Araştırma Makalesi

Evaluating Supplier Selection Criteria with Interval Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP

Cilt: 22 Sayı: 4 4 Ağustos 2025
PDF İndir
EN TR

Evaluating Supplier Selection Criteria with Interval Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP

Abstract

Supplier selection is one of the most critical decisions a business must make today. Especially with the rise of globalization and increasing competition, both the process of selecting suppliers and the criteria considered during selection have gained greater significance. In this context, the purpose of this paper is to determine the importance levels of supplier selection criteria for a furniture manufacturing company. For this purpose, nine criteria—quality, delivery on time, material price, information sharing, after-sales service, lead time, quantity discount, occupational health and safety system, and transportation costs—were evaluated. The Interval-Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP (IVPF-AHP) method was employed to assess the importance levels of these criteria. Based on evaluations from three experts and subsequent calculations, transportation costs emerged as the most critical criterion in supplier selection. This was followed, respectively, by delivery on time, material price, quality, quantity discount, lead time, after-sales service, information sharing, and the occupational health and safety system.

Keywords

Internal-Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy-AHP , Supplier Selection Criteria , Furniture Sektor

Kaynakça

  1. Akhtar, M. T., Gupta, N., & Saini, C. P. (2022). Evaluation of key criteria affecting the adoption of digital marketing by SMEs using an interval Valued Pythagorean fuzzy AHP technique. Transnational Marketing Journal, 10(3), 459-471. https://doi.org/10.33182/tmj.v10i3.2339
  2. Akyüz, K. C., Tugay, T., Perçin, S., & Yıldırım, İ. (2020). Analitik hiyerarşi süreci (AHP) ile mobilya sanayi sektöründe en uygun tedarikçi seçimine yönelik bir uygulama. Uluslararası İktisadi ve idari incelemeler dergisi, (29), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.180-92/ulikidince.459650
  3. Ali, M. R., Nipu, S. M. A., & Khan, S. A. (2023). A decision support system for classifying supplier selection criteria using machine learning and random forest approach. Decision Analytics Journal, 7, 100238. https://doi.org/10.1016/-j.dajour.2023.100238
  4. Arabsheybani, A., Paydar, M. M., & Safaei, A. S. (2018). An integrated fuzzy MOORA method and FMEA technique for sustainable supplier selection considering quantity discounts and supplier's risk. Journal of Cleaner Production, 190, 577-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/-j.jclepro.2018.04.167
  5. Ayyildiz, E., & Taskin Gümüş, A. (2021). Interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy AHP method-based supply chain performance evaluation by a new extension of SCOR model: SCOR 4.0. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 7(1), 559-576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-020-00221-9
  6. Chan, F. T., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M. K., Lau, H. C., & Choy, K. (2008). Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach. International Journal of production research, 46(14), 3825-3857. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540600787200
  7. Chang, B., Chang, C. W., & Wu, C. H. (2011). Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria. Expert systems with Applications, 38(3), 1850-1858. https://doi.org/-10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.114
  8. Çebi, F., & Otay, I. (2016). A two-stage fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and order allocation problem with quantity discounts and lead time. Information Sciences, 339, 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2015.12.032
  9. Demir, L., Akpınar, M. E., Araz, C., & Ilgın, M. A. (2018). A green supplier evaluation system based on a new multi-criteria sorting method: VIKORSORT. Expert Systems with Applications, 114, 479-487. https://doi.org/-10.1016/j.eswa.2018.07.071
  10. Dağdeviren, M., & Eraslan, E. (2008). Supplier selection using PROMETHEE sequencing method. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 23(1).

Kaynak Göster

APA
Cingöz, K. (2025). Evaluating Supplier Selection Criteria with Interval Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP. OPUS Journal of Society Research, 22(4), 769-778. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1710659