Seema et al.

, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology E-ISSN 0976-3945

Research Paper
DESIGNING A MATHEMATICAL MODEL USING FUZZY
BASED MOORA METHOD FOR SUPPLIER SELECTION
1
Seema, 2Raminderjeet Kaur, 3Darshan Kumar
Address for Correspondence
1
Research Scholar, Pacific University, Udaipur, Rajasthan, Republic of India
2
Lecturer, DIET, Gurdaspur, Punjab, Republic of India
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Aman Bhalla Institute of Engineering and Technology, Pathankot-
145025, Punjab, Republic of India
ABSTRACT:
Supplier selection and evaluation are arguably one of the most critical functions for the success of an organization. These
decisions are complicated because potential options need to be evaluated on more than one criterion. Purchasing managers
need to evaluate periodically supplier performance in order to retain those suppliers who meet their requirements in terms of
several performance criteria. The evaluation element typically consists of identifying the attributes or factors that are
relevant to the decision and then measuring or rating each supplier by considering each of the relevant factors. The present
paper deals with the problem of supplier selection through application of fuzzy based multi-objective optimization on the
basis of ratio analysis (MOORA). We take a real-world problem of supplier selection for chemical and biotechnology
organizations in India to illustrate the use of proposed methods. We have found the proposed system so simplified that the
engineers/managers of the related fields will find implementation of this technique very easy and suitable.
KEYWORDS: MOORA; fuzzy; supplier selection; criteria, ranking.
1. INTRODUCTION right suppliers significantly reduces production costs
One of the critical responsibilities faced by and improves competitiveness.
purchasing managers of organizations is the Keeping in view the importance of effective supplier
performance evaluation and monitoring of suppliers selection mechanism, a trend is emerging in large
that will supply the organizations with the necessary industrial organizations whereby a number of
raw material, components and services for the personnel from various functional areas participate in
production of end-items. Commodity partnerships the selection and evaluation of suppliers, indicating a
that are exclusively based on price are no longer growing importance of team involvement in this
acceptable for suppliers of critical inputs and selection and evaluation activity. This increased
resources or for organizations introducing and concern for supplier selection is probably due to the
practicing the latest innovations. Recent emphasis in fact that supplier selection may be the single most
managing these inter-organizational relationships has important phase of the purchasing process.
extended to include other important factors such as Purchasing managers need to evaluate periodically
quality, delivery, flexibility etc. thus, there continues supplier performance in order to retain those
to be a need for robust evaluation models that suppliers who meet their requirements in terms of
effectively incorporate supplier criteria [1]. The fact several performance criteria. The evaluation element
that supplier selection is a multi-criteria problem typically consists of identifying the attributes or
which includes both qualitative and quantitative factors that are relevant to the decision and then
factors makes the process even more crucial. In order measuring or rating each supplier by considering
to select the best supplier it is necessary to make a each of the relevant factors [4]. But, the problem
trade-off between those tangible and non-tangible arises when these factors are conflicting to each
factors some of which may conflict. other. That is why fuzzy multi criteria decision
Supplier selection and evaluation are arguably one of making (FMCDM) has a role to play in order to
the most critical functions for the success of an select the alternative suppliers.
organization. Research shows that higher levels of The objective of this paper is to enhance evaluation
customer satisfaction, i.e., competitive pricing, and selection methodology and to propose an
product quality, product variety and delivery service; alternative approach by applying fuzzy multi-
and firm performance result from selecting and objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis
evaluating suppliers based on their ability to provide (MOORA). It is also proved that fuzzy MOORA
quality components and subassemblies, reliable method is a simple, accurate and easy to understand
delivery and product performance. Also, involving tool for solving multi criteria decision making
suppliers on product development and continuous problems, having vague and imprecise evaluation
improvement teams has an even greater positive data.
impact on firm performance [2]. Thus, supplier 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
selection decisions are an important component of A survey of previous research work reveals a lot of
management. These decisions are complicated published work on supplier selection problems. Mon
because potential options need to be evaluated on et. al [5] used fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP)
more than one criterion. This is illustrated from the based on entropy weight calculations for evaluation
fact that in review of supplier selection criteria and of suppliers for weapon. But, the entropy weight
methods by Weber et al. [3]. The authors found that method is not efficient enough due to the fact that it
47 of the 76 articles reviewed had more than one uses complicated calculations for decision making.
criterion. A second complication of supplier selection To overcome this problem, Chen [6] proposed a new
decisions is the fact that individual suppliers may method to evaluate the same suppliers for weapons
have different performance characteristics for using fuzzy number arithmetic operations. The
different criteria. Selection of wrong supplier could method used by Chen did not normalize each
be enough to upset the organizations financial and criterions score which could make a wrong decision
operational position. On the contrary, selecting the due to presence of many levels for rank scores. To
Int J Adv Engg Tech/Vol. V/Issue I/Jan.-March.,2014/16-24
 Seema et al., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology
overcome this error, Cheng [7] proposed a new
model that utilized fuzzy ratio scales to indicate the
relative strength of factors used in the evaluation of
suppliers of weapons. AHP approach may suffer
from some drawbacks including bias in estimation
process. To overcome this drawback, Muralidharan et
al. [8] proposed a methodology in their paper which
made use of estimation of the rating by a group on an
individual basis following the principle of anonymity.
They carried out a statistical analysis to determine the
confidence intervals for the estimates of the
composite rating of the suppliers. To overcome the
same problem, Bhutta and Huq [9] used AHP to cope
with multi criteria situations involving supplier
selection and compared it with another approach,
called total cost of ownership that looked beyond just
the price of purchase to better understand and
manage costs in selecting and maintaining
relationships with suppliers. Chan and Kumar [10]
used fuzzy based AHP to tackle the different decision
criteria like cost, quality, service performance and
supplier's profile including the risk factors involved
in the selection of global supplier in the current
business scenario. Ruoning and Zhai [11] also used
fuzzy logic for the retailer to order the right quantity
to maximize supply chain profit.
Many researchers and practitioners used combination
of more than one method for solution of supplier
selection problems. Ghodsypour and OBrien [12]
proposed a decision support system for supplier
selection using an integration of AHP and linear
programming to consider both tangible and intangible
factors in choosing the best supplier and placing the
optimum order quantities among them. Korpela et. al
[13] proposed a framework by which risks related to
a customer-supplier relationship can be included in
production capacity allocation, based on integrated
AHP and mixed integer programming (MIP) model.
Wang et. al [14] developed a multi-criteria decision-
making methodology using integrated AHP and pre-
emptive goal programming (PGP) to take into
account both quantitative and qualitative factors in
supplier selection. Ng [15] proposed a weighted
linear program for the multi-criteria supplier
selection problem. The proposed model allowed
involvement of the decision maker in ranking the
relativity of importance of criteria. In addition, the
decision makers role was not as subjective as other
approaches in AHP models. He presented a
transformation technique which enabled the weighted
linear program to be solved without optimization. Xia
and Wu [16] also considered an integrated approach
of AHP improved by rough sets theory and multi-
objective mixed integer programming to
simultaneously determine the number of suppliers to
employ and the order quantity allocated to these
suppliers in the case of multiple sourcing, multiple
products, with multiple criteria and with supplier's
capacity constraints.
Another approach to solve supplier selection
problems is mathematical programming. This
approach has been used by researchers and
practitioners in many ways. One category which is
used in many problems in literature is multi-objective
optimization models. Gaballa [17] was the first
researcher to utilize mathematical programming. He
formulated a MIP for Australian post office. He tried
to minimize suppliers discounted prices through the
Int J Adv Engg Tech/Vol. V/Issue I/Jan.-March.,2014/16-24
E-ISSN 0976-3945
model developed. Weber and Current [18] used
multi-objective linear programming in supplier
selection. They developed a model to tradeoff among
several conflicting criteria. Many such linear
programming models have been developed for
minimization of cost of production and lot size to be
ordered. Liu et al. [19], for example, proposed a
linear programming model for optimization of lot
sizes in consequential production periods. Ustun and
Demirtas [20] used an integrated approach of analytic
network process (ANP) and multi-objective mixed
integer linear programming (MOMILP) to considers
both tangible and intangible factors in choosing the
best suppliers and defines the optimum quantities
among selected suppliers to maximize the total value
of purchasing (TVP), and to minimize the total cost
and total defect rate and to balance the total cost
among periods. Lee et al. [21] also used ANP for
selecting the appropriate acquisition mode for a
required technology during supplier selection and
evaluation process. Chung et al. [22] developed a
closed-loop supply chain inventory model to
maximize the joint profits of the supplier,
manufacturer and the retailer under contractual
design.
As discussed above, researchers and practitioners
have focused their attention on selecting the most
suitable supplier for the different purposes using
complex mathematical tools. The models discussed
provide systematic approaches for purchasing
managers to evaluate and score suppliers with multi-
criteria. Nevertheless, these models are not easy to
implement. Models based on multi-objective
optimization require the decision makers to
exogenously specify the exact values of weights of
individual criteria. It is however difficult to obtain
precise weight values. The objective of the present
paper is to enhance evaluation and selection
methodology and to recommend an alternative
approach by applying fuzzy based multi-objective
optimization on the basis of ratio analysis (MOORA)
method to solve supplier selection problems in
manufacturing environment.
Rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 3
gives brief description of fuzzy set theory. Section 4
describes basics of MOORA and fuzzy MOORA
methods. Section 5 illustrates an example to validate
the proposed model and concluding remarks are
provided in section 6.
3. FUZZY SET THEORY
Fuzzy set theory, pioneered by Zadeh [23] has been
widely used to model systems that are hard to define
precisely. Therefore, fuzzy logic represents an
alternative tool to aid research in production
management when the dynamics of the environment
limits the specification of model objectives,
constraints and measurements. The main interest of
fuzzy set theory pertained to representing uncertainty
in human cognitive processes in the early years of its
use. But, it is now applied to problems in
engineering, businesses, medical and other sciences.
The use of this methodology for modeling and
analyzing decision systems is of particular interest in
problems related to supplier selection due to fuzzy
theorys ability to quantitatively and qualitatively
model problems which involve vagueness and
imprecision [24]. Literature reveals many
applications of fuzzy set theory in the fields of
 Seema et al., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology
production management, new product development,
production scheduling, inventory management,
facility layout, facility location, quality and cost
benefit analysis etc. The main reasons why fuzzy set
theory application is successful in these areas of
research are:
Imprecision and vagueness of such
problems.
Most of the times, the information required
to develop a model is vague or not precisely
measureable.
Imprecision and subjective opinion of the
people concerned may further dampen the
quality and quantity of available
information.
In a universe of discourse X, a fuzzy sub-set is
characterised by membership function (x) that
maps each element x in X to a real number in the
interval [0, 1]. The function value of (x) is termed
as the grade of membership of x in . Generally,
triangular fuzzy numbers and trapezoidal fuzzy
numbers are used. Because of their calculation
easiness and added features, triangular fuzzy numbers
find their applications in engineering and
manufacturing environment. A triangular fuzzy
variable is a triplet composed of crisp numbers, (a, b,
c), whose membership function is
xa
A( x ) = , axb
ba
=
xc
, bxc
bc
= 0, others
Figure 1 depicts membership function of triangular
fuzzy variable.
Figure 1: Membership function of triangular fuzzy
variable
4. THE MOORA METHOD
Multi-objective optimization, also known as multi-
criteria or multi-attribute optimization, is the process
of simultaneously optimizing two or more conflicting
attributes. Such techniques, therefore, seem to be an
appropriate tool for ranking or selecting best
alternative from a set of available options. The
MOORA method, first introduced by Brauers [25] is
such a multi-objective optimization technique that
can be successfully applied to solve various types of
complex decision making problems in the
manufacturing environment subject to certain
constraints. This method has been successfully
applied in various engineering/management fields,
for example selection of best intelligent
manufacturing system [26], site selection for setting
up a wind farm [27], project selection [28],
evaluation of inner climate [29], parametric
optimization of milling process [30] etc.
In MOORA method, first step is to develop a
decision matrix showing the pertinent evaluation
attributes for different alternatives. A general
decision matrix is shown in table 1.
Int J Adv Engg Tech/Vol. V/Issue I/Jan.-March.,2014/16-24
E-ISSN 0976-3945
Table 1: A general decision matrix for supplier
selection problem
where, xij is the performance measure of the ith
alternative on jth attribute, m is the number of
alternatives and n is the number of attributes.
In the next step, a ratio system is developed, where
each performance of an alternative on an attribute is
to be compared with the representative for all the
alternatives. Brauers et al. [31] proposed the ratio,
shown in equation 1, for desired ratio system
(j=1,2,..,n) (1)
xij = xij m 2
x ij
i =1
Where xij is a dimensionless number that belongs to
the interval [0, 1] representing the normalized
performance of the ith alternative on jth criterion.
Next, the overall performance of each alternative is
calculated as the difference between sums of its
normalized performances for beneficial attributes and
non-beneficial attributes using the following
equation.
- .(2)
Where g is the number of attributes to be maximized
and (n-g) is the number of attributes to be minimized,
and yi is the assessment value of ith alternative with
respect to all the attributes. In some cases, it
is often observed that some attributes are more
important than the others. In order to give more
importance to an attribute, it could be multiplied with
its corresponding weight (significance coefficient)
[32]. When these attribute weights are taken into
consideration, equation (2) becomes as follows:
- (j = 1, 2, .., n)
(3)
where wj is the weight of jth attribute. The value of yi
so found can be positive or negative. This depends on
the total of its maxima (beneficial attributes) and
minima (non-beneficial attributes) in the decision
matrix. An ordinal ranking of yi shows the final
preference. Thus, the best alternative has the highest
yi value, while the worst alternative has the lowest yi
value.
In the present paper, a new variant of MOORA
method, i.e., fuzzy MOORA is proposed in order to
take full advantage of MOORA method for solving
the MCDM problems related to supplier selection,
which generally have vague and imprecise data. The
proposed method consists of following steps.
Step 1: For developing the fuzzy decision matrix,
opinions of the key decision makers are taken. In this,
each criterion is measured using triangular
membership function. A typical fuzzy decision
matrix is shown below as equation (4).
X=
. (4)
where , and respectively are the lower,
middle and upper values of a triangular membership
 Seema et al., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology E-ISSN 0976-3945

function for alternative with respect to The required data has been collected from chemical
and biotechnology industries of India through a
criterion. survey. A questionnaire based on existing
Step 2: Fuzzy decision matrix, created in step 1 is measurement scales for the research constructs was
normalized using vector normalization procedure. developed for determining the factors that these
For normalization, equations (5), (6) and (7), given industries consider for supplier selection and
below are used. evaluate suppliers (see annexure A). These
a
x ij questions were framed on a five-point Likert scale. A
a
r ij = total of 625 questionnaires were sent to different

( ) ( ) ( )
m
a + x b + x c
2 2 2 industries throughout the country from the directory
x ij ij ij of public sector, private sector and government
i = 1 ............ (5)
organizations. A total of 88 responses were
xb
ij collected. This gives an effective response rate of
rb
ij = 14.08%. Though the response rate is somewhat less,
( ) ( ) ( )
m
a + x b + x c
2 2 2 nevertheless it does assist in digging and tracing the
x ij ij ij
i = 1
important factors related to supplier selection and
... (6) evaluation, as being followed in the Indian chemical
c
x ij and biotechnology organizations.
c=
r ij Most of the constructs used in the study are
( ) ( ) ( )
m
a + x b + x c
2 2 2 individual level constructs. We believe that
x ij ij ij
i = 1 .(7) organizations do not communicate; people do.
However, in order to translate these behavioural
Step 3: In this step, weighted normalized fuzzy constructs at the dyadic, inter-organizational level
decision matrix is determined by using equations (8), (which is the unit of analysis), we presume that
(9) and (10). individual views on the issues surveyed will be a
a = w ra
v ij function of their organizational roles. Also,
j ij individuals who occupy strategic positions in their
..(8)
organizations would be more knowledgeable about
vb b
ij = w j r ij the strategic aspects of inter-organizational exchange
..(9) relationships. Thus, we tapped responses to the
questionnaire from key informants of purchase and
..(10) material management departments of these
Step 4: In this step, overall ratings of beneficial and organizations. The usage of data collected this way is
non-beneficial criteria for each alternative is standard practice in strategic management research
calculated. For beneficial criteria, the overall ratings [33, 34].
of an alternative for lower, middle and upper values 5.2 Factors for development of model
of the triangular function are computed by using Respondents were asked to rate the importance of
equations (11), (12) and (13). factors considered for supplier evaluation, using a
= . (11) five-point scale with endpoints labeled least
important (=1) and most important (=5). Results
= (12) for the importance scores of the factors are provided
in figure 2.
= (13)
It can be seen from figure 1 that the personnel from
For non-beneficial criteria, the overall ratings of an the organizations surveyed consider service, quality,
alternative for lower, middle and upper values of the on-time delivery, pollution causing factor and total
triangular function are computed by using equations cost as much more important factors than other
(14), (15) and (16). factors while selecting a supplier. We, therefore,
= (14) consider these five factors for ranking the alternative
suppliers. These five factors are defined below.
= (15) Total Cost is the money that buyer has to
= (16) pay for delivery of material from buyers
site to his organization
Step 5: Overall performance index (Si) is determined Quality will take care of consistency in
for each alternative. For this, defuzzified values of quality of raw material being supplied and
the overall ratings for beneficial and non-beneficial percentage rejection of incoming material
criteria for each alternative are calculated using defected by the buyers quality and
equation (17) given below. production departments.

S ( s ,s ) = (
1 +a a 2
) ( )( +c c
) Service factor has been evaluated
2 2
+b b
i
+
i

i +
3 si si si si
si si considering supplier technical ability,
service provided by supplier in response to
(17) the order placed, at the time of any
Step 6: The overall performance indices are arranged complaint, when refund/replacement of
in the descending order and ranked best to worst, i.e., defective material is claimed and in case of
the alternative with the highest overall performance emergency.
index is the best choice. On-time delivery ensures that the required
5. Illustrative example raw material is delivered at the production
5.1 Data collection site before it is to be consumed. This ensures

Int J Adv Engg Tech/Vol. V/Issue I/Jan.-March.,2014/16-24

 Seema et al., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology E-ISSN 0976-3945

that there are no losses because of shortage substances or energy, such as noise, heat or
of raw material. light. Pollutants, the components of
Pollution causing factors consider pollution, can be either foreign
contaminants into the natural environment substances/energies or naturally occurring
that cause adverse change. Pollution can contaminants.
take the form of chemical

Figure 2: Importance scores of factors used to select and evaluate the supplier
5.3 Implementation of fuzzy MOORA method (see annexure B). Using triangular fuzzy
AHP method was employed to determine the weights membership function, the fuzzy decision matrix for
of these five criteria as = 0.364, = 0.260, supplier selection was developed, as shown in table
2.
0.099, 0.209, 0.067 respectively
Table 2: Fuzzy supplier selection decision matrix

The fuzzy decision matrix is then normalized using Normalization is done to make the members of
equations (5), (6) and (7). This normalized fuzzy decision matrix dimensionless and comparable.
decision matrix is shown in table 3 below.
Table 3: Normalized fuzzy decision matrix

After normalization, weighted normalized fuzzy causing factors are the non-beneficial attributes as
decision matrix is obtained after multiplying the lower values for these criteria are desired. Now,
normalized fuzzy criteria values with the using equations (11)-(13), the overall ratings of
corresponding values of crisp criteria weights using beneficial criteria are calculated and using equations
equations (8)-(10). Among the five supplier selection (14)-(16), the overall ratings of non-beneficial criteria
criteria taken, quality and service are beneficial are calculated. These overall ratings for both
attributes as higher values for these criteria are beneficial and non-beneficial attributes for the
desired, whereas cost, on-time delivery and pollution alternative suppliers are shown in table 4.
Table 4: Weighted normalized fuzzy decision matrix

Now, the vertex method is used to defuzzify the
overall ratings for both beneficial and non-beneficial
attributes for the alternative suppliers so as to derive
the values of overall performance index using
equation (17). Table 5 shows the ranking of
alternative suppliers. It is observed that highest value
of overall performance index occurs for supplier 1,
signifying that supplier 1 is the best choice. Supplier
4, having minimum value of overall performance
index will be the worst choice.

Int J Adv Engg Tech/Vol. V/Issue I/Jan.-March.,2014/16-24

 Seema et al., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology
Table 5: Ranking of suppliers
6. CONCLUSIONS
One of the critical responsibilities faced by
purchasing managers of organizations is the
performance evaluation and monitoring of suppliers
that will supply the organizations with the necessary
raw material, components and services for the
production of end-items. It is often observed that the
selection and evaluation of suppliers is a cost-
intensive and time-consuming task. Proper
purchasing strategies, on the other hand, can play a
major role in the achievement of objectives of
successful organizations. Supplier selection is a
multi-criteria problem which includes both
qualitative and quantitative factors. In order to select
the best supplier it is necessary to make a trade-off
between those tangible and non-tangible factors some
of which may conflict. Most of the times, these
factors cannot be easily quantified. This is because of
the unavailability of complete information, precise
references and reliable data. Fuzzification of
attributes plays a vital role in such situations. In the
present paper, a practical example has been taken to
select best supplier for chemical and biotechnology
organizations of India. We have used fuzzy MOORA
approach to handle this problem. The proposed
model can be very helpful to the other companies
also for making decisions about supplier selection.
Also, the proposed methodology can be translated to
model the decision making processes for supplier
benchmark studies, continuous evaluation of the
selected suppliers, negotiation process, supplier
performance feedback, new product development,
facility location and so on. We have found the
proposed system so simplified that the
engineers/managers of the related fields will find
implementation of this technique very easy and
suitable.
REFERENCES
1. Talluri, S. and Sarkis, J., A model for performance
monitoring of suppliers, International Journal of
Production Research, 40(2002) 4257-4269.
2. Tracey, M. and Tan, C.L., Empirical analysis of
supplier selection and involvement, customer
satisfaction and firm performance, International Journal
of Supply Chain Management, 6(2001) 174-188.
3. Weber, C.A., Current, J. and Benton, W.C., Vendor
selection criteria and methods, International Journal of
Supply Chain Management, 5(1991) 90-98.
4. Braglia, M. and Petroni, A., A quality assurance-
oriented methodology for handling trade-offs in
supplier selection, International Journal of Physical
Distribution and Logistic Management, 30(2000) 96-
111.
5. Mon, D., Cheng, C.H. and Lin, J.C., Evaluating weapon
system using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process based on
entropy weight, International Journal of Fuzzy Sets and
Systems, 62(1994) 127-134.
6. Chen, S.M., Evaluating weapon systems using fuzzy
arithmetic operations, International Journal of Fuzzy
Sets and Systems, 77(1996) 265-276.
7. Cheng, C.H., Evaluating weapon system using ranking
fuzzy numbers, International Journal of Fuzzy Sets and
Systems, 107(1999) 25-35.
8. Muralidharan, C., Anantharaman, N. and Deshmukh,
S.G., Vendor rating in purchasing scenario: a
confidence interval approach, International Journal of
Int J Adv Engg Tech/Vol. V/Issue I/Jan.-March.,2014/16-24
E-ISSN 0976-3945
Operations and Production Management, 21(2001)
1305-1325.
9. Bhutta, K.S. and Huq, H., Supplier selection problem: a
comparison of the total cost of ownership and analytical
hierarchy process approaches, International Journal of
Supply Chain Management, 7(2002) 126-135.
10. Chan, F.T.S. Kumar, N., Global supplier development
considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-
based approach, International Journal of Management
Science, 35(2007) 417-431.
11. Ruoning, X. and Zhai, X., Manufacturers coordination
mechanism for single-period supply chain problems
with fuzzy demand, International Journal of
Mathematical and Computer Modeling. 51(2010) 693-
699.
12. Ghodsypour, S.H. and OBrien, C., A decision support
system for supplier selection using an integrated
analytic hierarch process and linear programming,
International Journal of Production Economics, 56-
57(1998) 199-212.
13. Korpela, J., Kylaheiko, K, Lehmusvaara, A. and
Tuominen, M., An analytic approach to production
capacity allocation and supply chain design,
International Journal of Production Economics,
78(2002) 187-195.
14. Wang, G., Huang, S.H. and Dismukes, J.P., Product-
driven supply chain selection using integrated multi-
criteria decision-making methodology, International
Journal of Production Economics, 91(2004) 1-15.
15. Ng, W.L., An efficient and simple model for multiple
criteria supplier selection problem, European Journal of
Operational Research, 186(2008) 1059-1067.
16. Xia, W., Wu, Z., Supplier selection with multiple
criteria in volume discount environments, International
Journal of Management Science, 35(2007) 494-504.
17. Gaballa, A.A., Minimum cost allocation of tenders,
International Journal of Operational Research, 25(1974)
389-398.
18. Weber, C.A., Current, J., A multi objective approach to
vendor selection, European Journal of Operational
Research, 68(1993) 173-184.
19. Liu, X., Wang, C., Luo, X. and Wang, D., A model and
algorithm for out-sourcing planning. Proceedings of
International Conference on e-Business Engineering,
Beijing, 2005 195-198.
20. Ustun, O., Demrtas, E.A., An integrated multi-
objective decision-making process for multi-period lot-
sizing with supplier selection, International Journal of
Management Science, 36(2008) 509-521.
21. Lee, H., Lee, S. and Park, Y., Selection of technology
acquisition mode using the analytic network process,
International Journal of Mathematical and Computer
Modeling. 49(2009) 1274-1282.
22. Chung, S.L., Wee, H.M., and Yang, P.C., Optimal
policy for a closed-loop supply chain inventory system
with remanufacturing, International Journal of
Mathematical and Computer Modeling. 48(2008) 867-
881.
23. Zadeh, L.A., Fuzzy sets, International Journal of
Information and Control, 8(1965) 338-353.
24. [24] Carrera, D.A. and Mayorga, R.V., Supply chain
management: a modular Fuzzy Inference System
approach in supplier selection for new product
development, International Journal of Intelligent
Manufacturing, 19(2008) 1-12.
25. Brauers, W.K.M., Optimization methods for a
stakeholder society: A revolution in economic thinking
by multi-objective optimization, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Boston, USA, 2004.
26. Mandal, U.K. and Sarkar, B., Selection of best
intelligent manufacturing system (IMS) under fuzzy
MOORA conflicting MCDM environment,
International Journal of Emerging Technology and
Advanced Engineering, 2(2012) 301-310.
27. Chatterjee, N.C. and Bose, G.K., A COPRAS-F base
multi-criteria group decision making approach for site
 Seema et al., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology E-ISSN 0976-3945
selection of wind farm, Decision Science Letters, 2
(2012) 1-10.
28. Bakshi, T., Sinharay, A. and Sarkar, B., Fuzzy sets,
Proceedings of International Conference on Operations
and Quality Management, June 28-30(2011) 128-131.
29. Kalibatas, D. and Turskis, Z., Multi-criteria evaluation
of inner climate by using MOORA method,
International Journal of Information and Control,
37(2008) 79-83.
30. Gadakh, V.S., Application of MOORA method for
parametric optimization of milling process,
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research,
1(2011) 743-758.
31. Brauers, W.K.M., Zavadskas, E.K., Peldschus, F., and
Turkis, Z., Multiobjective decision-making for road
design, Transport, 23(2008) 183-193.
32. Brauers, W.K.M., and Zavadskas, E.K., Robustness of
the multi-objective MOORA method with a test for the
facilities sector, Technological and Economic
Development of Economy, 15(2009) 352-375.
33. Toni, A.D., and Nassimbeni, G., Just-in-time
purchasing: An empirical study of operational practices,
supplier development and performance, International
Journal of Management Science, 28(2000) 631-651.
34. Olhager, J., Prajogo, D.I., The impact of manufacturing
and supply chain improvement initiatives: A survey
comparing make-to-order and make-to-stock firms,
International Journal of Management Science, 40(2012)
159-165.

Int J Adv Engg Tech/Vol. V/Issue I/Jan.-March.,2014/16-24