USING AHP AND TOPSIS METHODS FOR SELECTING OF PUBLISHING HOUSE

Abstract

Defining a good house publisher is one of famous decision problems, it consists in choosing house with lower cost and important readers number. In this study, we focused mainly upon the selection of publishing house problem. Analytic hiyerarcy process(AHP) and TOPSIS multicriteria decision making methods are used in order to define optimal delevry time, cost and competenece. Indeed, the weight are determined by using AHP and the overal ranking of alternatives is computed using Topsis.

Keywords

• Choosing publishing house,multicriteria decision-making,AHP,TOPSIS

KİTAP BASIMEVİ SEÇİMİNDE AHP VE TOPSIS YÖNTEMLERİNİN KULLANIMI

Öz

Basımevi seçim kararı bir yazarın emeğini paylaşması ve karşılığını alması için çok önemlidir. Doğru basımevinin seçilmesi yazarın karşılayacağı maliyeti düşürürken ulaşacağı okuyucu sayısını arttırmaktadır. Bu çalışmada ders kitabı yazan bir yazar için basımevi seçim problemi ele alınmıştır. Problem çözümü için çok kriterli karar verme yöntemlerinden AHP ve TOPSIS yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Uzman görüşleri ve sonucunda; teslimat süresi, maliyet, marka değeri ve alanındaki yetkinlik kriterleri tespit edilmştir. Önce AHP yöntemi ile kriterlerin ağırlıkları belirlenmiş, daha sonra altı alternatif için sıralama yapılarak en iyi çözüm bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Basımevi Seçimi,Çok Kriterli Karar Verme; AHP; TOPSIS

Kaynakça

1. Abalı Y.A., Kutlu B.S., Eren T., “Çok Ölçütlü Ka¬rar Verme Yöntemleri ile Bursiyer Seçimi: Bir Öğ¬retim Kurumunda Uygulama”, Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 26, (3-4), 259-272, 2012.
2. Aalami, H.A., Moghaddam, M.P., Yousefi, G.R. “Modeling and Prioritizing Demand Response Programs in Power Markets”, Electric Power Systems Research, 80 (4), 2010, 426-435.
3. Chan, F.T.S., Chan, H.K., “Development of the Selection model-a case study in the advandec technology industry”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B-Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 218(12), 2004.
4. Chan, F.T.S., Kumar, N., “Global Supplier Development Considering Risk Factors Using Fuzzy Extended AHP-Based Approach”, Omega,35(4), 417–431, 2007.
5. Chan, F.T.S., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M.K., Lau, H.C.W., Choy, K.L., “Global Supplier Selection: A Fuzzy-AHP Approach”, International Journal of Production Research, 46(14), 2008.
6. Chang, C. W. “Collaborative Decision Making Algorithm For Selection Of Optimal Wire Saw in Photovoltaic Wafer Manufacture.” Journal of Intelligent manufacturing, 23(3), 533-539, 2012.
7. Chen, C.-T., Lin, C.-T., Huang, S.-F., “A Fuzzy Approach For Supplier Evaluation And Selection In Supply Chain Management”, International Journal of Production Economics, 102(2), 289-301, 2006.
8. Chou, S.-Y., Chang, Y.-H., “A Decision Support System For Supplier Selection Based On A Strategy-Aligned Fuzzy SMART Approach”, Expert Systems with Applications, 34(4), 2241–2253, 2008.

9. Dağdeviren, M., Eren, T., “Tedarikçi Firma Seçiminde Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi Ve 0-1 Hedef Programlama Yöntemlerinin Kullanılması”, Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2), 41-52, 2001.
10. Fazlollahtabar, H., Mahdavi, I., Ashoori, M.T., Kaviani, S., Amiri, N.M. “A Multi-Objective Decision-Making Process Of Supplier Selection And Order Allocation For Multi-Period Scheduling In An Electronic Market”, The International Journal Of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 52 (9- 12), 1039-1052, 2011.
11. Ghodsypur, S.H., O’Brien, C., “A Decision Support System For Supplier Selection Using An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process And Linear Programming”, International Journal of Production EconomicsVolumes 56–57, 20, 199–212, 1998.
12. Han, F.Y., Jia, X.P., Tan, X.S. “Two Key Support Tools For Environmentally Friendly Process Optimal Synthesis”, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 15, 1274-1279, 2003.
13. Hamurcu, M., Eren, T., “A Multicriteria Decision-Making for Monorail Route Selection in Ankara”, International Journal of Industrial Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 4 (5), 121-125, 2016.
14. Hamurcu, M., Eren, T., “Using ANP- TOPSIS Methods For Route Selection Of Monorail in Ankara”, 28th European Conference on Operational Research, Poznan, Polland, July 3-6, 2016.
15. Hamurcu M., Gür Ş., Özder E.H., Eren T., “A Multicriteria Decision Making For Monorail Projects with Analytic Network Process and 0-1 Goal Programming.”. International Journal Of Advances In Electronics And Computer Science (IJAECS), 3(7):8-12, 2016.
16. Hamurcu, M., Eren, T., “Ankara Büyükşehir Belediyesi’nde Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Yöntemi İle Monoray Güzergâh Seçimi”, Transist 8. Uluslararası Ulaşım Teknolojileri Sempozyumu ve Fuarı, İstanbul, s. 410-419, 17-19 Aralık 2015.
17. Hamurcu, M., Eren, T., “Using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Goal Programming Methods for Invesment Project Selection in Ankara”, 11th International Conferences on Multiple Objective Programming and Goal Programming (MOPGP 2015), Tlemcen, Algeria, 13-15 December 2015.
18. Ho, W., “Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process And Its Applications-A Literature Review”, European Journal of Operational Research, 186(1), 211–228, 2008.
19. Işıklar, G., Büyüközkan G. “Using A Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach To Evaluate Mobile Phone Altematives”, Computer Standards & Interfaces, 29 (2), 265-274, 2007.
20. Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., Ulukan, Z., “Multi-criteria Supplier Selection Using Fuzzy AHP”, Logistics Information Management, 16(6), 382 – 394, 2003.
21. Koyuncu, O., Özcan, M., “Personel Seçim Sürecinde Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci Ve TOPSIS Yöntemlerinin Karşılaştırılması: Otomotiv Sektöründe Bir Uygulama”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(2), 195-218, 2014.
22. Kuo, Y., Yang, T., Cho, C., Tseng, Y.C., “Using Simulation And Multi- Criteria Methods To Provide Robust Solutions To Dispatching Problems In A Flow Shop With Multiple Processors”, Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 78 (1), 40-56, 2008.
23. Lin, M.-C., Wang, C.-C., Chen, M.-S., Alec Chang, C., “Using AHP and TOPSIS Approaches In Customer-Driven Product Design Process”, Computers in Industry 59(1), 17–31, 2008.
24. Özdemir, A., “Ürün Grupları Temelinde Tedarikçi Seçim Probleminin Ele Alınması Ve Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci Ile Çözülmesi”, Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 12(1), 2010.
25. Paksoy, T., Güleş, H.K., “Analytic Hierarchy Process For Supplier Selection Problem In Supply Chain Management: Case Study Of A Textile Manufacturer Firm.” Sigma, 4, 100-110, 2006.
26. Rao R.V. “Machinability Evaluation of Work Materials Using A Combined Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Method”, The International Journal Of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 28 (3-4), 221-227, 2006.
27. Rao, R.V., Davim, J.P. “A Decision-Making Framework Model for Material Selection Using A Combined Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Method”, The International Journal Of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 35 (7- 8), 751-760, 2006.
28. Seçme, N. Y., & Özdemir, A. İ. “Bulanik Analitik Hiyerarşi Yöntemi İle Çok Kriterli Stratejik Tedarikçi Seçimi: Türkiye Örneği”. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 22(2), 2008.
29. Shyjith, K., Ilangkumaran, M., Kumanan, S., “Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach to Evaluate Optimum Maintenance Strategy in Textile Industry”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 14(4), 375-386, 2008.
30. Sobczak, A., Berry, D.M., “Distributed Priority Ranking Of Strategic Preliminary Requirements For Management Information Systems In Economic Organizations”, Information and Software Technology, 49 (9-10), 960-984, 2007.
31. Supçiller, A. A., Çapraz, O. “AHP-TOPSIS Yöntemine Dayali Tedarikçi Seçimi Uygulaması”, Ekonometri ve İstatistik Dergisi, (13), 1, 2011.
32. Şevkli, M., “An Application of The Fuzzy ELECTRE Method for Supplier Selection”, International Journal of Production Research 48(12), 2010.
33. Tzeng, G.H., Lin, C.W., Opricovic, S., “Multi-Criteria Analysis of Altemative-Fuel Buses For Public Transportation”, Energy Policy, 33 (11), 1373-1383, 2005.
34. Wang, J.-W., Cheng, C.-H., Kun-Cheng, H., “Fuzzy Hierarchical TOPSIS for Supplier Selection”, Applied Soft Computing, 9(1), 377–386, 2009.
35. Wang, G., Huang, S.H., Dismukes, J.P., “Product-driven Supply Chain Selection Using Integrated Multi-criteria Decision-making Methodology”, International journal of Production Economics, 91(1), 1–15, 2004.
36. Wang, F., Kang, S., Du, T., Li, F., Qiu, R., “Determination of Comprehensive Quality Index For Tomato And Its Response To Different İrrigation Treatments”, Agricultural Water Management, 98 (8), 1228-1238, 2011.
37. Yahya, S., Kingsman, B., “Vendor Rating For An Entrepreneur Development Programme: A Case Study Using The Analytic Hierarchy Process Method”, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(9), 916-930, 1997.
38. Yurdakul, M., İç, Y.T., “Türk Otomotiv Firmalarının Performans Ölçümü Ve Analizine Yönelik TOPSIS Yöntemi Kullanan Bir Örnek Çalışma”, Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik ve Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 2003.
39. Yurdakul, M., İç, Y.T., “Development of a Performance Measurement Model For Manufacturing Companies Using the AHP and TOPSIS Approaches”, International Journal of Production Research,43(21), 609-4641, 2005.
40. Zanakis, S.H., Solomon, A., Wishart, N., Dublish, S. “Multi-attribute Decision Making: A Simulation Comparison Of Select Methods”, European Journal of Öperational Research, 107 (3), 507-529, 1998.