-

Öz

Supplier selection is an important activity within the purchasing function. The main objective of supplier selection is to identify high-potential suppliers who meet the firm’s continuity and price effectiveness needs. The right choices about suppliers improve the customer satisfaction and competitiveness while reducing costs. In this study, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), TOPSIS and K-means methods are used to solve supplier selection and evaluation problem. The criteria are weighted using AHP and then these weights are used as input of TOPSIS method. The suppliers ranked according to weighted scores using TOPSIS are divided into subsets with K-means method. Instead of selecting the best supplier, it is aimed to generate the infrastructure to prepare effective procurement plan clustering the suppliers who have similar characteristics by using Kmeans method with AHP and TOPSIS methods

Anahtar Kelimeler

• AHP, TOPSIS, K-Means

TEDARİKÇİ SEÇİMİ İÇİN BİR KARAR DESTEK SİSTEMİ

Öz

Tedarikçi seçimi, satın alma fonksiyonu içerisinde oldukça önemli bir faaliyettir. Tedarikçi seçiminin başlıca amacı, firmanın süreklilik ve fiyat etkinliği ihtiyaçlarını karşılayan yüksek potansiyelli tedarikçilerin belirlenmesidir. Tedarikçiler konusunda yapılacak doğru tercihler satın alma maliyetlerinin azaltırken, müşteri memnuniyeti ve rekabet yeteneğini artırır. Bu çalışmada, tedarikçi seçimi ve değerlendirme probleminin çözümü için Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (AHP), TOPSIS ve K-ortalamalar yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Değerlendirme kriterlerin ağırlıkları AHP ile belirlenmiş ve bu ağırlıklar TOPSIS yönteminin girdisi olarak kullanılmıştır. TOPSIS ile ağırlıklı puanlarına göre sıralanan tedarikçiler K-ortalamalar yöntemi ile alt kümelere ayrılmıştır. En iyi tedarikçiyi seçmek yerine, K-ortalamalar yönteminin AHP ve TOPSIS yöntemleri ile birlikte kullanımıyla benzer özellikleri olan tedarikçileri kümelendirerek etkin tedarik planlarının hazırlanması hedeflenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• AHP, TOPSIS, K-Ortalamalar

Kaynakça

1. Akçalı, E., 2009. Ankara İçin Optimal Hastane Yeri Seçiminin Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci İle Modellenmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14 (2), 69-86.
2. Albayrak, Y. E. ve Erkut, H., 2005. Banka Performans Değerlendirmede Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreç Yaklaşımı. İTÜ Mühendislik Dergisi, 4 (6), 47–58.
3. Aıssaouı, N., Haouarı, M., Hassını, E., 2007. Supplier selection and order lot sizing modeling: A review. Computers & Operations Research, 34, 3516-3540.
4. Athawale, V. M., Chakraborty, S., 2010. A TOPSIS Method-based Approach to Machine Tool Selection. Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Dhaka, Bangladesh, January 9-10.
5. Azadnia, A.H., Ghadimi, P., Saman, M.Z.M., Wong, K.Y., Sharif, S., 2011. Supplier Selection: A Hybrid Approach Using ELECTRE and Fuzzy Clustering. Informatics Engineering and Information Science Communications in Computer and Information Science, 252, 663-676
6. Benton, W.C., 1991. Quantity discount decisions under conditions of multiple items, multiple suppliers and resource limitations. International Journal of Production Research, 29, 10, 1953-1961.
7. Benıtez, J.M., Martın, J.C., Roman,C. 2007. Using Fuzzy Number For measuring Quality Of Service In The Hotel Industry. Tourism Management, 28, 2, 544- 555.
8. Bottani, E., Rizzi, A., 2008. An adapted multi-criteria approach to suppliers and products selection—An application oriented to lead-time reduction. International Journal of Production Economics, 111, 763–781.

9. Bülbül, S., Köse, A., 2009. Türk Gıda şirketlerinin Finansal Performansını Çok Amaçlı Karar Verme Yöntemleriyle Değerlendirilmesi. 10. Ekonometri ve İstatistik Sempozyumu, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum, 1-23.
10. Chamodrakas, I., Batıs, D., Martakos, D., 2010. Supplier selection in electronic marketplaces using satisficing and fuzzy AHP. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 1, 490-498.
11. Chaudhry, S.S., Forst, F.G., Zydiak, J.L., 1993. Vendor selection with price breaks. European Journal of Operational Research, 70, 52-66.
12. Che, Z.H., Wang, H.S., (2010). “A hybrid approach for supplier Mathematics with Applications, 59, 2, 745–763. Computers &
13. Che, Z.H., 2012. Clustering and selecting suppliers based on simulated annealing algorithms. Journal Computers & Mathematics with Applications archive, 63, 1, 228-238.
14. Chen, S.J., Hwang, C.L., (1992), “Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications”, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
15. Chen, C. T., Lin, C. T., & Huang, S. F. (2006). “A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management”, International Journal of Production Economics, 102, 2, 289–301.
16. Chen, C. T., Lin, C. T., Huang, S. F. 2006. A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management. International Journal of Production Economics, 102, 289–301.
17. Chu, T.C., Lin, Y.C., 2003. A Fuzzy Topsis Method for Robot Selection. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 21, 284- 290.
18. Çalişkan, S.K. Ve Soğukpinar, İ., 2008. KxKNN: K-Means ve K En Yakın Komşu Yöntemleri ile Ağlarda Nüfuz Tespiti. 2. Ağ ve Bilgi Güvenliği Sempozyumu, 16- 18 Mayıs, Girne, 120-124.
19. Çetin A.,C., Bitirak, İ. A., (2010), “Banka Karlılık Performansının Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci İle Değerlendirilmesi: Ticari Bankalar İle Katılım Bankalarında Bir Uygulama. Alanya İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 2, 2, 75-92.
20. Dağdeviren, M., Eren, T., 2001. Tedarikçi firma seçiminde analitik hiyerarşi prosesi ve 0-1 hedef programlama yöntemlerinin kullanılması. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, 16, 2, 41-52.
21. Das, C., Tyagi, R., 1994. Wholesaler: a decision support system distribution. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 24, 10, 4- 12. procurement and ve Homojen Bölgelerin
22. Ghodsypour, S.H., O’brien, C., 2001. The total cost of logistics in Supplier selection, under conditions of multiple sourcing, multiple criteria and capacity constraints. International Journal of Production Economics, 73, 15-27.
23. Ghodsypur, S.H., O’brien, C., 1998. A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. International Journal of Production Economics, 56-57, 199-212.
24. Girginer, N., Kaygısız Z., 2009. İstatistiksel Yazılım Seçiminde Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci ve 0–1 Hedef Programlama Yöntemlerinin Birlikte Kullanımı. Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10, 1, 211-233.
25. Grando, A., Sianesi, A., 1996. Supply management: a vendor rating assessment. CEMS Business Review, 1, 199-212.
26. Gregory, R.E., 1986. Source selection: a matrix approach. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 22, 2, 24-29.
27. Güner, H., Mutlu, Ö., 2005. Bulanik AHP İle Tedarikçi Seçim Problemi ve Bir Uygulama. V. Ulusal Üretim Araştırmaları Sempozyumu, İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi, 25-27 Kasım 2005.
28. Güngör, İ., İşler D.B., 2005. Analitik Hiyerarşi Yaklaşımı ile Otomobil Seçimi. ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1, 2, 21-33.
29. Hinkle, C.L., Robinson, P. J., Green, P. E., 1969. Vendor evaluation using cluster analysis. Journal of Purchasing, 5, 3, 49-58.
30. Ho, W., 2008. Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 186, 211-228.
31. Holt, G.D., 1998. Which contractor selection methodology?. International Journal of Project Management, 16, 3, 153-164.
32. Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K., 1981. Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.
33. Ibrahim,O., Nilashi, M., Bagherifard, K., Hashemi, N., Janahmadi, N., Barisam, J., 2011. Application of AHP and K-Means Clustering for Ranking and Classifying Customer Trust in M-commerce. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5 12, 1441-1457.
34. İç Y.T., Yurdakul, M., 2000. Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHS) Yöntemini Kullanan Bir Kredi Değerlendirme Sistemi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 15, 1, 1- 14.
35. Jahanshahloo G.R., Hosseinzadeh L.F., Izadikhah, M., (2006). Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181, 1, 544–1551.
36. Karaatlı, M., Ömürbek, N., Köse, G., 2014. Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci Temelli TOPSIS ve VIKOR Yöntemleri İle Futbolcu Performanslarının Değerlendirilmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 29, 1, 25-61.
37. Karpak, B., Kumcu, E., Kasuganti, R., 1999. An application of visual interactive goal programming: a case in vendor selection decisions. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 8, 93-105.
38. Kengpol A., 2004. Design of a decision support system to evaluate the investment in a new distribution centre. International Journal of Production Economics, 90, 1, 59-70.
39. Koçak, A., 2003. Yazılım Seçiminde Analitik Hiyerarşi Yöntemi yaklaşımı ve Bir Uygulama. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 1, 67-77.
40. Laudon, K.C., Laudon, J.P., 2011. Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri Dijital İşletmeyi Yönetme (U. YOZGAT vd., Çev.), Ankara: Nobel.
41. Le, M.C., Nguyen, V.T., 2007. Strategy for Project Portfolio Selection in Private Corarations in Vietnam. Master Thesis, Umea School Of Business, Sweeden. portal.org/smash/get/diva2:141275/FULLTEXT0 1.pdf) (http://umu.diva
42. Lee, C.P., Lou, S.J., Shih, R.C., Tseng, K.H., 2011. An AHP- Based Weighted Analysis of Network Knowledge Management Platforms for Elementary School Students. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10, 4, 52-59.
43. Liaudanskiene, R., Ustinovicius, L., Bogdanovicius, A., 2009. Evaluation of Construction Process Safety Solutions Using the TOPSIS Method. Inzinerine Ekonomika - Engineering Economics, 4, 32-40.
44. Liu, J., Ding, F.Y., Lall, V., 2000. Using Data Envelopment Analysis to compare suppliers for supplier selection and performance improvement. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 5, 3, 143-150.
45. Liu, W., Jiang, L., 2010. A Clustering Algorithm FCM- ACO for Supplier Base Management, Advanced Data Mining and Applications Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6440, 106-113.
46. Lopez Ortega, O., Rosales, M.A., 2011. An agent- oriented decision support system combining fuzzy clustering and the AHP. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 7, 8275-8284.
47. Macqueen, J. B., 1967. Some Methods for classification and Analysis of Multivariate Observations. Proceedings of 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability 1. University of California Press, 281–297.
48. Mehdizadeh, E., 2009. A fuzzy clustering PSO algorithm for supplier base management. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 4, 4, 311-320.
49. Monczka, R.M., Trecha, S.J., 1988. Cost-based supplier performance evaluation. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 24, 2, 2-7.
50. Murat, G., Çelik, N., 2007. Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci Yöntemi ile Otel İşletmelerinde Hizmet Kalitesini Değerlendirme: Bartın Örneği. ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3, 6, 1-20.
51. Ng, S.T., Skitmore, R.M., 1995. CP-DSS: decision support system for contractor prequalification. Civil Engineering Systems: Decision Making Problem Solving, 12, 2, 133-160.
52. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.H., 2004. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 445–455.
53. Orçanli, K., Özen, Ü., 2013. Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinden Ahp Ve Topsıs'in E-Kitap Okuyucu Seçiminde Uygulanması. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15, 282-311.
54. Özgül, Ö. Yazgan, H.R., 2006. Bir İşletme İçin TOPSIS ve AHP Yöntemleri ile ERP Yazılımının Seçimi. 26. Yöneylem Araştırması ve Endüstri Mühendisliği Konferansı, 3-5 Temmuz, Kocaeli.
55. Özkan, B., Başlıgıl, H., Şahın, N., 2011. “Supplier Selection Using Analytic Hierarchy Process: An Application From Turkey. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2011, Vol II, WCE 2011, July 6 - 8, 2011, London, U.K.
56. Pal, M.N., Choudhury, K., 2009. Exploring The Dimensionality Of Service Quality: An Application Of TOPSIS in the Indian Banking Industry. Asia- Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), 26, 1, 115-133.
57. Pan, A.C., 1989. Allocation of order quantities among suppliers. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 25, 2, 36-39.
58. Papagapiou, A., Mingers, J., Thanassoulis, E., 1996. Would you buy a used car with DEA?. OR Insight, 10, 1, 13-19.
59. Razi, F., 2014. A supplier selection using a hybrid grey based hierarchical clustering and artificial bee colony”, Decision Science Letters, 3, 3, 259-268.
60. Roa, C.P., Kiser, G.E., 1980. Educational buyers’ perceptions of vendor attributes. Journal of Purchasing Material Management, 16, 25-30.
61. Saaty, T.L., 1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Scandinavian. Journal of Forest Research, 15, 234-281.
62. Saaty, T.L., 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1, 1, 83-98.
63. Saaty T.L., Tran L.T., 2007. On The Invalidity of FuzzifyingNumerical Judgments in The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46, 962-975.
64. Sadrian, A.A., Yoon, Y.S., 1994. A procurement decision support system in business volume discount environments. Operations Research, 42, 1, 14-23.
65. Shemshadi, A., Toreihi, M., Shirazi, H., Tarokh, M.J., 2011. Supplier selection based on supplier risk: An ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach. The Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science, 2, 1, 111-121.
66. Smytka, D.L., Clemens, M.W., 1993. Total cost supplier selection model: a case study. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 29, 1, 42-49.
67. Soukup, W.R., 1987. Supplier selection strategies. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 23, 3, 7-12. SPSS Yardım Menüsü
68. Stamm, C.L., Golhar, D.Y., 1993. JIT purchasing: Attribute classification and literature review. Prod. Planning Control 4, 3,, 273-282.
69. Ha S.H., Krishman, R., 2008. A hybrid approach to supplier selection for the maintenance of a competitive supply chain. Expert System with Application, 34, 1303–1311.
70. Supçiler, A.A., Çapraz, O., 2011. AHP-TOPSIS Yöntemine Dayali Tedarikçi Seçimi Uygulaması. Ekonometri ve İstatistik e-Dergisi, 13, 1-22.
71. Şahin, Y., Akyer, H., 2011. Ülke Kaynaklarının Verimli Kullanımı: 4x4 Arama ve Kurtarma Aracı Seçiminde AHS ve TOPSIS Yöntemlerinin Uygulaması. SDÜ Vizyoner Dergisi, 3, 5, 72-87.
72. Tahriri, F., Osman, M.R., Ali, A., Yusuff, M., R., Esfandiary, A., 2008. AHP approach for supplier evaluation and selection in a steel manufacturing company. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 1, 2, 54-76.
73. Tam, M.C.Y., Tummala, V.M.R., 2001. An Application of the AHP in vendor selection of a telecommunications system. Omega, 29, 2, 171- 182.
74. Timmerman, E., 1986. An approach to vendor performance evaluation. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 1, 27-32.
75. Triantaphyllou, E., 2000. Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
76. Turner, I., 1988. An independent system for the evaluation of contract tenders. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 39, 6, 551-561.
77. Triantaphyllou, E., Mann, S.H., 1995). Using The Analytic Hierarchy Process For Decision Making In Engineering Applications: Some Challenges. International Journal of Industrial Engineering: Applications and Practice, 2, 1, 35-44.
78. Ulucan, A., 2004. Yöneylem Araştırması İşletmecilik Uygulamalı Bilgisayar Destekli Modelleme. Siyasal Kitabevi, 1. Baskı, Ankara.
79. Wang G., Huang, S. H., Dismukes, J. P., 2001. Product- driven supply chain selection using integrated multi-criteria decision-making methodology. International Journal of Production Economics, 91, 1, 1-15.
80. Wang, J., Zhu, Y., 2012. Research on Third-party Reverse Logistics Provider Selection Based on Fuzzy Clustering in Perspective of Low-carbon Economy”, Communications in Information Science and Management Engineering, 2, 2, 63-66.
81. Weber, C.A., 1991. A decision support system using multi-criteria techniques for vendor selection. University Micro lms International, Ann Arbor, MI.
82. Weber, C.A., Current, J.R., 1993. A multiobjective approach to vendor selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 68, 173-184.
83. Weber, C.A., Current, J.R., Desai, A., 1998. Non- cooperative negotiation strategies for vendor selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 108, 208-223.
84. Weber, C.A., Desai, A., 1996. Determination of paths to vendor market efficiency using parallel co- ordinates representation: a negotiation tool for buyers. European Journal of Operational Research, 90, 142-155.
85. Weber, C.A., Ellram, L.M., 1992. Supplier selection using multi-objective programming: a decision support system approach. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 23, 2, 3-14.
86. Yang, C.C., Chen, B.S., 2006. Supplier selection using combined analytical hierarchy process and grey relational analysis. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 17, 7, 926-941.
87. Yaralioğlu, K., 2001. Performans Değerlendirmede Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses. DEÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 16, 1, 129-142.
88. Yurdakul, M. İç, Y. T., 2005. Development of a performance measurement model for manufacturing companies using the AHP and Topsis approaches. International Journal of Production Research, 43, 21, 4609-4641.
89. Zenz, G., 1981. Purchasing and the Management of Materials. Wiley, New York.