Treffer: Assessing business impacts of agility criterion and order allocation strategy in multi-criteria supplier selection
Management Information Systems Department, Jon M. Huntsman School of Business, 3515 Old Main Hill, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-3515, United States
CC BY 4.0
Sauf mention contraire ci-dessus, le contenu de cette notice bibliographique peut être utilisé dans le cadre d’une licence CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS / Unless otherwise stated above, the content of this bibliographic record may be used under a CC BY 4.0 licence by Inist-CNRS / A menos que se haya señalado antes, el contenido de este registro bibliográfico puede ser utilizado al amparo de una licencia CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS
Operational research. Management
Weitere Informationen
This paper formulates supplier evaluation and selection as a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem with subjective and fuzzy preferences of decision makers over evaluation criteria. As an outcome, this paper provides decision makers with a decision support system that presents the Pareto fronts, a set of best possible high-quality suppliers and optimized business operation levels from such suppliers. In addition, this paper quantifies the importance of the agility criterion and its sub-criteria in the process of evaluating and selecting agile suppliers by measuring the magnitude of bullwhip effect and inventory costs. The proposed system uses a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (fuzzy AHP) and fuzzy technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (fuzzy TOPSIS) to successfully determine the priority weights of multiple criteria and selects the fittest suppliers by taking the vagueness and imprecision of human assessments into consideration. More importantly, it presents approximated Pareto fronts of the resulting supplier chains for varying priority weights of the agility criterion and its sub-criteria. Finally, we compare business costs of agile and non-agile supply chains before and after reconfigurations of original supply chains in response to unexpected disruptions under two order allocation strategies, a skewed order allocation (SOA) strategy and an even order allocation (EOA) strategy.