Selecting Contractor Company in Urban Transformation Using SWARA - Gray Relationship Analysis Method

Öz

After the Law No. 6306 on the Transformation of Areas Under Disaster Risk (Law on Urban Transformation) has entered into force, the buildings which have been damaged by the earthquakes and completed its economic life can be reconstructed.  In case that the building is found to be under the risk following the risk assessment to be carried out by the institutions and organizations, licensed by the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (MEU), upon request of the owner/ owners of the property, the building can be demolished. The resolution to be taken by at least two-thirds majority of stakeholders will be valid for the selection of the contracting firm for construction of new building after its demolition. We encounter with the selection of the contracting firm as a problem of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM).

The purpose of this study is to select the contracting firm, which will construct the new building in the place of the building under the risk that has been demolished under the urban transformation, by using SWARA-based Gray Relationship Analysis method. In the sample application; a-5-storey building with 10 houses was found to be the risk building and MEU decided to demolish that building. The stakeholders of land determined the criteria on the selection of the contracting firm to construct the new building following the demolition of the building and alternative contracting firms by utilizing the support of experts. The weighting of the criteria was performed by using SWARA method and the alternative contracting firms were assessed by Gray Relationship Analysis method. Thus, the contracting firm providing maximum benefits and yield was selected within the scope of the criteria set out by the stakeholders.

 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Urban Transformation,Contractor Selection,SWARA Method,Gray Relationship Analysis Method

Kentsel Dönüşüm Kapsamında Müteahhit Firmanın SWARA – Gri İlişkisel Analiz Yöntemiyle Seçilmesi

Öz

6306 sayılı Afet Riski Altındaki Alanların Dönüştürülmesi Hakkında Kanunun (Kentsel Dönüşüm Kanunu - KDK) yürürlüğe girmesinin ardından ekonomik ömrünü tamamlamış, depremlerde hasar görmüş binalar yeniden inşa edilebilmektedir. Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı (ÇŞB) tarafından lisanslandırılan kurum ve kuruluşlara mülk sahibi / sahipleri tarafından yaptırılacak risk tespitinin ardından, binanın riskli olması durumunda bina yıkımına gidilmektedir. Yıkım sonrası yeni bina inşası için müteahhit firmanın seçiminde paydaşların en az üçte iki çoğunlukla alacakları karar geçerli olmaktadır. Müteahhit firmanın seçim işlemi ise, çok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV) problemi olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır.

Bu çalışmada amaç, kentsel dönüşüm kapsamında yıkımı gerçekleştirilen riskli bina yerine, yeni binayı inşa edecek müteahhit firmanın SWARA temelli Gri İlişkisel Analiz yöntemiyle seçilmesidir. Örnek uygulamada, 5 katlı ve 10 daireli bir binanın riskli yapı olduğu tespit edilerek, ÇŞB tarafından yıkılmasına karar verilmiştir. Arsa paydaşları tarafından, yıkım sonrası yeni binayı inşa edecek müteahhit firmanın seçimi için kriterler belirlenmiş ve alternatif müteahhitlerin seçiminde ise uzman desteğinden faydalanılmıştır. Kriterlerin ağırlıklandırılması SWARA yöntemiyle yapılmış, alternatif müteahhitler ise Gri İlişkisel Analiz yöntemiyle değerlendirilmiştir. Böylece, paydaşların kendi belirledikleri kriterler çerçevesinde, maksimum fayda ve getiriyi sağlayan müteahhit firma seçilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kentsel Dönüşüm,Müteahhit Seçimi,SWARA Yöntemi,Gri İlişkisel Analiz Yöntemi

Kaynakça

1. Acar, Y. (2014). İnşaat sektöründe ANP (Analytic Network Process) Yöntemiyle Alt Yüklenici Seçimi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
2. Aghdaie, M. H., Zolfani, S. H. ve Zavadskas, E. K. (2013). Decision Making in Machine Tool Selection : An Integrated Approach with SWARA and COPRAS-G Methods. Engineering Economics, 24(1), 5–17.
3. Aghdaie, M. H., Zolfani, S. H. ve Zavadskas, E. K. (2014a). Synergies of Data Mining and Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110(2014), 767–776.
4. Aghdaie, M. H., Zolfani, S. H. ve Zavadskas, E. K. (2014b). Sales Branches Performance Evaluation: A Multiple Attribute Decision Making Approach. 8th International Scientific Conference “Business and Management 2014” içinde (ss. 1–7). Lithuania: Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
5. Alimardani, M., Zolfani, S. H., Aghdaie, M. H. ve Tamošaitienė, J. (2013). A Novel Hybrid SWARA and VIKOR Methodology for Supplier Selection in an Agile Environment. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19(3), 533–548.
6. Anh, H., Nguyen, D., Lee, C. ve Shin, K. (2017). An approach to optimizing printed conductive lines in high-resolution roll-to- roll gravure printing. Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 46(January), 122–129. doi:10.1016/j.rcim.2017.01.003.
7. Chan, J. W. K. ve Tong, T. K. L. (2007). Multi-Criteria Material Selections and End-of-Life Product Strategy: Grey Relational Analysis Approach. Materials and Design, 28(5), 1539–1546. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2006.02.016.
8. Chang, C.-L., Tsai, C.-H. ve Chen, L. (2003). Applying Grey Relational Analysis to the Decathlon Evaluation Model. International Journal of The Computer, The Internet and Management, 11(3), 54–62.

9. Chen, F. L. ve Ou, T. Y. (2009). Gray Relation Analysis and Multilayer Functional Link Network Sales Forecasting Model for Perishable Food in Convenience Store. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 7054–7063. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.08.034.
10. Cristóbal, J. S. (2012). Contractor Selection Using Multicriteria Decision-Making Methods. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(6), 751–758. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000488.
11. Çakır, E. (2016). Kentsel Dönüşüm Kapsamında Müteahhit (Yüklenici) Firmanın Bütünleşik SWARA - VIKOR Yöntemiyle Seçilmesi. Proceedings of XVII. International Symposium on Econometrics, Operations Research and Statistics içinde (ss. 881–896). Sivas: Proceedings of XVII. International Symposium on Econometrics, Operations Research and Statistics.
12. Çakır, E. (2017). Kriter Ağırlıklarının SWARA – Copeland Yöntemi ile Belirlenmesi: Bir Üretim İşletmesinde Uygulama. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4(1), 42–56.
13. Çakmak, Z., Baş, M. ve Yıldırım, E. (2012). Gri İlişkisel Analiz ve Uyum Analizi ile Bir İşletmede Karşılaşılan Üretim Hatalarının İncelenmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 123–142.
14. Çalal, S. (2016). Kentsel Dönüşüm Alanı İlan Edilen Yerlerde Yüklenicilerin Sorumlulukları. Mali Çözüm Dergisi, 26(133), 141–145.
15. Çaydaş, U. ve Hasçalık, A. (2008). Use of the Grey Relational Analysis to Determine Optimum Laser Cutting Parameters with Multi-Performance Characteristics. Optics and Laser Technology, 40(7), 987–994. doi:10.1016/j.optlastec.2008.01.004
16. Çiftçioğlu, B. (2013). İnşaat Sektöründe AHP Yöntemi ile Alt Yüklenici Seçimi: Bir Konut Projesinde Uygulama. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
17. Das, D. K., Mishra, P. C., Chaubey, A. K. ve Singh, S. (2016). Fabrication Process Optimization for Improved Mechanical Properties of Al 7075/SiCp Metal Matrix Composites. Management Science Letters, 6, 297–308. doi:10.5267/j.msl.2016.1.011
18. Dehnavi, A., Aghdam, I. N., Pradhan, B. ve Morshed Varzandeh, M. H. (2015). A New Hybrid Model Using Step-Wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (SWARA) Technique and Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) for Tegional Landslide Hazard Assessment in Iran. Catena, 135(2015), 122–148.
19. Erdem, İ. (2013). Yöneylem Araştırması ve WinQSB Uygulamaları. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
20. Forghani, M. A. ve Izadi, L. (2013). Contractor Selection Based on SWOT Analysis with VIKOR Aand TOPSIS Methods in Fuzzy Environment. World Applied Sciences Journal, 24(4), 540–549. doi:10.5829/idosi.wasj.2013.24.04.346
21. Fung, C. P. (2003). Manufacturing Process Optimization for Wear Property of Fiber-Reinforced Polybutylene Terephthalate Composites with Grey Relational Analysis. Wear, 254(3–4), 298–306. doi:10.1016/S0043-1648(03)00013-9
22. Gavcar, E., Coşkun, E., Paksoy, T., Eleren, A., Sulak, H., Özdemir, M., … Keskin, R. (2011). Yöneylem Araştırması. (V. Tecim, Ed.). İstanbul: Lisans Yayıncılık.
23. Goyal, S. ve Grover, S. (2012). Applying Fuzzy Grey Relational Analysis for Ranking the Advanced Manufacturing Systems. Grey Systems: Theory and Application, 2(2), 284–298. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20439371211260243
24. Görener, A. ve Sabuncuoglu, O. (2016). Bulanık TOPSIS Metodu ile Karar Verme: İnşaat Projelerinde Yüklenici Seçimi. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 5(2), 71–82. doi:10.20525/ijrbs.v5i2.328
25. Hasani, H., Tabatabaei, S. A. ve Amiri, G. (2012). Grey Relational Analysis to Determine the Optimum Process Parameters for Open-End Spinning Yarns. Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, 7(2), 81–86.
26. Hepsen, A. ve Yildirim, B. F. (2015). Grey Relational Analysis Based Ranking of Latin American and Caribbean Economies. Pressacademia, 2(3), 301–312. doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2015312957
27. Hillier, F. S. ve Lieberman, G. J. (2001). Introduction to Operational Research. New York: McGraw-Hill.
28. Hua, Y., Wang, S., Chai, C., Liu, Z., Liu, X., Zou, L., … Ying, Y. (2016). Quality Evaluation of Pseudostellariae Radix Based on Simultaneous Determination of Multiple Bioactive Components Combined with Grey Relational Analysis. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 22(1). doi:10.3390/molecules22010013
29. Hussain, T., Arain, F. A. ve Malik, Z. A. (2017). Use of Taguchi Method and Grey Relational Analysis to Optimize Multiple Yarn Characteristics in Open-End Rotor Spinning. Autex Research Journal, 17(1), 67–72. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eoah&AN=41495260&lang=tr&site=ehost-live adresinden erişildi.
30. İncedayı, D. (2004). Kentsel Dönüşüm Kavramı Üzerine. Mimar.ist - Üç Aylık Mimarlık Kültür Dergisi, 4(12), 60–61.
31. Juan, Y.-K. (2009). A Hybrid Approach Using Data Envelopment Analysis and Case-Based Reasoning For Housing Refurbishment Contractors Selection And Performance İmprovement. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5702–5710. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.053
32. Juan, Y. K., Perng, Y. H., Castro-Lacouture, D. ve Lu, K. S. (2009). Housing Refurbishment Contractors Selection Based On A Hybrid Fuzzy-QFD Approach. Automation in Construction, 18(2), 139–144. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2008.06.001
33. Kaplan, B. (2014). Genetik Algoritma ve Monte Carlo Simülasyonu ile Bir İnşaat Projesinde Alt Yüklenici Seçimine İlişkin Süre Maliyet Kalite Optimizasyonu ve Risk Değerlendirmesi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
34. Karabasevic, D., Paunkovic, H. ve Stanujkic, D. (2016). Ranking of companies according to the indicators of corporate social responsibility based on SWARA and ARAS methods. Serbian Journal of Management, 11(1), 43–53. doi:10.5937/sjm11-7877
35. Karabasevic, D., Stanujkic, D., Urosevic, S. ve Maksimovic, M. (2015). Selection of Candidates in the Mining Industry Based on the Application of the SWARA and the MULTIMOORA Methods. Acta Montanistica Slovaca, 20(2), 116–124.
36. Karabasevic, D., Stanujkic, D., Urosevic, S. ve Maksimovic, M. (2016). An approach to personnel selection based on Swara and Waspas methods. Journal of Economics, Management and Informatics, 7(1), 1–11. doi:10.5937/bizinfo1601001K
37. Keleş, R. (2004). Kentsel Dönüşümün Tüzel Altyapısı. Mimar.ist - Üç Aylık Mimarlık Kültür Dergisi, 4(12), 72–75.
38. Keršulienė, V. ve Turskis, Z. (2011). Integrated Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making Model for Architect Selection. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(4), 645–666.
39. Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K. ve Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of Rational Dispute Resolution Method by Applying New Step-Wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (Swara). Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 243–258.
40. Köseokur, H. (2007). İnşaat Sektöründe Yapay Sinir Ağları Yardımıyla Alt Yüklenici Seçimi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
41. Kung, C. Y. ve Wen, K. L. (2007). Applying Grey Relational Analysis and Grey Decision-Making to Evaluate the Relationship Between Company Attributes and Its Financial Performance - A Case Study of Venture Capital Enterprises in Taiwan. Decision Support Systems, 43(3), 842–852. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2006.12.012
42. Kuo, Y., Yang, T. ve Huang, G. W. (2008). The Use of Grey Relational Analysis in Solving Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Problems. CompComputers & Industrial Engineering, 55(1), 80–93. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2007.12.002
43. Lee, W. S. ve Lin, Y.-C. (2011). Evaluating and ranking energy performance of office buildings using Grey relational analysis. Energy, 36(2011), 2551–2556. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.049
44. Lin, Y.-H., Lee, P.-C. ve Chang, T.-P. (2009). Practical Expert Diagnosis Model Based on the Grey Relational Analysis Technique. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2, Part 1), 1523–1528. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2007.11.046
45. Lin, Z. C. ve Ho, C. Y. (2003). Analysis and application of grey relation and ANOVA in chemical-mechanical polishing process parameters. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 21(1), 10–14. doi:10.1007/s001700300001
46. Lu, I. J., Lin, S. J. ve Lewis, C. (2008). Grey Relation Analysis of Motor Vehicular Energy Consumption in Taiwan. Energy Policy, 36(7), 2556–2561. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.03.015
47. Nezhad, M. R. G., Zolfani, S. H., Moztarzadeh, F., Zavadskas, E. K. ve Bahrami, M. (2015). Planning the priority of high tech industries based on SWARA-WASPAS methodology: The case of the nanotechnology industry in Iran. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, 28(1), 1111–1137. doi:10.1080/1331677x.2015.1102404
48. Peker, İ. ve Baki, B. (2011). Performance Evaluation in Turkish Insurance Sector with Grey Relationship Analysis. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 3(7), 1–18.
49. Rajesh, R. ve Ravi, V. (2015). Supplier selection in resilient supply chains: A grey relational analysis approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 86(August 2014), 343–359. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.054
50. Ramezaniyan, M. R., Kazemi, M., Jafari, H. ve Elahi, S. M. (2012). Application of Integrated Fuzzy VIKOR & AHP Methodology to Contractor Ranking. Management Science Letters, 2(5), 1511–1526. doi:10.5267/j.msl.2012.05.017
51. Rashvand, P., Majid, M. Z. A. ve Pinto, J. K. (2015). Contractor management performance evaluation model at prequalification stage. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(12), 5087–5101. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.02.043
52. Saha, A. ve Mandal, N. K. (2013). Optimization of Machining Parameters of Turning Operations Based on Multi Performance Criteria. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, 4, 51–60. doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2012.011.004
53. Sarucan, A., Baysal, E. M., Kahraman, C. ve Engin, O. (2011). A Hierarchy Grey Relational Analysis for Selecting the Renewable Electricity Generation Technologies. World Congress on Engineering, II, 4–9.
54. Senger, Ö. ve Albayrak, Ö. K. (2016). Gri İlişki Analizi Yöntemi ile Personel Değerlendirme Üzerine Bir Çalışma. International Journal of Economic & Administrative Studies, 2016(7), 235–258.
55. Shukla, S., Mishra, P. K., Jain, R. ve Yadav, H. C. (2016). An integrated decision making approach for ERP system selection using SWARA and PROMETHEE method. Int. J. of Intelligent Enterprise, 3(2), 120–147. doi:10.1504/IJIE.2016.076041
56. Sofyalıoğlu, Ç. ve Öztürk, Ş. (2012). Application of Grey Relational Analysis With Fuzzy AHP to FMEA Method. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 13(1), 114–130.
57. Stanujkic, D., Karabasevic, D. ve Zavadskas, E. K. (2015). A Framework for the Selection of a Packaging Design Based on the SWARA Method. Engineering Economics, 26(2), 181–187.
58. Sumrit, D., Anuntavoranich, P. ve Vadhanasindhu, P. (2012). Strategic Decision for the External Technological Innovation Acquisition Mode Selection by Using an Integration of AHP and GRA Methods: A Case Study on a Thai New Technology-Based Firm. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 6(1), 29–38.
59. Tekin, M. (2008). Sayısal Yöntemler. Konya: Selçuk Üniversitesi İİBF.
60. Timor, M. (2010). Yöneylem Araştırması. İstanbul: Türkmen Kitabevi.
61. Topcu, Y. I. (2004). A decision model proposal for construction contractor selection in Turkey. Building and Environment, 39(4), 469–481. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2003.09.009
62. Tosun, N. (2006). Determination of Optimum Parameters for Multi-Performance Characteristics in Drilling by Using Grey Relational Analysis. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 28(5–6), 450–455. doi:10.1007/s00170-004-2386-y
63. Tsai, C.-H., Chang, C.-L. ve Chen, L. (2003). Applying Grey Relational Analysis to the Vendor Evaluation Model. International Journal of The Computer, The Internet and Management, 11(3), 45–53.
64. Tuş Işık, A. ve Aytaç Adalı, E. (2016). A new integrated decision making approach based on SWARA and OCRA methods for the hotel selection problem. International Journal of Advanced Operations Management, 8(2), 140–151. doi:10.1504/IJAOM.2016.079681
65. Tzeng, C.-J., Lin, Y.-H., Yang, Y.-K. ve Jeng, M.-C. (2009). Optimization of Turning Operations with Multiple Performance Characteristics Using The Taguchi Method and Grey Relational Analysis. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 209(6), 2753–2759. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.06.046
66. Uçkun, N. ve Girginer, N. (2011). Türkiye’deki Kamu ve Özel Bankaların Performanslarının Gri İlişki Analizi ile İncelenmesi, 67–88.
67. Ulubeyli, S. (2008). Uluslararası İnşaat Projelerinde Alt Yüklenici Seçimi İçin Bulanık Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Modeli. İstanbul Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Doktora Tezi.
68. Ulubeyli, S. ve Kazaz, A. (2016). Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model For Subcontractor Selection in International Construction Projects. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 22(2), 210–234. doi:10.3846/20294913.2014.984363
69. Üstünışık, N. Z. (2007). Türkiye’deki İller ve Bölgeler Bazında Sosyo-Ekonomik Gelişmişlik Sıralaması Araştırması: Gri İlişkisel Analiz Yöntemi ve Uygulaması. Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara.
70. Vafaeipour, M., Zolfani, S. H., Varzandeh, M. H. M., Derakhti, A. ve Keshavarz, M. E. (2014). Assessment of Regions Priority for Implementation of Solar Projects in Iran: New Application of a Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach. Energy Conversion and Management, 86(2014), 653–663.
71. Vijaya, B., Sharavanan, S. ve Jeykrishnan, J. (2017). Optimization of process parameters in drilling of fibre hybrid composite using Taguchi and grey relational analysis. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 183(1), 12003. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eoah&AN=41519614&lang=tr&site=ehost-live adresinden erişildi.
72. Wang, S.-M., Hsieh, C.-H. ve Sie, P.-R. (2014). A Grey Relation Analysis of the Performance of Listed Hospitality Companies in Taiwan. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 7(3), 115–125.
73. Wu, H.-H. (2002). A Comparative Study of Using Grey Relational Analysis in Multiple Attribute Decision Making Problems. Quality Engineering, 15(2), 209–217. doi:10.1081/QEN-120015853
74. Yan, F., Qiao, D., Qian, B., Ma, L., Xing, X., Zhang, Y. ve Wang, X. (2016). Improvement of CCME WQI using grey relational method. Journal of Hydrology, 543, 316–323. http://10.0.3.248/j.jhydrol.2016.10.007 adresinden erişildi.
75. Yan, J., Li, L., Zhao, F., Zhang, F. ve Zhao, Q. (2016). A multi-level optimization approach for energy-efficient flexible flow shop scheduling. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137, 1543–1552. http://10.0.3.248/j.jclepro.2016.06.161 adresinden erişildi.
76. Yazdani, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Ignatius, J. ve Abad, M. D. (2016). Sensitivity analysis in MADM methods: Application of material selection. Engineering Economics, 27(4), 382–391. doi:10.5755/j01.ee.27.4.14005
77. Yıldırım, B. F. ve Önder, E. (2014). İşletmeciler, Mühendisler ve Yöneticiler için Operasyonel, Yönetsel ve Stratejik Problemlerin Çözümünde Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri. Bursa: Dora Yayınları.
78. Yılmaz, E. ve Güngör, F. (2010). Gri İli̇şki̇sel Anali̇z Yöntemi̇ne Göre Farklı Sertli̇klerde Opti̇mum Takım Tutucusunun Beli̇rlenmesi̇. 2. Ulusal Tasarım İmalat ve Analiz Kongresi içinde (ss. 1–9).
79. Zhai, L. Y., Khoo, L. P. ve Zhong, Z. W. (2009). Design Concept Evaluation in Product Development Using Rough Sets and Grey Relation Analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 7072–7079. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.08.068
80. Zolfani, S. H. ve Bahrami, M. (2014). Investment Prioritizing in High Tech Industries Based on SWARA-COPRAS Approach. Technological & Economic Development of Economy, 20(3), 534–553.
81. Zolfani, S. H. ve Banihashemi, S. S. A. (2014). Personnel Selection Based on a Novel Model of Game Theory and MCDM Approaches. 8th International Scientific Conference “Business and Management 2014” içinde (ss. 191–198). Lithuania: Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
82. Zolfani, S. H., Esfahani, M. H., Bitarafan, M., Zavadskas, E. K. ve Arefi, S. L. (2013). Developing A New Hybrid MCDM Method for Selection of The Optimal Alternative of Mechanical Longitudinal Ventilation of Tunnel Pollutants During Automobile Accidents. Transport, 28(1), 89–96. doi:10.3846/16484142.2013.782567
83. Zolfani, S. H. ve Saparauskas, J. (2013). New Application of SWARA Method in Prioritizing Sustainability Assessment Indicators of Energy System. Engineering Economics, 24(5), 408–414.
84. Zolfani, S. H., Zavadskas, E. K. ve Turskis, Z. (2013). Design of Products with Both International and Local Perspectives Based on Yin-Yang Balance Theory and SWARA Method. Economic Research, 26(2), 153–166.