Tedarikçi Seçim Kriterlerinin Aralık Değerli Pisagor Bulanık AHP Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 4, 769 - 778, 04.08.2025

Kısmet Cingöz

https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1710659

Öz

Tedarikçi seçimi günümüzde bir işletmenin vermesi gereken en önemli kararlardan birisidir. Özellikle küreselleşme ve rekabetin artması ile birlikte tedarikçi seçimi ve tedarik seçerken göz önünde bulundurulması gereken kriterler daha önemli olmaktadır. Bu doğrultuda bu çalışmanın amacı, mobilya üretici bir işletmenin tedarikçi seçim kriterlerini önem derecesini belirlemektedir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda 9 kriter - kalite, zamanında teslimat, malzeme fiyatı, bilgi paylaşımı, satış sonrası hizmet, teslimat süresi, miktar indirimi, iş sağlığı ve güvenliği sistemi ve taşımacılık maliyetleri – değerlendirmeye alınmıştır. Kriterlerin önem dereceleri belirlenirken Aralık değerli Pisagor bulanık AHP (Interval Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP / IVPF-AHP) yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Üç uzman görüşü alınarak değerlendirilen kriterler ve yapılan hesaplamalara göre tedarikçi seçiminde en önemli kriter taşımacılık maliyetleri olarak belirlenmiştir. Taşımacılık maliyetleri kriterini sırasıyla zamanında teslimat, malzeme fiyatı, kalite, miktar indirimi, teslimat süresi, satış sonrası hizmet, bilgi paylaşımı ve iş sağlığı ve güvenliği sistemi kriterleri takip etmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Aralık Değerli Pisagor Bulanık AHP, Tedarikçi Seçim Kriterleri, Mobilya Sektörü

Etik Beyan

Çalışmada etik kurallara uyulmuştur.

Destekleyen Kurum

Çalışmayı destekleyen bir kurum yoktur.

Evaluating Supplier Selection Criteria with Interval Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP

Öz

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.

Anahtar Kelimeler

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

Etik Beyan

Ethical rules were followed in the study.

Destekleyen Kurum

There is no institution supporting the study.

Kaynakça

• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• Dağdeviren, M., & Eraslan, E. (2008). Supplier selection using PROMETHEE sequencing method. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 23(1).
• Dickson, G. W. (1966). An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions. Journal of purchasing, 2(1), 5-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.1966.tb00818.x
• Erdebilli, B., Yilmaz, I., Aksoy, T., Hacıoglu, U., Yüksel, S., & Dinçer, H. (2023). An interval-valued pythagorean fuzzy AHP and COPRAS hybrid methods for the supplier selection problem. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 16(1), 124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44196-023-00297-4
• Erdoğan, N. K., Onay, A., & Karamaşa, Ç. (2019). Measuring the performance of retailer firms listed in BIST under the balanced scorecard perspective by using interval valued Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP based Pythagorean Fuzzy TODIM Methodology. Alphanumeric Journal, 7(2), 333-350. https://doi.org/10.17093/alphanumeric.451247
• Garg, H. (2017). A novel improved accuracy function for interval valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets and its applications in the decision‐making process. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 32(12), 1247-1260. https://doi.org/-10.1002/int.21898
• Ghobadian, A., Stainer, A., Liu, J., & Kiss, T. (2016). A computerised vendor rating system. Developments in Logistics and Supply Chain Management: Past, Present and Future içinde (ss. 103-112). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
• Guneri, A. F., Yucel, A., & Ayyildiz, G. (2009). An integrated fuzzy-lp approach for a supplier selection problem in supply chain management. Expert systems with Applications, 36(5), 9223-9228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.-2008.12.021
• Gürsoy, İ. (2024). Dış Ticaret Firmalarının Hedef Pazar Seçim Kriterlerinin Aralık Değerli Pisagor Bulanık AHP Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi: Otomotiv Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. Journal of Management and Economics, 31(4), 805-822. https://doi.org/10.18657-/yonveek.1468696
• Ha, S. H., & Krishnan, R. (2008). A hybrid approach to supplier selection for the maintenance of a competitive supply chain. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(2), 1303-1311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.12.008
• Ilbahar, E., Karaşan, A., Cebi, S., & Kahraman, C. (2018). A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Safety Science, 103, 124-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.025
• Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., & Ulukan, Z. (2003). Multi‐criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logistics information management, 16(6), 382-394. https://doi.org/10.1108/-09576050310503367
• Kılıncçı, O., & Onal, S. A. (2011). Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(8), 9656-9664. https://doi.org/10.-1016/j.eswa.2011.01.159
• Laosirihongthong, T., Samaranayake, P., & Nagalingam, S. (2019). A holistic approach to supplier evaluation and order allocation towards sustainable procurement. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(8), 2543-2573. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-11-2018-0360
• Milošević, M. R., Milošević, D. M., Stević, D. M., & Kovačević, M. (2023). Interval valued Pythagorean fuzzy AHP integrated model in a smartness assessment framework of buildings. Axioms, 12(3), 286. https://doi.org/10.-3390/axioms12030286
• Miyangaskary, M. K., Keivanpour, S., & Safari, H. (2025). A multi-objective optimization model of a closed-loop supply chain for supplier selection and order allocation under uncertainty: A case study of retail stores for protein products. Transportation Research Procedia, 82, 323-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.-2024.12.046
• Pal, O., Gupta, A. K., & Garg, R. K. (2013). Supplier selection criteria and methods in supply chains: A review. International Journal of Economics and Management Engineering, 7(10), 2667-2673.
• Perçin, S. (2006). An application of the integrated AHP‐PGP model in supplier selection. Measuring Business Excellence, 10(4), 34-49. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040610719263
• Petrović, G., Mihajlović, J., Ćojbašić, Ž., Madić, M., & Marinković, D. (2019). Comparison of three fuzzy MCDM methods for solving the supplier selection problem. Facta Universitatis, Series: Mechanical Engineering, 17(3), 455-469. https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME190420039P
• Rahman, K., Abdullah, S., Shakeel, M., Ali Khan, M. S., & Ullah, M. (2017). Interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy geometric aggregation operators and their application to group decision making problem. Cogent Mathematics, 4(1), 1338638. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311835.-2017.1338638
• Saaty, T. L. (2004). Decision making—the analytic hierarchy and network processes (AHP/ANP). Journal of systems science and systems engineering, 13, 1-35. https://doi.org-/10.1007/s11518-006-0151-5
• Sultana, M. N., Rahman, M. H., & Al Mamun, A. (2016). Multi criteria decision making tools for supplier evaluation and selection: a review. European Journal of Advances in Engineering and Technology, 3(5), 56-65.
• Supçiller, A., & Çapraz, O. (2011). Ahp-topsis yöntemine dayalı tedarikçi seçimi uygulaması. Ekonometri ve İstatistik e-Dergisi, 13, 1-22.
• Temiz, N. & Cingöz, K. (2015). İş gören seçim sürecindeki kritik faaliyetlerin analitik hiyerarşi süreci ile değerlendirilmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(4), 531-553. https://doi.org/10.16953/deusbed.31634
• Thiruchelvam, S., & Tookey, J. E. (2011). Evolving trends of supplier selection criteria and methods. International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering, 4, 437-454. https://doi.org/10.15282/ijame.4.2011.6.0036
• Tursun, S. S., & Özkoç, H. H. (2022). Çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri kullanılarak tedarikçi seçim kararları ile ilgili yapılmış çalışmaların bibliyometrik analizi: 2000-2020. Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 64-82.
• Wang Chen, H. M., Chou, S. Y., Luu, Q. D., & Yu, T. H. K. (2016). A fuzzy MCDM approach for green supplier selection from the economic and environmental aspects. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2016(1), 8097386. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8097386
• Weber, C. A., Current, J. R., & Benton, W. C. (1991). Vendor selection criteria and methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 50(1), 2-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(91)90033-R
• Yager, R. R. (2013, June). Pythagorean fuzzy subsets. In 2013 joint IFSA world congress and NAFIPS annual meeting (IFSA/NAFIPS) (57-61). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IFSA-NAFIPS.2013.6608375
• Yurdakul, Ü., Çolak, M., & Çetin, T. (2013). Mobilya endüstrisinde kullanılan hammaddeler ve tedarikinde karşılaşılan sorunlar. Kastamonu University Journal of Forestry Faculty, 13(2), 220-227.
• Zolfani, S. H., Chen, I. S., Rezaeiniya, N., & Tamošaitienė, J. (2012). A hybrid MCDM model encompassing AHP and COPRAS-G methods for selecting company supplier in Iran. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18(3), 529-543. https://doi.org/10.3846/-20294913.2012.709472