5):273-284.
8. Hokkanen, J., Lahdelma, R. ve Salminen, P. (1999) “A Multiple Criteria Decision Model for Analyzing and Choosing Among Different Development Patterns for the Helsinki Cargo Harbor” Socio-Economic Planning Sci- ences, 33:1-23.

9. Ishizaka, A., Nemery, P. ve Lidouh, K. (2013) “Lo- cation Selection for the Construction of a Casino in the Greater London Region: A Triple Multi-Criteria Appro- ach” Tourism Management, 34:211-220.
10. Kahraman, C., Ruan, D. ve Doğan, İ. (2003) “Fuzzy Group Decision-Making for Facility Location Selection” Information Sciences, 157:135 -153.
11. Kalkınma Bakanlığı (2004) http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/ bolgesel/gosterge/2004/ilce.pdf, (21.07.2013)
12. Lahdelma, R. ve Salminen, P. (2001) “SMAA-2: Stoc- hastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Group De- cision Making” Operations Research, 49(3):444-454.
13. Lahdelma, R., Salminen, P. ve Hokkanen, J. (2002) “Locating a Waste Treatment Facility by Using Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis with Ordinal Crite- ria” European Journal of Operational Research, 142(2):345- 356.
14. Lahdelma, R., Miettinen, K. ve Salminen, P. (2003) “Ordinal Criteria in Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptabi- lity Analysis (SMAA)” European Journal of Operational Research,147(1):117-127.
15. Lahdelma, R., Miettinen, K. ve Salminen, P. (2005) “Reference Point Approach for Multiple Deci- sion Makers” European Journal of Operational Research, 164(3):785-791.
16. Menou, A., Benallou, A., Lahdelma, R. ve Salminen, P. (2010) “Decision Support for Centralizing Cargo at a Moroccan Airport Hub Using Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis” European Journal of Operational Research, 204:624-629.
17. Tervonen, T. ve Figueira, J. (2008) “A Survey on Stoc- hastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis Methods” Jour- nal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 15:1-14.
18. Tervonen, T., Lahdelma, R., Dias, J.A., Figueira J. ve Salminen P. (2009) “SMAA-TRI: A Parameter Stability Analysis Method for ELECTRE-TRI” Kiker, G.A. ve Linkov, I. (eds.) Environmental Security in Harbors and Coastal Areas, Berlin, Springer.
19. Tervonen, T. (2012) “JSMAA: Open Source Software for SMAA Computations” International Journal of Systems Science, 1-13.
20. Tervonen, T. ve Lahdelma, R. (2007) “Implementing Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis” European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2):500-513.
21. Vahidnia, M.H., Alesheikh, A.A. ve Alimohammadi, A. (2009) “Hospital Site Selection Using Fuzzy AHP and its Derivatives” Journal of Environmental Management, 90(10):3048-3056.
22. Yu, W. (1992) “Aide Multicritère à la Décision Dans le Cadre de la Problématique du tri: Concepts, Méthodes Et Applications” Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Paris, Université Paris-Dauphine.