A rough multicriteria approach for evaluation of the supplier criteria in automotive industry

Ensuring costs reduction and increasing competitiveness and satisfaction of end users are the goals of each participant in the supply chain. Taking into account these goals, the paper proposes methodology for defining the most important criteria for suppliers’ evaluation. From a set of twenty established criteria, i.e. four sets of criteria: finances, logistics, quality and communication and business including its sub-criteria, we have allocated the most important ones for supplier selection. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) based on rough numbers is presented to determine the weight of each evaluation criterion. For the criteria evaluation we have used knowledge from the expert in this field. The efficacy of the proposed evaluation methodology is demonstrated through its application to the company producing metal washers for the automotive industry. Next a sensitivity analysis is carried out in order to show the stability of the model. For checking stability the AHP method in conventional form is used in combination with fuzzy logic.

[1]  Rosli Besar,et al.  A Study of Multicriteria Decision Making for Supplier Selection in Automotive Industry , 2013 .

[2]  Jin Qi,et al.  An integrated AHP and VIKOR for design concept evaluation based on rough number , 2015, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[3]  Gülçin Büyüközkan,et al.  Application of a new combined intuitionistic fuzzy MCDM approach based on axiomatic design methodology for the supplier selection problem , 2017, Appl. Soft Comput..

[4]  Van Weele Prof..  Purchasing and supply chain management : analysis, strategy, planning and practice , 2005 .

[5]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  Three-way decisions with intuitionistic fuzzy decision-theoretic rough sets based on point operators , 2017, Inf. Sci..

[6]  James Nga-Kwok Liu,et al.  A novel believable rough set approach for supplier selection , 2014, Expert Syst. Appl..

[7]  Li Pheng Khoo,et al.  A rough set enhanced fuzzy approach to quality function deployment , 2008 .

[8]  Özer Uygun,et al.  Supplier Selection for Automotive Industry Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Techniques , 2013 .

[9]  Xiangyu Wang,et al.  Integrated Supplier Selection Framework in a Resilient Construction Supply Chain: An Approach via Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) , 2017 .

[10]  Tadeusz Sawik,et al.  Single vs. multiple objective supplier selection in a make to order environment , 2010 .

[11]  S. N. Musa,et al.  A hybrid model for supplier selection: integration of AHP and multi expression programming (MEP) , 2017, Neural Computing and Applications.

[12]  Xin Guo Ming,et al.  A rough TOPSIS Approach for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Uncertain Environments , 2014, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int..

[13]  Wen-Pai Wang,et al.  A fuzzy linguistic computing approach to supplier evaluation , 2010 .

[14]  Wenyan Song,et al.  An integrated rough number-based approach to design concept evaluation under subjective environments , 2013 .

[15]  Li Pheng Khoo,et al.  A prototype genetic algorithm-enhanced rough set-based rule induction system , 2001, Comput. Ind..

[16]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2012 .

[17]  Nihan Çetin Demirel,et al.  Supplier selection problem in global supply chains by AHP and ANP approaches under fuzzy environment , 2011 .

[18]  Gordan Stojic,et al.  Novel Integrated Multi-Criteria Model for Supplier Selection: Case Study Construction Company , 2017, Symmetry.

[19]  Aşır Özbek,et al.  Supplier Selection with Fuzzy TOPSIS , 2015 .

[20]  Semra Birgün Barla.  A case study of supplier selection for lean supply by using a mathematical model , 2003 .

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

[22]  Janusz Zalewski,et al.  Rough sets: Theoretical aspects of reasoning about data , 1996 .

[23]  F. Chan,et al.  Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach , 2007 .

[24]  N. Anantharaman,et al.  A MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISIONMAKING MODEL FOR SUPPLIER RATING , 2002 .

[25]  Li Pheng Khoo,et al.  A rough set based QFD approach to the management of imprecise design information in product development , 2009, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[26]  Puneet Tandon,et al.  Product design concept evaluation using rough sets and VIKOR method , 2016, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[27]  D. I. Cho,et al.  An integrated approach for supplier selection and purchasing decisions , 2008 .

[28]  Cevriye Gencer,et al.  Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm , 2007 .

[29]  Dragan Pamučar,et al.  Novel approach to group multi-criteria decision making based on interval rough numbers: Hybrid DEMATEL-ANP-MAIRCA model , 2017, Expert Syst. Appl..

[30]  Theresa Beaubouef,et al.  Rough Sets , 2019, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[31]  Lori Tavasszy,et al.  Supplier selection in the airline retail industry using a funnel methodology: Conjunctive screening method and fuzzy AHP , 2014, Expert Syst. Appl..

[32]  T. Davis.  Effective supply chain management , 2020, Strategic Direction.

[33]  Alain Bernard,et al.  Group multi-criteria design concept evaluation using combined rough set theory and fuzzy set theory , 2016, Expert Syst. Appl..

[34]  Nouman Azam,et al.  A three-way decision making approach to malware analysis using probabilistic rough sets , 2016, Inf. Sci..

[35]  Ivo Düntsch,et al.  The Rough Set Engine GROBIAN , 1999 .

[36]  Dragan Pamučar,et al.  Multi-criteria decision making: An example of sensitivity analysis , 2017 .

[37]  Ilija Tanackov,et al.  An integrated fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS model for supplier evaluation , 2016 .

[38]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  The Selection of Wagons for the Internal Transport of a Logistics Company: A Novel Approach Based on Rough BWM and Rough SAW Methods , 2017, Symmetry.