Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Keywords:
Supply chain management
Supplier selection
Analytic network process
Fuzzy analytic network process
Sensitivity analysis
a b s t r a c t
The contemporary manufacturing organisations are forced to adopt advanced manufacturing paradigms
for sustaining in the global markets. Supply chain management is an essential ingredient of advanced
manufacturing systems since outsourcing gains vital importance. Supplier selection is a vital issue concerned in the process of managing global supply chains. A conceptual model for supplier selection
encompassing various criteria and sub-criteria has been developed. In this article, fuzzy analytic network
process (fuzzy ANP) approach has been used for the supplier selection process. The case study has been
carried out in an Indian electronics switches manufacturing company. Based on supplier selection
weighted index, the best supplier has been determined. This is followed by the conduct of sensitivity
analysis as well as questionnaire-based validation. The results of the validation study indicated that
the application of fuzzy ANP is practically feasible and adaptable in the contemporary industrial scenario.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Increasing competition has been forcing the manufacturing
organisation to respond to dynamic demands of the customers
(Cater, 2005). Contemporary manufacturing paradigms such as
Agile Manufacturing demand the concept of outsourcing by adopting the principles of supply chain management (Gunasekaran, Lai,
& Cheng, 2008). Supply chain encompasses all activities associated
with the ow and transformation of goods from the raw material
stage through to the end user as well as the associated information
ows. Supply chain focuses on the improvement of customer service, protability and business performance. Strategic partnership
with better suppliers needs to be formed to improve quality, exibility as well as to reduce lead time. Supplier selection is a crossfunctional group decision making problem ensuring long-term
commitment for the organisation. The problem of supplier selection is a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) problem in the
presence of many criteria and sub-criteria. A decision maker needs
to make use one of the MCDM methods (Ayag & Ozdemir, 2009).
Some of the widely used MCDM methods include analytic hierarchy process (AHP), analytic network process (ANP), strategy
aligned fuzzy simple multi-attribute rating technique (SMART)
(Chou & Chang, 2008), grey relational analysis (GRA). AHP is a hierarchically structured technique that concentrates, compares and
evaluates the inuence of various elements on the objectives. But
practical decision making problems cannot be structured hierar* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9952709119.
E-mail address: vinodh_sekar82@yahoo.com (S. Vinodh).
0957-4174/$ - see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.06.057
2. Literature review
The literature review has been carried out by referring to leading journal databases. The literature has been reviewed from three
perspectives: (1) various methods used for supplier selection, (2)
applications of ANP and (3) applications of fuzzy ANP.
273
Table 1
Methods used for supplier selection process
Research articles
Contributions
A supplier evaluation approach based on ANP and the technique for order performance by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) methods to
help a telecommunication company in the GSM sector in Turkey under the fuzzy environment has been presented.
A hybrid model has been presented using data envelopment analysis (DEA), decision trees (DT) and neural networks (NNs) to assess
supplier performance. The model consists of two modules: Module 1 applies DEA and classies suppliers into efcient and inefcient
clusters based on the resulting efciency scores. Module 2 utilizes rm performance-related data to train DT, NNs model and apply the
trained decision tree model to new suppliers. This results in favourable classication and prediction of accuracy rate.
A comprehensive decision method has been suggested for identifying top suppliers by considering the effects of interdependence among
the selection criteria, as well as to achieve optimal allocation of orders among the selected suppliers. An integrated fuzzy analytic network
process - multi objective linear programming (FANP-MOLP) approach has been used
A SMART approach has been used for solving the supplier/vendor selection problem from the perspective of strategic management of the
supply chain.
A new grey-based approach to deal with the supplier selection problem has been proposed.
Wu (2009)
Lin (2009)
An integration of ANP and multi-objective mixed integer linear programming (MOMILP) is proposed to consider both tangible and
intangible factors in choosing the best suppliers and dene the optimum quantities among selected suppliers to maximize the total value
of purchasing and minimize the budget and defect rate.
An examination of the difference between managers rating of the perceived importance of different supplier attributes and their actual
choice of suppliers in an experimental setting has been presented.
An integration of AHP and linear programming is proposed to consider both tangible and intangible factors in choosing the best suppliers
and placing the optimum order quantities such that the total value of purchasing (TVP) becomes the maximum.
Supplier selection practices across the supply chain have been explored. They have compared the supplier selection practices based on a
survey of companies at different levels of auto industry. compare
3. Research methodology
4. Case study
This section deals with the details about the case company,
background of the case study and fuzzy ANP approach for supplier
selection.
Table 2
Various applications of ANP.
Research articles
Contributions
Wu et al. (2009)
An integrated approach of ANP has been proposed to consider both tangible and intangible factors and to optimize the paid off earn by
company from strategic alliance.
An integrated multi-objective decision-making process by using ANP and mixed integer programming (MIP) to optimize supplier selection
process has been presented.
ANP and multi-period goal programming integration has been used in purchasing decisions.
Wu et al. (2009)
Demirtas and Ustun
(2008b)
Lang, Chiang, and Lan
(2009)
Ustun and Demirtas
(2009)
Ustun and Demirtas
(2008)
Gencer and Gurpinar
(2007)
Gencer and Gurpinar
(2007)
A novel hierarchical evaluation framework to assist the expert group to select the optimal supplier in supply chain management strategy
(SCMS).
An integrated approach of ANP and multi-objective mixed integer linear programming (MOMILP) is proposed to consider both tangible and
intangible factors in choosing the best suppliers and dene the optimum quantities among selected suppliers to maximize the total value of
purchasing and minimize the budget and defect rate.
An integration of ANP and achievement of scalarising functions is proposed to choose the best suppliers and dene the optimum quantities
among the selected suppliers by considering tangibleintangible criteria and time horizon.
An approach using ANP in supplier selection to evaluate the relations between supplier selection criterias in a feedback systematic.
ANP in supplier selection has been developed and implemented in an electronics company.
274
Table 3
Applications of fuzzy ANP
Research articles
Contributions
A fuzzy ANP based approach is proposed to evaluate a set of conceptual design alternatives developed in a new product development (NPD)
environment in order to reach to the best one satisfying both the needs and expectations of customers, and the engineering specications of
company.
Fuzzy ANP approach has been used for selecting a shipyard location.
Fuzzy ANP based approach is used for transportation-mode selection between Turkey and Germany.
An evaluation model using fuzzy ANP, indicate overall organization performance of each hospital and assessing hospital operating crisis.
Fuzzy ANP model is used to identify faulty behaviour risk (FBR) in work system.
Literature review on supplier selection models and applications of ANP and fuzzy ANP
Development of conceptual model for supplier selection
Selection of a suitable organisation for conducting fuzzy ANP case study
Gathering of necessary data
Application of fuzzy ANP for supplier selection
Calculation of Supplier Selection Weighted Index (SSWI)
Selection of best supplier
Sensitivity analysis
Fig. 1. Research methodology.
The case study has been carried out at Salzer Electronics Limited
(hereafter referred to Salzer). Salzer is manufacturing Cam operated rotary switches, modular switches and relays. Salzer has been
started in collaboration with a German company. It has been
started in the year 1984. The number of employees currently working at Salzer is 350.
Various data pertaining to fuzzy ANP approach has been gathered in consultation with Manager (Standards & Systems) of Salzer.
The Manager, Standards & Systems (hereafter referred to as decision maker) possesses rich experience about the working culture
of Salzer. The various steps involved in fuzzy ANP approach have
been shown in Fig. 2.
Building pair wise comparison matrices between criteria and sub criteria
Sensitivity analysis
275
improvement criteria consists of various sub-criteria namely reputation of industry, nancial strength, managing ability, organisation customers. The interaction between various sub-criteria is
shown in layer 3 in Fig. 3. In this research project, there are three
suppliers, among which the best supplier has to be selected.
Framework for fuzzy ANP supplier selection process is shown below in Fig. 3
The process starts with identication of supplier selection criteria and sub-criteria. Then, pairwise comparison matrices between
criteria and sub-criteria have to be developed. Then, the super matrix has to be formulated and analysed. This is followed by the calculation of desirability index for various sub-criteria. Then, the
sensitivity analysis has to be performed at criteria level. Then,
the SSWI has to be computed for deciding the best supplier.
4.3. Framework of fuzzy ANP
Business
Improvement (BI)
Extent of
Fitness (EOF)
Quality (Q)
Service (S)
Risks (R)
Sub-Criteria
Layer 2
1) Reputation of
Industry (ROI)
1) Sharing of
Expertise (SOE)
1) Low Defect
Rate (LDR)
1) On Time
Delivery (OTD)
1) Supply
Constraint (SC)
2) Financial
Strength (FS)
2) Flexible
Practices (FP)
2) Commitment to
Quality (CTQ)
2) Quick
Responsiveness
(QR)
2) Buyer Supplier
Constraint (BSC)
3) Managing
Ability (MA)
3) Diversified
Customers (DC)
3) Improved
Process Capability
(IPC)
3) Suppliers Profile
(SP)
3) Supplier
Capacity (SC)
4) Organisation
Customers (OS)
Interactions
ROI
FS
LD
SOE
MA
FP
DC
CT
OTD
IPC
QR
Layer 3
SC
SC
BSC
SP
OS
Supplier A
Supplier B
Supplier C
Table 4
Nine point scale used in pairwise comparisons.
Numerical rating
References
Remarks
1
3
5
7
9
Equally important
Moderately more important
Strongly more important
Very strongly more important
Extremely more important
Two attributes contribute equally to the attribute at the higher decision level
One attribute slightly favours another attribute over another
One attribute strongly favours another attribute over another
One attribute very strongly favours another attribute over another
One attribute extremely favours another attribute over another
276
1
a
Ba
~
B
e B 21
A
B ..
@ .
~a1n
a
~a12
a
1
..
.
~an2
a
~a1n 1
a
~a2n C
a
C
C
..
..
.. C
.
.
. A
BOI
EF
Q
S
R
Aw kmax w
Table 5
Fuzzy comparison matrix for dependencies in various criteria.
BOI
EF
1
~ 1
3
~
3
1
~ 1
5
~
7
~
5
~
5
~
7
~
7
~
9
1
~ 1
3
~
3
1
~ 1
3
~
5
~
3
~ 1
7
~ 1
5
~ 1
7
~ 1
7
~ 1
9
~ 1
5
Table 6
a-Cuts fuzzy comparison matrix for dependencies in various criteria.
BOI
EF
Q
S
R
Eigen vector
1
.375
.146
.208
.146
3
1
.208
.146
.113
7
5
1
5
7
3
1
.375
7
9
5
3
1
.4845
.3144
.1061
.0620
.0329
.375
.208
LDR
CTQ
IPC
CTQ
1
~ 1
3
~
9
~
5
IPC
~ 1
9
~
3
1
~ 1
5
LDR
BOI
EF
1
[1/2, 1/4]
[1/6, 1/8]
[1/4, 1/6]
[1/6, 1/8]
[2, 4]
1
[1/4, 1/6]
[1/6, 1/8]
[1/8, 1/10] [1/4, 1/6]
[6, 8]
[4, 6]
1
[1/2, 1/4]
~ 1
3
[4, 6]
[6, 8]
[2, 4]
1
1
[6, 8]
[8, 10]
[4, 6]
[2, 4]
Table 9
a cut fuzzy comparison matrix for relative importance of sub-criteria under criteria
quality.
LDR
CTQ
IPC
LDR
CTQ
IPC
1
[1/2, 1/4]
[1/8, 1/10]
[2, 4]
1
[1/4, 1/6]
[8, 10]
[4, 6]
1
Table 10
Eigen vector for comparison matrix of the sub-criteria under criteria quality.
To select the best supplier, the following steps have been followed:
EF
EF
e a la ; ua m la l; u ma u 8a
M
BOI
BOI
Table 8
Fuzzy comparison matrix for the relative importance of sub-criteria under criteria
quality.
~ 3;
~ 5;
~ or 1
~ 1 ; 3
~ 1 ; 5
~ 1 ,
~ 7;
~ 9
~ 1 ; 7
~ 1 ; 9
~ij 1, if i = j, and a
~ij 1;
where a
when i j. a denotes condence level and l denotes index of optimism and is determined by the decision maker. The triangular fuzzy
numbers can be calculated using the following equations:
Table 7
Eigen vector of comparison matrix for dependencies in various criteria.
LDR
CTQ
IPC
LDR
CTQ
IPC
Eigen vector
3
1
9
5
1
.6619
.2741
.0641
.375
.113
.208
Table 11
Fuzzy comparison matrix for relative importance of each supplier for sub-criteria
reputation of industry.
ROI
1
~ 1
1
~ 1
7
~
1
1
~ 1
3
~
7
~
3
B
C
~ a 1; 3 2a
1
~ a 1 2a; 5 2a
3
~
5a 3 2a; 7 2a
~ a 5 2a; 9 2a
7
~ a 7 2a; 11 2a
9
1
1
~ 1
3
;
a
5 2a 1 2a
1
1
~ 1
;
5
a
7 2a 3 2a
1
1
~ 1
;
7
a
9 2a 5 2a
1
1
~ 1
9
;
a
11 2a 7 2a
where a is condence level, whose value is substituted as a = 0.5
Sample calculation
277
Table 15
Fuzzy comparison matrix for the relative importance of the
sub-criteria under extent of tness and exible practices.
ROI
FP
SOE
DC
A
B
C
1
[1/2, 1/3]
[1/6, 1/8]
[2, 3]
1
[1/2, 1/4]
[6, 8]
[2, 4]
1
SOE
~
9
~ 1
7
~
7
~
9
Table 13
Eigen vector for comparison matrix for relative importance of each supplier for subcriteria reputation of industry.
ROI
Eigen vector
A
B
C
1
.75
.146
1.5
1
.375
7
3
1
.5653
.3392
.0988
8l 2 0; 1
~ a 0:5 3
~ a 1 0:5 3
~a
3
ij
iju
ijl
a
~ 0:5 2 0:5 4 3
3
ij
Similarly, fuzzy triangular numbers are calculated for other a-cuts
fuzzy numbers
4.4.3. Computation of consistency ratio for each pairwise comparison
matrix
The consistency ratio has to be calculated after the construction
of all pairwise comparison matrices. The consistency index that
represents the deviation from consistency is calculated using the
following equation:
CI
kmax n
n1
CR
CI
RI
As a sample Table 14 shows the Eigen vector calculation of comparison matrix for various sub-criteria under the criteria quality
kmax 3:08
3:08 3
0:04
CI
31
Di
j
k
X
X
j1 k1
0:04
0:069
CR
31
Table 14
Eigen vector for comparison matrix for various sub-criteria under quality criteria.
LDR
CTQ
IPC
DC
LDR
CTQ
IPC
1
.375
.113
3
1
.208
9
5
1
kmax
CI
RI
CR
Eigen vector
.6619
.2741
.0641
3.08
.04
.58
.069 < .100
Table 16
a cut fuzzy comparison matrix for relative importance of the
sub-criteria under extent of tness and exible practices.
FP
SOE
DC
SOE
DC
[8, 10]
[1/6, 1/8]
[6, 8]
[8, 10]
278
Table 17
Eigen vector for comparison matrix for the relative importance of the sub-criteria
under extent of tness and exible practices.
FP
SOE
DC
Eigen vector
SOE
DC
9
.146
7
9
.8800
.1200
Table 18
Super matrix before convergence.
ROI
F.S
MQ
OS
SOE
FP
DC
LDF
CTQ
IPC
OTD
QR
SC
SCT
BSC
SP
ROI
FS
MQ
OS
.00
.52
.31
.17
.50
.00
.36
.14
.70
.175
.00
.125
.71
.22
.07
.00
SOE
FP
DC
.00
.93
.07
.88
.00
.12
.75
.25
.00
LDF
CTQ
IPC
.00
.58
.42
.87
.00
.12
.94
.06
.00
OTD
QR
SC
.00
.98
.02
.55
.00
.45
.97
.03
.00
SCT
BSC
SP
.00
.55
.45
.68
.00
.32
.84
.16
.00
Table 19
Super matrix after convergence.
ROI
F.S
MQ
OS
SOE
FP
DC
LDF
CTQ
IPC
OTD
QR
SC
SCT
BSC
SP
ROI
FS
MQ
OS
.3838
.2620
.2218
.1858
.3838
.2620
.2218
.1858
.3838
.2620
.2218
.1858
.3838
.2620
.2218
.1858
SOE
FP
DC
.4611
.4520
.0864
.4611
.4520
.0864
.4611
.4520
.0864
LDF
CTQ
IPC
.4256
.2594
.2081
.4256
.2594
.2081
.4256
.2594
.2081
OTD
QR
SC
.3745
.3749
.1764
.3745
.3749
.1764
.3745
.3749
.1764
SCT
BSC
SP
.4264
.2804
.2814
.4264
.2804
.2814
.4264
.2804
.2814
Table 20
Desirability index computed for various suppliers based on all the ve criteria.
Criteria
Sub-criteria
Pj
AD
kj
Alkj
S1kj
S2kj
S3kj
Supplier A
Supplier B
Supplier C
BI
ROI
FS
MQ
OS
.4845
.4845
.4845
.4845
.6300
.2100
.1300
.0730
.3838
.2620
.2218
.1858
.5653
.7320
.8320
.7210
.3392
.1456
.0970
.2270
.0988
.1222
.0720
.0510
.0662
.0195
.0116
.0019
.0397
.0039
.0014
.0006
.0116
.0032
.0010
.0001
EOF
SOE
FP
DC
.3144
.3144
.3144
.7760
.1617
.0607
.4611
.4520
.0864
.6639
.4273
.5700
.2782
.4912
.1900
.0579
.0815
.2400
.0748
.0098
.0009
.0314
.0112
.0003
.0065
.0019
.0004
LDF
CTQ
IPC
.1061
.1061
.1061
.6619
.2741
.0641
.4256
.2594
.2081
.6040
.5734
.6329
.3200
.3460
.3152
.0760
.0803
.0519
.0194
.0035
.0010
.0103
.0021
.0005
.0024
.0048
.0001
OTD
QR
SC
.0620
.0620
.0620
.7230
.2000
.0780
.3745
.3749
.1764
.5420
.5394
.5141
.4070
.2341
.2879
.0510
.2265
.1979
.0091
.0025
.0004
.0068
.0011
.0002
.0009
.0010
.0002
SCT
BSC
SP
.3290
.3290
.3290
.760
.1900
.0500
.4264
.2804
.2814
.8718
.4249
.6566
.0872
.5433
.2837
.0410
.0518
.0597
.0093
.0007
.0003
.0009
.0009
.0001
.0004
.0001
.0001
.2309
.1114
.0347
Total
279
Table 21
SSWI for various suppliers.
Supplier A
Supplier B
Supplier C
Total
SSWI
.2309
.1114
.0347
.3770
.6124
.2955
.0920
1.0000
As inferred from Table 20, supplier A has been found to be the best
supplier with high desirability index 0.2309.
Fig. 4. Results of sensitivity analysis by varying the relative criteria between various criteria for different suppliers.
Name:
Designation:
Company:
Date:
1) You have been shown the super ma trix that depicts the interdependencies of various sub-criteria. To
what extent do you believe that this super matrix is practically possible?
0
Not at all
10
partially
completely
2) You have been shown the supplier selection desira bility index for various sub-criteria. To what extent
do you believe that this approach represents reality?
0
Not at all
partially
10
completely
280
Table 22
Response of the decision maker.
Q.
No.
Question
You have been shown the super matrix that depicts the interdependencies of various sub-criteria. To what
extent do you believe that this super matrix is practically possible?
You have been shown the supplier selection desirability index for various sub-criteria. To what extent do you
believe that this approach represents reality?
You have been shown the supplier selection weighted index for different suppliers. To what extent do you
believe that this computation is practically feasible?
The sensitivity analysis for the supplier selection process is shown to you. To what extent do you believe that
the results are realistic?
2
3
4
change in the relative importance does not create any impact in the
decision made, which has been revealed by the linearity of the
results.
5.2. Questionnaire-based validation
In order to determine the practical feasibility of deploying fuzzy
ANP approach for selecting the best supplier, a questionnaire has
been designed scientically, and an excerpt of the questionnaire
has been shown in Fig. 5. The responses have been gathered from
the decision maker of Salzer and his responses are shown in Table 22.
Besides, the overall opinion of the decision maker has been
quoted as an effective method of supplier selection and is compatible for Salzer, based on the response given by the decision maker
as well as based on the sensitivity analysis, the fuzzy ANP process
is found to be practically feasible and compatible in industrial scenario for effective supplier selection.
6. Conclusions
The manufacturing organisations in contemporary scenario
have been witnessing rapid transformation in their manufacturing
pattern. The manufacturing pattern has been changed from mass
manufacturing to mass customised manufacturing (Gunasekaran,
1999). In mass customised as well as in advanced manufacturing
paradigms, outsourcing is an essential ingredient of business practices. In this context, the supplier selection process gains extreme
importance. Various approaches are available for supplier selection. Fuzzy ANP approach has been used in this project to select
the best supplier so as to enable the manufacturing organisation
to achieve their business objectives in the supply chain practices.
The unique features of fuzzy ANP include the development of pairwise comparison matrices, utilisation of interdependencies among
decision levels and development of more reliable solutions (Ayag &
Ozdemir, 2009). Extreme care has to be ensured in the supplier
selection process because any wrong decision in supplier selection
may lead to the risk of losing market share and prot margin of the
organisation. The case study reported in this article has been validated using two approaches which indicated the practical feasibility and practical adaptability of this approach in the contemporary
industrial scenario.
References
Ayag, Z., & Ozdemir, R. G. (2009). A hybrid approach to concept selection through
fuzzy analytic network process. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 56,
368379.
9
9
8
Cater, J. J. (2005). The rise of the furniture manufacturing industry in Western North
Carolina and Virginia. Management Decision, 43(6), 906924.
Chang, Y.-H., Wey, W.-M., & Tseng, H.-Y. (2009). Using ANP priorities with goal
programming for revitalization strategies in historic transport: A case study
of the Alishan Forest Railway. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 8682
8690.
Choi, T.-Y., & Hartley, J.-L. (1996). An exploration of supplier selection practices
across the supply chain. Journal of Operations Management, 14, 333343.
Chou, S.-Y., & Chang, Y.-H. (2008). A decision support system for supplier selection
based on a strategy-aligned fuzzy SMART approach. Expert Systems with
Applications, 34, 22412253.
Dagdeviren, M., Yuksel, I., & Kurt, M. (2008). A fuzzy analytic network process (ANP)
model to identify faulty behavior risk (FBR) in work system. Safety Science, 46,
771783.
Demirtas, E.-A., & Ustun, O. (2008a). An integrated multi-objective decision making
process for supplier selection and order allocation. Omega, 36, 7690.
Demirtas, E.-A., & Ustun, O. (2008b). An integrated multi-objective decisionmaking process for multi-period lot-sizing with supplier selection. Omega, 36,
509521.
Gencer, C., & Gurpinar, D. (2007). Analytic network process in supplier selection: A
case study in an electronic rm. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 31,
24752486.
Ghodsypour, S. H., & OBrien, C. (1998). A decision support system for supplier
selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear
programming. International Journal of Production Economics, 5657, 199212.
Gunasekaran, A. (1999). Agile manufacturing: A framework for research and
development. International Journal of production economics, 62, 87105.
Gunasekaran, A., Lai, K.-h., & Cheng, T. C. E. (2008). Responsive supply chain: A
competitive strategy in a networked economy. Omega, 36(4), 549564.
Guneri, A. F., Cengiz, M., & Seker, S. (2009). A fuzzy ANP approach to shipyard
location selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 79927999.
Lang, T.-M., Chiang, J.-H., & Lan, L. W. (2009). Selection of optimal supplier in supply
chain management strategy with analytic network process and Choquet
integral. Computers & Industrial Engineering.
Lin, R.-H. (2009). An integrated FANP-MOLP for supplier evaluation and order
allocation. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 33, 27302736.
Li, G.-D., Yamaguchi, D., & Nagai, M. (2007). A grey-based decision-making approach
to the supplier selection problem. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46,
573581.
Tuzkaya, U. R., & Onut, S. (2008). A fuzzy analytic network process based approach
to transportation-mode selection between Turkey and Germany: A case study.
Information Sciences, 178, 31333146.
Ustun, O., & Demirtas, E.-A. (2008). Multi-period lot-sizing with supplier selection
using achievement scalarizing functions. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54,
918931.
Ustun, O., & Demirtas, E.-A. (2009). Analytic network process and multi-period goal
programming integration in purchasing decisions. Computers & Industrial
Engineering, 56, 677690.
Verma, R., & Pullman, M.-E. (1998). An analysis of supplier selection process. Omega,
International Journal of Management Science, 26(6), 739750.
Wu, D. (2009). Supplier selection: A hybrid model using DEA, decision tree and
neural network. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 91059112.
Wu, C.-R., Lin, C.-T., & Chen, H.-C. (2009). Integrated environmental assessment of
the location selection with fuzzy analytical network process. Quality & Quantity,
43, 351380.
Wu, C.-R., Ozdemir, R. G., & Lin, Hung-Lung (2008). A fuzzy ANP-based approach to
evaluate medical organizational performance. Information and Management
Sciences, 19, 5374.