Bulanık AHP ve Bulanık Gri İlişkiler Analizi Yöntemleri ile Kargo Uçak Tipi Seçimi: Bir Türk Havayolu Firmasında Uygulama

Öz

Küreselleşme ve teknolojik gelişmeler pazar koşullarını birçok yönden etkilemiştir. Bu gelişmeler ile birlikte ülkeler arasındaki ticari sınırlar ortadan kalkmış ve firmalar için ucuz işçilik, hammadde kaynaklarına ve yeni pazarlar ulaşılabilirlik artmıştır. Öte yandan, kısalan ürün hayat eğrileri, teslimat süreleri ve kişiselleşmiş ürünlere olan talebin artması küreselleşmenin bazı zorlayıcı sonuçları olmuştur. Firmalar değişen pazar koşullarını karşılayabilmek ve zorlayıcı rekabet koşullarında stratejik başarılar elde edebilmek için farklı taşıma modlarını etkin bir şekilde kullanmalıdır. Bunun sonucu olarak hızlı ve güvenilir teslimat sağlayan havayolu taşımacılığı günümüzde operasyonel süreçlerde popüler hale gelmiştir.  Havacılıkta artan talep hacmine bağlı olarak, Türk hava kargo sektörü son yıllarda hızla büyümektedir. Bu durum, bölgede hizmet veren hava taşımacılığı şirketlerini, artan talebi karşılamak için filolarını genişletmeye yönelmiştir. Kargo uçağı seçimi havayolu firmaları için stratejik bir karar olmakla beraber çoklu çelişen kriterlerin aynı anda dikkate alınacağı çok kriterli bir karar verme problemidir. Bu çalışmanın amacı havayolu kargo uçağı seçim süreci için belirlenen kritik kriterleri bulanık analitik hiyerarşi prosesi (AHP) yöntemini kullanarak önemlerine göre sıralamak ve bulanık gri ilişkiler yöntemi (GIA) ile kargo uçağı seçimi problem için alternatif bir çözüm önerisinde bulunmaktır. Ayrıca yöntem bir Türk hava kargo şirketinde uygulanarak yöntemin performansı ölçümlenmiştir.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kargo Uçağı,Havayolu Kargo,Çok kriterli karar verme,Bulanık AHP,Bulanık Gri İlişkiler Analizi

Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy Grey Relational Method for Cargo Aircraft Type Selection: A Case Study in a Turkish Airline Company

Öz

Globalization and technological developments have affected market conditions in many ways. These developments removed the economic boundaries among countries and gave great opportunities to companies, such as access to cheap labor, raw material and new markets. On the other hand, short product life cycles, delivery times and customization are some of the challenging results of globalization. To meet that challenging market requirements and achieve a competitive advantage, firms ought to operate and use all their transportation modes effectively. Consequently, airline transportation has become more popular in operations since it provides quick and reliable delivery. Due to increasing demand volume in aviation, Turkish air cargo industry has been growing rapidly in last decades. Therefore, airfreight companies are looking to expand their fleet to capitalize on growing in the region. Selecting the most suitable cargo aircraft has a critical importance in terms of the competitiveness. Cargo aircraft selection is a multi-criteria decision-making problem in which multiple conflicting criteria are to be considered simultaneously. The aim of this study is to determine critical criteria set for air cargo plane selection process and rank them according to their importance with using a fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method and select the most suitable cargo aircraft using fuzzy grey relational analysis (GIA) method. A real life case study is conducted at a Turkish air cargo company to test the performance of the proposed method.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Freighter,Air Cargo,Multi Criteria Decision Making,Fuzzy AHP,Fuzzy Grey Relational Analysis

Kaynakça

1. Ahmadi, A., Gupta, S., Karim, R., & Kumar, U. 2010. “Selection of maintenance strategy for aircraft systems using multi-criteria decision making methodologies.” International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering, 17(03), 223-243.
2. Avci, A. G. S., Şahin, Y., & Çelik, B. 2017. “Gri İlişkisel Analiz Yöntemi İle En İyi Konaklama Yeri Seçimi.” 7th International Conference of Strategic Research on Social Science and Education, 187-196
3. Bhadra, D. 2003. “Choice of aircraft fleets in the US NAS: findings from a multinomial logit analysis.” In AIAA's 3rd Annual Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Forum(p. 6767).
4. Bülbül, M. E. 2014. İnovasyon performansı değerlendirme sürecinde AHS ve GİA bütünleşik yaklaşımı: süt ürünleri sektöründe bir uygulama (Master's thesis, ESOGÜ, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü).
5. Chai J., Liu J.N.K. and Ngai E.W.T., 2013. “Application of decision making techniques in supplier selection: A Systematic review of literature,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 40, pp. 3872-3885.
6. Chan, F. T., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M. K., Lau, H. C., & Choy, K. L. 2008. “Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach.” International Journal of production research, 46(14), 3825-3857.
7. Chang, D. Y. 1996. “Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP.” European journal of operational research, 95(3), 649-655.
8. 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.” Journal of Air Transport Management, 59, 83-99.

9. Dožić, S., & Kalić, M. 2014. “An AHP approach to aircraft selection process.” Transportation Research Procedia, 3, 165-174.
10. Dožić, S., & Kalić, M. 2015. “Comparison of two MCDM methodologies in aircraft type selection problem.” Transportation Research Procedia, 10, 910-919.
11. Dožić, S., Lutovac, T., & Kalić, M. 2018. “Fuzzy AHP approach to passenger aircraft type selection.” Journal of Air Transport Management, 68, 165-175.
12. Ecer, F. 2013. “Türkiye’deki özel bankaların finansal performanslarının karşılaştırılması: 2008-2011 dönemi.” Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi.
13. Gomes, L. F. A. M., Mattos Fernandes, J. E., & Mello, J. C. C. 2014. “A fuzzy stochastic approach to the multicriteria selection of an aircraft for regional chartering.” Journal of Advanced Transportation, 48(3), 223-237.Goyal, S., & Grover, S. 2012. “Applying fuzzy grey relational analysis for ranking the advanced manufacturing systems.” Grey Systems: Theory and Application, 2(2), 284-298.
14. Göksu, A., & Güngör, İ. 2008. “Bulanik Analitik Hiyerarşik Proses Ve Üniversite Tercih Siralamasinda Uygulanması.” Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(3), 1-26.
15. Gumus, A., Yayla, A., Çelik, E., & Yildiz, A. 2013. “A combined fuzzy-AHP and fuzzy-GRA methodology for hydrogen energy storage method selection in Turkey.” Energies, 6(6), 3017-3032.
16. Harasani, W. I. 2006. “Evaluation and Selection of a Fleet of Aircraft for a Local Airline.” Journal of King. Abdulaziz University: Engineering Sciences, 17(2), 3-16.
17. Hashemi, S. H., Karimi, A., & Tavana, M. 2015. “An integrated green supplier selection approach with analytic network process and improved Grey relational analysis.” International Journal of Production Economics, 159, 178-191.
18. Heo, E., Kim, J., & Boo, K. J. 2010. “Analysis of the assessment factors for renewable energy dissemination program evaluation using fuzzy AHP.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(8), 2214-2220.
19. Kabir, G. 2012. “Multiple criteria inventory classification under fuzzy environment.” International Journal of Fuzzy System Applications (IJFSA), 2(4), 76-92.
20. Kabir, G., & Hasin, M. A. A. 2011. “Comparative analysis of AHP and fuzzy AHP models for multicriteria inventory classification.” International Journal of Fuzzy Logic Systems, 1(1), 1-16.
21. Kabir, G., & Sumi, R. S. 2014. “Power substation location selection using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and PROMETHEE: A case study from Bangladesh.” Energy, 72, 717-730.
22. Kubler, S., Robert, J., Derigent, W., Voisin, A., & Le Traon, Y. 2016. “A state-of the-art survey & testbed of fuzzy AHP (FAHP) applications.” Expert Systems with Applications, 65, 398-422.
23. Kutlu AC, Ekmekçioglu M. 2012. “Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP.” Expert Systems with Applications ;39(1): 61e7. Kutlu, A. C., & Ekmekçioğlu, M. 2012. “Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP.” Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 61-67.
24. Kwong, C. K., & Bai, H. 2003. “Determining the importance weights for the customer requirements in QFD using a fuzzy AHP with an extent analysis approach.” Iie Transactions, 35(7), 619-626.
25. Lin, C. T., & Hsu, P. F. 2003. “Selection of internet advertising networks using an analytic hierarchy process and grey relational analysis.” International journal of information and management sciences, 14(2), 1-16.
26. Liou, T. S., & Wang, M. J. J. 1992. “Ranking fuzzy numbers with integral value.” Fuzzy sets and systems, 50(3), 247-255.
27. Mangla, S. K., Kumar, P., & Barua, M. K. 2015. “Risk analysis in green supply chain using fuzzy AHP approach: A case study.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 104, 375-390.
28. Meydan, C., Yıldırım, B. F., & Senger, Ö. 2016. “BİST’te işlem gören gıda işletmelerinin finansal performanslarının gri ilişkisel analiz yöntemi kullanılarak değerlendirilmesi.” Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (69), 147-171.
29. Noorul Haq, A., & Kannan, G. 2006. “An integrated approach for selecting a vendor using grey relational analysis.” International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 5(02), 277-295.
30. Organ, A., & Yalçin, E. 2017. “An Integrated Approach Based on Fuzzy Ahp and Grey Relational Analysis for Heating Source Selection.” European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 13(12).
31. Özcan, T., Çelebi, N., & Esnaf, Ş. 2011. “Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methodologies and implementation of a warehouse location selection problem.” Expert Systems with Applications, 38(8), 9773-9779.
32. Ozdemir, Y., & Basligil, H. 2016. “Aircraft selection using fuzzy ANP and the generalized choquet integral method: The Turkish airlines case.” Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 31(1), 589-600.
33. Ozdemir, Y., Basligil, H., & Karaca, M. 2011. “Aircraft selection using analytic network process: a case for Turkish airlines.” In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering (WCE) (Vol. 8, pp. 9-13).
34. Özdemir, A. İ., & Deste, M. 2009. “Gri ilişkisel analiz ile çok kriterli tedarikçi seçimi: Otomotiv sektöründe bir uygulama.” Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration, 38(2).
35. Özen Ö. D. Y., & Koçak A. 2017. “Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi ve Bulanık Dematel Yöntemleri Kullanılarak Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Yazılım Seçimi ve Değerlendirilmesi.” Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 24 (3),927-957. Pitchipoo, P., Venkumar, P., & Rajakarunakaran, S. 2013. “Fuzzy hybrid decision model for supplier evaluation and selection.” International Journal of Production Research, 51(13), 3903-3919.
36. Samvedi, A., Jain, V., & Chan, F. T. 2012. “An integrated approach for machine tool selection using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process and grey relational analysis.” International Journal of Production Research, 50(12), 3211-3221.
37. Senger, Ö., & Albayrak, Ö. K. 2016. “Gri İlişki Analizi Yöntemi İle Personel Değerlendirme Üzerine Bir Çalişma.” International Journal of Economic & Administrative Studies, (17).
38. Singh, R. K., Chaudhary, N., & Saxena, N. 2018. “Selection of warehouse location for a global supply chain: A case study.” IIMB management review, 30(4), 343-356.
39. Srdjevic, B., & Medeiros, Y. D. P. 2008. “Fuzzy AHP assessment of water management plans.” Water Resources Management, 22(7), 877-894.
40. Srichetta, P., and Thurachon, W., 2012. “Applying fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to evaluate and select product of notebook computers.” International Journal of Modeling and Optimization, vol.2, no.2, pp.168.
41. Şahin, B., & Yazır, D. 2019. “Uzmanlık katsayılarının belirlenmesinde kullanılan farklı yaklaşımların geliştirilmiş bulanık analitik hiyerarşi süreci metodu üzerindeki etkilerinin analizi.” Journal of the Faculty of Engineering & Architecture of Gazi University, 34(1).
42. Şen, C. G., & Çınar, G. 2010. “Evaluation and pre-allocation of operators with multiple skills: A combined fuzzy AHP and max–min approach.” Expert Systems with Applications, 37(3), 2043-2053.
43. Tsai, C. H., Chang, C. L., & 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.
44. Ulutaş, A., Özkan, A. M., & Tağraf, H. 2018. “Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci Ve Bulanik Gri İlişkisel Analizi Yöntemleri Kullanilarak Personel Seçimi Yapilması.” Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 17(65).
45. Vahidnia, M. H., Alesheikh, A. A., & Alimohammadi, A. 2009. “Hospital site selection using fuzzy AHP and its derivatives.” Journal of environmental management, 90(10), 3048-3056.
46. Van Laarhoven, P. J., & Pedrycz, W. 1983. “A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory.” Fuzzy sets and Systems, 11(1-3), 229-241.
47. Wang, T. C., & Chang, T. H. 2007. “Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment.” Expert Systems with Applications, 33(4), 870-880.
48. Wang, Y. M., Luo, Y., & Hua, Z. 2008. “On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications.” European journal of operational research, 186(2), 735-747.
49. 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.
50. Yeh, C. H., & Chang, Y. H. 2009. “Modeling subjective evaluation for fuzzy group multicriteria decision making.” European Journal of Operational Research, 194(2), 464-473.
51. Yin, Z. H., & Lu, Q. 2009, April. “The grey comprehensive evaluation model of a third-party reverse ligistics provider selection.” In Artificial Intelligence, 2009. JCAI'09. International Joint Conference on (pp. 497-500). IEEE.
52. Zadeh, L.A., 1965. Fuzzy Sets, Information and Control, vol. 8, pp. 338-353.