Designing Port Services Via Fuzzy Quality Function Deployment

Öz

The objective of this study is to develop a proposal for developing port services that can improve the service quality by accurately satisfying the customer requirements. In this study, a four-stage process was identified. In the first stage, data envelopment analysis (DEA) was used for measuring the efficiency of the container terminals. In the second stage, the requirements of the port customers were identified, and confirmatory factor analysis was applied for satisfying these requirements. Further, in the third stage, the consistency of the binary comparison matrices which consist of customer requirements was evaluated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). In the final stage, the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) and fuzzy quality function deployment (FQFD) were jointly used for designing the port services. According to results, the resources requirement is considered to the most important criterion among the main criteria to improve the service quality of the port. Further, FQFD was used for designing of P1 port’s service. FQFD was concluded that the quality of the equipment, facilities, and technological infrastructure have to be improved for increasing the service quality of P1 port.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process
• Fuzzy Quality Function Deployment
• Confirmatory Factor Analysis
• Port Service Design
• Data Envelopment Analysis

Kaynakça

1. Akbaba, A., 2005. The quality function deployment (QFD) approach in customer focused service production: An application study for hospitality industry”, Anatolia, Journal of tourism Research, 16,1, 59-81.
2. Baird, A.J., 1995. Privatisation of trust ports in The United Kingdom: Review and analysis of the first sales. Transport Policy. 2, 2, 135-143.
3. Bakirci, F., 2006. Üretimde etkinlik ve verimlilik ölçümü, veri zarflama analizi teori ve uygulama. İstanbul: Atlas Yayınları, 1. Baskı.
4. Becker, A., Inoue, S., Fischer, M., Schwegler, B., 2011. Considering climate change: A survey of global seaport administrators. CIFE Working Paper WP128, Stanford University, 1-69.
5. Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F.E., Marchhetti, B., 2012. Development and test of a new fuzzy- QFD approach for characterizing customers rating of extra virgin olive oil. Food Quality and Preference. 24, 75- 84.
6. Bottani, E., Rizzi, A., 2006. Strategic management of logistics service: A fuzzy QFD approach. International Journal of Production Economics. 103, 585-599.
7. Branch, A. E., 1986. Elements of port operation and management. London, Chapman and Hall.
8. Buyukozkan, G., Feyzioglu, O., Ruan, D., 2007. Fuzzy group decision-making to multiple preference formats in Quality Function Deployment. Computers in Industry. 58, 392- 402.

9. Byrne, B.M., 2010. Structural equation modeling with AMOS, basic concepts, applications and programming. Taylor Francis Group, 2. Edition, LLC.
10. Chamzini, A.Y., Yakhchali, S.H., 2012. Tunnel boring machine (TBM) selection using fuzzy multicriteria decision making methods. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 30, 194-204.
11. Chan, F.T.S., Kumar, N., 2007. Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended ahp-based approach. Omega The International Journal of Management Science. 35, 417-431.
12. Chang, D.Y., 1996. Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research. 95, 649-655.
13. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Lewin, A.Y., Seiford, L.M., 1994. Data envelopment analysis: Theory, methodology and application. Springer Science +Business Media, LLC.
14. Cooper, W.W., Li, S., Seiford, L.M., Tone, K., Thrall, R.M., Zhu, J., 2001. Sensitivity and stability analysis in DEA: Some recent developments. Journal of Productivity Analysis. 15, 217-246.
15. Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L., M., Tone, K., 2007. Data envelopment analysis, A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software. Springer Science, Business Media, LLC. Second Edition.
16. Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M., Zhu, J., 2004. Handbook on data envelopment analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
17. Costa, A.I.A., Dekker, M., Jongen, W.M.F., 2001. Quality function deployment in the food industry: A review. Trend in Food Science & Technology. 11, 306-314.
18. Day, R.G., 1998. Quality function deployment: Integration of a company with its customers. ASQC Quality Press Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
19. Deng, H., 1999. Multicriteria analysis with fuzzy pairwise comparison. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning. 21, 215-231.
20. Ding, J. F., 2009. Applying fuzzy quality function deployment (QFD) to identify solutions of service delivery system for port of Kaohsiung, Qual Quant, 43, 553- 570.
21. Duru, O., Huang, S. T., Bulut, E., 2013. Multi-layer quality function deployment (QFD) approach for improving the compromised quality satisfaction under the agency problem: A 3D QFD design for the asset selection problem in the shipping industry, Qual Quant, 47, 2259–2280.
22. Dyson, R.G., Allen, R., Camanho, A.S., Podinovski, V.V., Sarrico, C.S., Shale, E.A., 2001. Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational
23. Ertugrul, I., Karakasoglu, N., 2008. Comparison of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods for facility location selection. Int. J. Adv. Manuf Technol. 39, 783-795.
24. Esmer, S., Cetin, C.K., 2016. Liman işletme yönetimi, in: Güldem Cerit, Ali Deveci ve Soner Esmer (eds.), Denizcilik İşletmeleri Yönetimi. Beta Basım A.Ş., İstanbul: 2.Basım, 377-416.
25. Ficalora, J.P., Cohen, L., 2010. Quality function deployment and sıx sıgma: A QFD Handbook, Pearson Education. Inc, Second Edition, Boston.
26. Golany, B., Roll, Y., 1989. An application procedure for DEA. Omega. 17, 3, 237-250.
27. Han, S.B., Chen, S.K., Ebrahimpour, M., Sodhi, M., 2001. A conceptual QFD planning model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. 18, 8, 796-812.
28. Hsu, W. K. K., 2013. Improving the service operations of container terminals, The International Journal of Logistics Management, 24, 1, 101-116.
29. Huang, C.C., Chu, P.Y., Chiang, Y.H., 2008. A fuzzy AHP application in government-sponsored R&D project selection. Omega. 36, 6, 1038-1052.
30. Huang, S. T., Bulut, E., Duru, O., 2015. Service quality assessment in liner shipping industry: an empirical study on Asian shipping case, Int. J. Shipping and Transport Logistics, 7, 2, 221-242.
31. Huang, S. T., Bulut, E., Duru, O., 2019. Service quality evaluation of international freight forwarders: an empirical research in East Asia, Journal of Shipping and Trade, 4, 14,1-16.
32. Jeong, M., Oh, H., 1998. Quality function deployment: An extended framework for service quality and customer satisfaction in the hospitality industry, hospitality industry. Hospitality Management. 17, 375-390.
33. Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., Ruan, D., 2004. Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: The case of Turkey. Int. J. Production Economics. 87, 171-184.
34. Khoo, L., P., Ho, N.C., 1996. Framework of a fuzzy quality function deployment system. Int. J. Prod. Res. 34, 2, 299-311.
35. Liu, H.T., 2009. The extension of fuzzy QFD: From product planning to part deployment. Expert Systems With Applications. 36, 11131-11144.
36. Mangan, J., Lalwani, C., Fynes, B., 2008. Port- Centric Logistics. The International Jounal of Logistics Management. 19, 1, 29- 41.
37. Nakip, M., 2013. Pazarlamada araştırma teknikleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık, 3. Baskı.
38. Ramanathan, R., 2003. An ıntroduction to data envelopment analysis: A tool for performance measurement, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
39. Rao, R.V., 2008. Evaluating flexible manufacturing systems using a combined multiple attribute decision making method. International Journal of Production Research. 46, 1, 1975-1989.
40. Razik, M. A., Tahar, R. M., Hasrulnizzam, W., Mahmood, W., Rozar, N., M., 2015. Integrated Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Model for Dry Bulk Terminal Improvements (DBTI) in Malaysian Ports, Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 3, 4, 413- 416.
41. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., Müller, H., 2003. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research. 8, 2, 23-74.
42. Tahar, R.M., Hussain, K., 2000. Simulation and analysis fort he Kelang container terminal operations. Logistics Information Management. 13, 1, 14-20.
43. Thai, V.V., 2008. Service quality in maritime transport: Conceptual model and empirical evidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. 20, 4, 493-518.
44. TURKLIM, Türkiye Liman İşletmecileri Derneği 2010. Türk Limancılık Sektörü Raporu. 1-182.
45. UNCTAD, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development 1992, Review of Maritime Transport, available at: http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ rmt1992_en.pdf (accessed 9 May 2016).
46. Weber, C.A., 1996. A data envelopment analysis approach to measuring vendor performance. Supply Chain Management. 1, 1, 28-39.
47. World Bank 2007. Port reform toolkit, module 3, alternative port management structures and ownership models. available at: https://ppiaf.org/sites/ppiaf. org/files/documents/toolkits/Portoolkit/Toolkit/ pdf/modules/03_TOOLKIT_Module3.pdf (accessed 17 February 2017).