A trasilient decision making tool for vendor selection: a hybrid-MCDM algorithm

PurposeVendor selection is the main activity in a sourcing decision, which is a strategic decision in that it leads enterprises to eliminate costs and improve their performance. However, an inappropriate selection may compromise the financial and operational status of the enterprise. But vendor selection is a complex, multi-criteria decision-making process because different and conflicting criteria have to be considered and assessed in order to find consistent suppliers. Consequently, evaluating and selecting the best vendor is the key to successful business. Traditionally, vendors are normally selected on the basis of traditional criteria (TC), such as costs and quality, neglecting resilience criteria (RC) (e.g. agility and flexibility). Thus, enterprises ultimately realize that a selecting method which involves TC as the only ones is inefficient and needs to be changed. The paper aims to discuss this issue.Design/methodology/approachThis study was set in motion by a problem in practice. It aims to provide a user-friendly decision-making tool for selecting the best vendor from a group which submitted their tenders for implementing a proposed radio frequency identification (RFID)-based passport tracking system (Dukyilet al., 2017). The main traditional and resilience (“trasilience” henceforth) selection criteria were identified in a unified framework in collaboration with experts in the institution. Next, the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) algorithm was used to determine the relative importance of each criterion and the weights thus obtained were integrated into the ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité (ELECTRE) algorithm. The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) algorithm was also applied, to evaluate the performance of vendors and to select the best one. The qualitative evaluation of the criteria and the vendors was based on four decision makers. Finally, the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (SRCC) approach was applied to obtain the statistical difference between the ranking orders obtained from the two algorithms.FindingsThe efficiency of the proposed decision-making tool was evident from the real-case study of six tenders submitted for implementing a RFID-based passport tracking system. The SRCC also turned out a “very strong” association value between TOPSIS and ELECTRE.Practical implicationsThe developed trasilient decision-making tool can easily be used to solve similar vendor or supplier selection problem. Moreover, other criteria can be added to fit other cases. Later, the tool was made available to the institution under study for solving future evaluation problems.Originality/valueThe literature shows that none of the previous papers presented an integrated trasilient approach that considers RC and TC simultaneously. This study presents a new trasilience tool for selecting a vendor.

[1]  Gary W. Dickson,et al.  AN ANALYSIS OF VENDOR SELECTION SYSTEMS AND DECISIONS , 1966 .

[2]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications - A State-of-the-Art Survey , 1981, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[3]  C. Spearman The proof and measurement of association between two things. By C. Spearman, 1904. , 1987, The American journal of psychology.

[4]  L. Ellram The Supplier Selection Decision in Strategic Partnerships , 1990 .

[5]  W. C. Benton,et al.  Vendor selection criteria and methods , 1991 .

[6]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making - Methods and Applications , 1992, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[7]  D. Kumar,et al.  Multicriterion decision making in irrigation planning , 1999 .

[8]  Binshan Lin,et al.  Environmental practices and assessment: a process perspective , 2001, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[9]  Reggie Davidrajuh Modeling and implementation of supplier selection procedures for e-commerce initiatives , 2003, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[10]  Matthias Ehrgott,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys , 2005 .

[11]  S. H. Ghodsypour,et al.  Fuzzy multiobjective linear model for supplier selection in a supply chain , 2006 .

[12]  Hsu-Shih Shih,et al.  A hybrid MCDM model for strategic vendor selection , 2006, Math. Comput. Model..

[13]  Filippo Emanuele Ciarapica,et al.  A FUZZY-QFD APPROACH TO SUPPLIER SELECTION , 2006 .

[14]  Najla Aissaoui,et al.  Supplier selection and order lot sizing modeling: A review , 2007, Comput. Oper. Res..

[15]  I. Ozkarahan,et al.  Supplier evaluation and management system for strategic sourcing based on a new multicriteria sorting procedure , 2007 .

[16]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL , 2007, Expert Syst. Appl..

[17]  E. Stanley Lee,et al.  An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making , 2007, Math. Comput. Model..

[18]  Selim Zaim,et al.  Hybrid analytical hierarchy process model for supplier selection , 2008, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[19]  Seyed Hassan Ghodsypour,et al.  Vendor selection and order allocation using an integrated fuzzy case-based reasoning and mathematical programming model , 2009 .

[20]  Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour,et al.  Are supplier selection criteria going green? Case studies of companies in Brazil , 2009, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[21]  B. R. Sarker,et al.  Multi-vendor integrated procurement-production system under shared transportation and just-in-time delivery system , 2010, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[22]  C. Spearman The proof and measurement of association between two things. , 2015, International journal of epidemiology.

[23]  Xiaowei Xu,et al.  Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[24]  Majid Mojahed,et al.  Personnel selection using ELECTRE , 2010 .

[25]  Peide Liu,et al.  Research on the supplier selection of a supply chain based on entropy weight and improved ELECTRE-III method , 2011 .

[26]  Drakoulis Martakos,et al.  In-depth analysis and simulation study of an innovative fuzzy approach for ranking alternatives in multiple attribute decision making problems based on TOPSIS , 2011, Appl. Soft Comput..

[27]  Jafar Razmi,et al.  Supplier selection and order allocation based on fuzzy SWOT analysis and fuzzy linear programming , 2011, Expert Syst. Appl..

[28]  Shouhong Wang,et al.  A Multiple Perspectives Approach to supplier Selection , 2011, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[29]  Subhabrata Chakraborti,et al.  Nonparametric Statistical Inference , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[30]  Iraj Mahdavi,et al.  A multi-objective decision-making process of supplier selection and order allocation for multi-period scheduling in an electronic market , 2011 .

[31]  Kamran Shahanaghi,et al.  Integrating fuzzy TOPSIS and multi-period goal programming for purchasing multiple products from multiple suppliers , 2011 .

[32]  Ewa Roszkowska,et al.  Multi-criteria Decision Making Models by Applying the Topsis Method to Crisp and Interval Data , 2011 .

[33]  Yeu-Shiang Huang,et al.  A Study on Aggregation of TOPSIS Ideal Solutions for Group Decision-Making , 2012 .

[34]  Mehdi Fasanghari,et al.  Supplier selection using a novel intuitionist fuzzy clustering approach , 2012, Appl. Soft Comput..

[35]  Morteza Yazdani,et al.  A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[36]  James Nga-Kwok Liu,et al.  Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[37]  Patrick T. Hester,et al.  An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods , 2013 .

[38]  Keely L. Croxton,et al.  Ensuring Supply Chain Resilience: Development and Implementation of an Assessment Tool , 2013 .

[39]  Huseyin Selcuk Kilic,et al.  An integrated approach for supplier selection in multi-item/multi-supplier environment , 2013 .

[40]  Angappa Gunasekaran,et al.  IS/IT as supplier selection criterion for upstream value chain , 2013, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[41]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods , 2014 .

[42]  Charbel José Chiappetta Jabbour,et al.  Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: Using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[43]  Amitava Ray,et al.  Resilient supplier selection under a fuzzy environment , 2014 .

[44]  Kash Barker,et al.  Interval-valued availability framework for supplier selection based on component importance , 2015 .

[45]  Seyed Ali Torabi,et al.  Resilient supplier selection and order allocation under operational and disruption risks , 2015 .

[46]  Kannan Govindan,et al.  Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review , 2015 .

[47]  V. Ravi,et al.  Supplier selection in resilient supply chains: a grey relational analysis approach , 2015 .

[48]  John Ahmet Erkoyuncu,et al.  A Review of Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods for Enhanced Maintenance Delivery , 2015 .

[49]  Mohamed Darwish,et al.  An Optimization Approach for A RFID-enabled Passport Tracking System , 2016, ICCMA '16.

[50]  Kash Barker,et al.  A Bayesian network model for resilience-based supplier selection , 2016 .

[51]  Kash Barker,et al.  Modeling infrastructure resilience using Bayesian networks: A case study of inland waterway ports , 2016, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[52]  Virginia L. M. Spiegler,et al.  Developing a resilient supply chain strategy during ‘boom’ and ‘bust’ , 2016 .

[53]  Kannan Govindan,et al.  ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications , 2016, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[54]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  A cost-effective decision-making algorithm for an RFID-enabled HMSC network design: A multi-objective approach , 2017, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[55]  Jurgita Antucheviciene,et al.  Supplier evaluation and selection in fuzzy environments: a review of MADM approaches , 2017 .

[56]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  Drafting a fuzzy TOPSIS-multi-objective approach for a sustainable supplier selection , 2017, 2017 23rd International Conference on Automation and Computing (ICAC).

[57]  Qian Wang,et al.  A sustainable manufacturing system design: A fuzzy multi-objective optimization model , 2017, Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

[58]  Daniela Fuchs-Hanusch,et al.  A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques , 2017, Expert Syst. Appl..

[59]  Wolfgang Rauch,et al.  Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization , 2017 .

[60]  Mohamed Darwish,et al.  A cost-effective decision making algorithm for an RFID-enabled passport tracking system: A fuzzy multi-objective approach , 2017, 2017 Computing Conference.

[61]  Tijun Fan,et al.  Evaluation of personal cloud storage products in China , 2017, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[62]  Qian Wang,et al.  Multi-criteria optimization for a cost-effective design of an RFID-based meat supply chain , 2017 .

[63]  Anthony Soroka,et al.  Evaluating Green and Resilient Supplier Performance: AHP-Fuzzy Topsis Decision-Making Approach , 2018, ICORES.

[64]  Qian Wang,et al.  Optimisation of a sustainable manufacturing system design using the multi-objective approach , 2018 .

[65]  Rossitza Setchi,et al.  An integrated methodology for a sustainable two-stage supplier selection and order allocation problem , 2018, Journal of Cleaner Production.

[66]  S. Si,et al.  DEMATEL Technique: A Systematic Review of the State-of-the-Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications , 2018 .

[67]  Reda Nujoom,et al.  Eco-Gresilient: Coalescing Ingredient of Economic, Green and Resilience in Supply Chain Network Design , 2018, ICORES.

[68]  Mohamed Darwish,et al.  Design and optimization of an RFID-enabled passport tracking system , 2018, J. Comput. Des. Eng..

[69]  Anthony Soroka,et al.  A hybrid MCDM-fuzzy multi-objective programming approach for a G-resilient supply chain network design , 2019, Comput. Ind. Eng..