Yüklenici Değerlendirme Sürecinde Aralıklı Tip2 Bulanık Topsis Yöntemi Uygulaması: Küçük ve Orta Ölçekli İşletmelerde Kobi'ler Bir Örnek Olay Çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışma, Küçük ve Orta Ölçekli İşletme KOBİ lerde en uygun yüklenicileri seçmede yardımcı olacak Çok Kriterli Karar Verme ÇKKV çerçevesi geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Önerilen çerçeve, TOPSIS yöntemi ve bulanık mantık teorisinin bir kombinasyonunu kullanmaktadır ve üç aşamadan oluşmaktadır. İlk olarak, değerlendirme kriterlerini belirlemek ve sonuçlandırmak için yüklenici seçimi ve teklif değerlendirmesi hakkında ayrıntılı bir literatür taraması derlenmiştir. Ardından belirsizliklerin üstesinden gelmek için aralık tip-2 bulanık kümeler ve dilsel değişkenler kullanılmış ve değerlendirme kriterlerinin ağırlıkları karar vericiler tarafından, aralık tip-2 bulanık sayılara dönüştürülen dilsel terimlere dayanarak elde edilmiştir. Son olarak aralık tip-2 bulanık TOPSIS yöntemi KOBİ'ler için yüklenici alternatiflerini sıralamak için kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca, Türkiye’deki bir KOBİ kuruluşunda yüklenici seçim sürecinden ilham alan bir örnek olay çalışması, önerilen yaklaşımın etkinliğini göstermek için kullanılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Aralık tip-2 bulanık sayılar, Topsis, yüklenici seçimi, küçük ve orta ölçekli işletmeler.

Application of Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Topsis Method in Contractor Evaluation Process: A Case Study in Small and Medium Enterprises SMEs

Öz

This study aims to develop a Multi-Criteria Decision Making MCDM framework to help select the most appropriate contractors in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises SMEs . The proposed framework uses a combination of the TOPSIS method and the fuzzy logic theory and consists of three steps. First, a detailed literature review of contractor selection and tender evaluation is conducted to determine and finalize evaluation criteria. Then, interval type-2 fuzzy sets and linguistic variables are used to handle the uncertainties, and the weights of the evaluation criteria are obtained by the decision makers based on linguistic terms that are converted to interval type-2 fuzzy numbers. Finally, the interval type-2 fuzzy TOPSIS method is used to rank contractor alternatives for SMEs. In addition, an example of an SME inspired by the contractor selection process in the case study organizations in Turkey has been used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Interval type-2 fuzzy numbers, Topsis, contractor selection, small and medium enterprises.

Kaynakça

1. Aksay, S., 2008. İnşaat Sözleşmeleri ve Yüklenici Seçim Kriterleri. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
2. Arslan, G., 2012. Web-Based Contractor Evaluation System for Mass- Housing Projects in Turkey. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 18, 323–334. doi:10.3846/13923730.2012.698892
3. Baykasoğlu, A., Gölcük, İ., 2017. Development of an interval type-2 fuzzy sets based hierarchical MADM model by combining DEMATEL and TOPSIS. Expert Syst. Appl. 70, 37–51. doi:10.1016/J.ESWA.2016.11.001
4. Bergman, M.A., Lundberg, S., 2013. Tender evaluation and supplier selection methods in public procurement. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 19, 73–83. doi:10.1016/J.PURSUP.2013.02.003
5. Büyüközkan, G., Parlak, I.B., Tolga, A.C., 2016. Evaluation of Knowledge Management Tools by Using An Interval Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS Method. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 9, 812–826. doi:10.1080/18756891.2016.1237182
6. Çalık, A., Paksoy, T., 2017. Aralık Tip-2 Bulanık AHP Yöntemi ile Üçüncü Parti Tersine Lojistik (3PTL) Firma Seçimi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sos. Bilim. Mesl. Yüksekokulu Derg. 20, 52–67.
7. Celik, E., Akyuz, E., 2018. An interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods transportation engineering: The case of ship loader. Ocean Eng. 155, 371–381. doi:10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2018.01.039 maritime
8. Cengiz Toklu, M., 2018. Interval type-2 fuzzy TOPSIS method for calibration supplier selection problem: a case study in an automotive company. Arab. J. Geosci. 11, 341. doi:10.1007/s12517- 018-3707-z

9. Cheaitou, A., Larbi, R., Al Housani, B., 2018. Decision making framework for tender evaluation and contractor selection in public organizations with risk considerations. Socioecon. Plann. Sci. doi:10.1016/J.SEPS.2018.02.007
10. Chen, S.M., Lee, L.W., 2010a. Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision- making based on the interval type-2 TOPSIS method. Expert Syst. Appl. 37, 2790–2798. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.09.012
11. Chen, S.M., Lee, L.W., 2010b. Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision- making based on the ranking values and the arithmetic operations of interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Expert Syst. Appl. 37, 824–833. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.06.094
12. Deveci, M., Demirel, N.Ç., Ahmetoğlu, E., 2017. Airline new route selection based on interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM: A case study of new route between Turkey- North American region destinations. J. doi:10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2016.11.013 Transp. Manag. 59, 83–99.
13. Dey, P.K., Ogunlana, S.O., Van Thuyet, N., 2007. Risk management in oil and gas construction projects in Vietnam. Int. J. Energy Sect. Manag. 1, 175–194. doi:10.1108/17506220710761582
14. Erdoğan, M., Kaya, İ., 2016. A combined fuzzy approach to determine the best region for a nuclear power plant in Turkey. Appl. Soft Comput. 39, 84–93. doi:10.1016/J.ASOC.2015.11.013
15. Falagario, M., Sciancalepore, F., Costantino, N., Pietroforte, R., 2012. Using a DEA-cross efficiency approach in public procurement tenders. doi:10.1016/J.EJOR.2011.10.031 J. Oper. Res. 218, 523–529.
16. Görener, A., Ayvaz, B., Kuşakcı, A.O., Altınok, E., 2017. A hybrid type- 2 fuzzy based supplier performance evaluation methodology: The Turkish Airlines technic case. Appl. Soft Comput. 56, 436–445. doi:10.1016/J.ASOC.2017.03.026
17. Hafizah, N., Lamsali, H., Sathyamoorthy, D., 2017. TECHNICAL TENDER EVALUATION USING ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP), Defence S and T Technical Bulletin.
18. Hsieh, T.-Y., Lu, S.-T., Tzeng, G.-H., 2004. Fuzzy MCDM approach for planning and design tenders selection in public office buildings. Int. doi:10.1016/J.IJPROMAN.2004.01.002 Proj. Manag. 22, 573–584.
19. Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K., 1981. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications, Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems. Springer-Verlag.
20. Jiang, T., Chen, X., Shu, D., 2011. An Improved Integrated Tender Evaluation Method Based On Analytic Hierarchy Process. Intell. Autom. Comput. doi:10.1080/10798587.2011.10644200 17, 651–658.
21. Kolis, K., Hajek, J., Vrbova, L., 2017. Hierarchical structure of criteria used for contractor selection for construction works. Empirical research from the Czech Republic, International Journal of Procurement Management. doi:10.1504/IJPM.2017.10005123
22. Krishna Rao, M. V, Kumar, V.S.S., Rathish Kumar, P., 2018. Optimal Contractor Selection in Construction Industry: The Fuzzy Way. J. Inst. Eng. Ser. A 99, 67–78. doi:10.1007/s40030-018-0271-1
23. Liao, T.W., 2015. Two interval type 2 fuzzy TOPSIS material selection methods. doi:10.1016/J.MATDES.2015.09.113 Des. 88, 1088–1099.
24. Mendel, J.M., John, R.I., Liu, F., 2006. Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Logic Systems Made Simple. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 14, 808–821. doi:10.1109/TFUZZ.2006.879986
25. Mousakhani, S., Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., Bozorgi-Amiri, A., 2017. A novel interval type-2 fuzzy evaluation model based group decision analysis for green supplier selection problems: A case study of battery doi:10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2017.08.154 J. Clean. Prod. 168, 205–218.
26. Qin, J., Liu, X., Pedrycz, W., 2015. An extended VIKOR method based on prospect theory for multiple attribute decision making under interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Knowledge-Based Syst. 86, 116–130. doi:10.1016/J.KNOSYS.2015.05.025
27. Russell, J.S., Skibniewski, M.J., 1988. Decision criteria in contractor prequalification. J. Manag. Eng. 4, 148–164.
28. Samuel, D., 2018. Risk-based tender evaluation using multicriteria decision analysis in Trinidad and Tobago. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. - Manag. Procure. Law 171, 58–69. doi:10.1680/jmapl.17.00047
29. Sarkis, J., Meade, L.M., Presley, A.R., 2012. Incorporating sustainability into contractor evaluation and team formation in the built environment. doi:10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2012.02.029 J. Clean. Prod. 31, 40–53.
30. T., A., R., M., 2000. Project Procurement System Selection Model. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 126, 176–184. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733- 9364(2000)126:3(176)
31. Turner, I., 1988. An Independent System for the Evaluation of Contract Tenders. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 39, 551–561. doi:10.2307/2582860
32. Vahdani, B., Mousavi, S.M., Hashemi, H., Mousakhani, M., Tavakkoli- Moghaddam, R., 2013. A new compromise solution method for fuzzy group decision-making problems with an application to the contractor selection. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 26, 779–788. doi:10.1016/J.ENGAPPAI.2012.11.005
33. Watt, D.J., Kayis, B., Willey, K., 2010. The relative importance of tender evaluation and contractor selection criteria. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 28, 51–60. doi:10.1016/J.IJPROMAN.2009.04.003
34. Wong, C.H., Holt, G.D., Cooper, P.A., 2000. Lowest price or value? Investigation of UK construction clients’ tender selection process. Constr. Manag. Econ. 18, 767–774. doi:10.1080/014461900433050
35. Wu, T., Liu, X., Liu, F., 2018. An interval type-2 fuzzy TOPSIS model for large scale group decision making problems with social network doi:10.1016/J.INS.2017.12.006 Inf. Sci. (Ny). 432, 392–410.
36. Zadeh, L.A., 1975. The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—I. Inf. Sci. (Ny). 8, 199–249. doi:10.1016/0020-0255(75)90036-5
37. Zadeh, L.A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353. doi:10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
38. Zamri, N., Abdullah, L., 2013. A New Linguistic Variable in Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Entropy Weight of a Decision Making Method. Procedia Comput. Sci. 24, 42–53. doi:10.1016/J.PROCS.2013.10.026