45,085 research outputs found

    Assessing and Selecting Sustainable and Resilient Suppliers in Agri-Food Supply Chains Using Artificial Intelligence: A Short Review

    Full text link
    [EN] The supplier evaluation and selection process is critical to increase the sustainability and resilience of the agri-food supply chain. Therefore, in this sector, it is necessary to consider sustainability and resilience criteria in the supplier evaluation and selection process. The use of arti¿cial intelligence techniques allows managing of a lot of information and the reduction of uncertainty for decision making. The objective of this article is to analyze articles that address the selection of suppliers in agrifood supply chains that pursue to increase their sustainability and resilience by using arti¿cial intelligence techniques to analyze the techniques and criteria used and draw conclusions.Authors of this publication acknowledge the contribution of the Project 691249, RUC-APS "Enhancing and implementing Knowledge based ICT solutions within high Risk and Uncertain Conditions for Agriculture Production Systems" (www.ruc-aps.eu), funded by the European Union under their funding scheme H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015.Zavala-Alcívar, A.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ. (2020). Assessing and Selecting Sustainable and Resilient Suppliers in Agri-Food Supply Chains Using Artificial Intelligence: A Short Review. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. 598:501-510. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62412-5_41S501510598Brandenburg, M., Govindan, K., Sarkis, J., Seuring, S.: Quantitative models for sustainable supply chain management: developments and directions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 233, 299–312 (2014)Ocampo, L.A., Abad, G.K.M., Cabusas, K.G.L., Padon, M.L.A., Sevilla, N.C.: Recent approaches to supplier selection: a review of literature within 2006–2016. Int. J. Integr. Supply Manage. 12, 22–68 (2018)Valipour, S., Safaei, A.: A resilience approach for supplier selection: using Fuzzy analytic network process and grey VIKOR techniques. J. Clean. Prod. 161, 431–451 (2017)Amindoust, A.: A resilient-sustainable based supplier selection model using a hybrid intelligent method. Comput. Ind. Eng. 126, 122–135 (2018)Zavala-Alcívar, A., Verdecho, M.-J., Alfaro-Saiz, J.-J.: A conceptual framework to manage resilience and increase sustainability in the supply chain. Sustainability 12(16), 6300 (2020)Villalobos, J.R., Soto-Silva, W.E., González-Araya, M.C., González-Ramirez, R.G.: Research directions in technology development to support real-time decisions of fresh produce logistics: A review and research agenda. Comput. Electron. Agric. 167, 105092 (2019)Ristono, A., Santoso, P.B., Tama, I.P.: A literature review of design of criteria for supplier selection. J. Ind. Eng. Manage. 11, 680–696 (2018)Torres-Ruiz, A., Ravindran, A.R.: Multiple criteria framework for the sustainability risk assessment of a supplier portfolio. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 4478–4493 (2018)Setak, M., Sharifi, S., Alimohammadian, A.: Supplier selection and order allocation models in supply chain management: a review. World Appl. Sci. J. 18, 55–72 (2012)Ravindran, A.R., Warsing, D.P.: Supplier selection models and methods. In: Supply Chain Engineering: Models and Applications. Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, Florida (2013)De Boer, L., Labro, E., Morlacchi, P.: A review of methods supporting supplier selection. Eur. J. Purch. Supply Manage. 7, 75–89 (2011)De Felice, F., Deldoost, M.H., Faizollahi, M., Petrillo, A.: Performance measurement model for the supplier selection based on AHP. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 7, 1–13 (2015)Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M., Schultmann, F.: Sustainable supplier management – a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. Int. J. Prod. Res. 54, 1412–1442 (2016)Christopher, M., Peck, H.: Building the resilient supply chain. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 15, 1–14 (2014)Ali, A., Mahfouz, A., Arisha, A.: Analysing supply chain resilience: integrating the constructs in a concept mapping framework via a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Manage. 22, 16–39 (2017)Verdecho, M., Alarcón-Valero, F., Pérez-Perales, D., et al.: A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains. Cent. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-019-00668-3Rabelo, L., Bhide, S., Gutierrez, E.: Artificial Intelligence: Advances in Research and Applications. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, United States (2017)Denyer, D., Tranfield, D.: Producing a systematic review. In: The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. SAGE Publications Ltd., pp. 671–689 (2019)Chen, Y.-J.: Structured methodology for supplier selection and evaluation in a supply chain. Inf. Sci. (Ny) 181, 1651–1670 (2011)Hamdi, F., Ghorbel, A., Masmoudi, F., Dupont, L.: Optimization of a supply portfolio in the context of supply chain risk management: literature review. J. Intell. Manuf. 29(4), 763–788 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-015-1128-3Kumar, V., Srinivasan, S., Das, S.: Optimal solution for supplier selection based on SMART fuzzy case base approach. In: 2014 Joint 7th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems. SCIS 2014 and 15th International Symposium on Advanced Intelligent Systems. ISIS 2014, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Department of Computer Science, IISJ Yokohama, Tokai Chiba, Japan, pp. 386–391 (2014)Jahani, A., Murad, M.A.A., bin Sulaiman, M.N., Selamat, M.H.: An agent-based supplier selection framework: Fuzzy case-based reasoning perspective. Strateg. Outsourcing 8, 180–205 (2015)Wang, Q.: Hybrid knowledge-based flexible supplier selection. In: 8th International Conference on Management of e-Commerce and e-Government. ICMeCG 2014. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Department of Information Management, Shanghai Finance University, Shanghai, China, pp. 235–239 (2014)Bai, C., Sarkis, J.: Green supplier development: analytical evaluation using rough set theory. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 1200–1210 (2010)Bai, C., Sarkis, J.: Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 124, 252–264 (2010)Guo, F., Lu, Q.: Partner selection optimization model of agricultural enterprises in supply chain. Adv. J. Food Sci. Technol. 5, 1285–1291 (2013)Azadnia, A.H., Saman, M.Z.M., Wong, K.Y.: Sustainable supplier selection and order lot-sizing: an integrated multi-objective decision-making process. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53, 383–408 (2015)Miranda-Ackerman, M.A., Azzaro-Pantel, C., Aguilar-Lasserre, A.A.: A green supply chain network design framework for the processed food industry: application to the orange juice agrofood cluster. Comput. Ind. Eng. 109, 369–389 (2017)Hajikhani, A., Khalilzadeh, M., Sadjadi, S.J.: A fuzzy multi-objective multi-product supplier selection and order-allocation problem in supply chain under coverage and price considerations: an urban agricultural case study. Sci. Iran. 25, 431–449 (2018)Zhang, H., Cui, Y.: A model combining a Bayesian network with a modified genetic algorithm for green supplier selection. Simulation 95, 1165–1183 (2019)Yadav, S., Garg, D., Luthra, S.: Selection of third-party logistics services for internet of things-based agriculture supply chain management. Int. J. Logist. Syst. Manage. 35, 204–230 (2020)Yazdani, M., Wang, Z.X., Chan, F.T.S.: A decision support model based on the combined structure of DEMATEL, QFD and fuzzy values. Soft. Comput. 24(16), 12449–12468 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-04685-2Zhang, H., Feng, H., Cui, Y., Wang, Y.: A fuzzy Bayesian network model for quality control in O2O e-commerce. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 15(1), (2020). article number 1003. https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2020.1.3783Amiri, S.A.H.S., Zahedi, A., Kazemi, M., Soroor, J., Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M.: Determination of the optimal sales level of perishable goods in a two-echelon supply chain network. Comput. Ind. Eng. 139, 106156 (2020)Roy, S., et al.: A framework for sustainable supplier selection with transportation criteria. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 13(2), 77–92 (2020)Parkouhi, S.V., Ghadikolaei, A.S., Lajimi, H.F.: Resilient supplier selection and segmentation in grey environment. J. Clean. Prod. 207, 1123–1137 (2019)Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Galeano, N., Molina, A.: Collaborative networked organizations – concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises. Comput. Ind. Eng. 57, 46–60 (2009)Lezoche, M., Panetto, H., Kacprzyk, J., Hernandez, J., Díaz, M.A.: Agri-food 4.0: a survey of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture. Comput. Ind. 117, 103187 (2020)Alikhani, R., Torabi, S., Altay, N.: Strategic supplier selection under sustainability and risk criteria. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 208, 69–82 (2019

    Quantifying the Sustainability of Products and Suppliers in Food Distribution Companies

    Full text link
    [EN] Supplier evaluation is a relevant task of supply chain management where multicriteria methods make great contributions to manufacturing industries. This is not the case in food distribution companies, which have a key role in providing safe and affordable food to society. The purpose of this research is to measure the sustainability of products and suppliers in food distribution companies through a multiple criteria approach. Firstly, the system proposed provides indicators to qualify products and assess the food quality, using the compensatory Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) model. Secondly, these indicators are included in supplier evaluation, which takes economic, environmental, and social criteria into account. MAUT and Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE), a non-compensatory method, are used for supplier evaluation. This approach has been validated for fresh food in a supermarket chain, mainly using historical data. Partial indicators, such as food safety scores, together with global indicators of suppliers, inform the most appropriate decisions and the most appropriate relations between companies and providers. Poor performance in food safety can lead to the disqualification of some suppliers. MAUT is good for qualifying products and is easy to apply at the operational level in logistic platforms, while PROMETHEE is more suitable for supplier segmentation, as it helps to identify supplier strengths and weaknesses.This research was funded by the Regional Ministry of Education, Research, Culture and Sport of the Autonomous Government of the Valencian Region, Spain, grant number AICO/2017/066.Segura Maroto, M.; Maroto Álvarez, MC.; Segura García Del Río, B. (2019). Quantifying the Sustainability of Products and Suppliers in Food Distribution Companies. Sustainability. 11(21):1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215875S1181121Thies, C., Kieckhäfer, K., Spengler, T. S., & Sodhi, M. S. (2019). Operations research for sustainability assessment of products: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 274(1), 1-21. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2018.04.039Diaz-Balteiro, L., González-Pachón, J., & Romero, C. (2017). Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review. European Journal of Operational Research, 258(2), 607-616. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2016.08.075Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M., & Schultmann, F. (2015). Sustainable supplier management – a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. International Journal of Production Research, 54(5), 1412-1442. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1079340Chai, J., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2020). Decision-making techniques in supplier selection: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Expert Systems with Applications, 140, 112903. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.112903Chai, J., Liu, J. N. K., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2013). Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(10), 3872-3885. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.12.040Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., & Murugesan, P. (2015). Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 66-83. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046Ansari, Z. N., & Kant, R. (2017). A state-of-art literature review reflecting 15 years of focus on sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2524-2543. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.023Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.05.009Rajeev, A., Pati, R. K., Padhi, S. S., & Govindan, K. (2017). Evolution of sustainability in supply chain management: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 299-314. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.026Demir, L., Akpınar, M. E., Araz, C., & Ilgın, M. A. (2018). A green supplier evaluation system based on a new multi-criteria sorting method: VIKORSORT. Expert Systems with Applications, 114, 479-487. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.07.071Dweiri, F., Kumar, S., Khan, S. A., & Jain, V. (2016). Designing an integrated AHP based decision support system for supplier selection in automotive industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 62, 273-283. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.06.030Chang, L., Ouzrout, Y., Nongaillard, A., Bouras, A., & Jiliu, Z. (2014). Multi-criteria decision making based on trust and reputation in supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 362-372. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.04.014Ekici, A. (2013). An improved model for supplier selection under capacity constraint and multiple criteria. International Journal of Production Economics, 141(2), 574-581. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.09.013Lin, R.-H. (2012). An integrated model for supplier selection under a fuzzy situation. International Journal of Production Economics, 138(1), 55-61. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.02.024Amid, A., Ghodsypour, S. H., & O’Brien, C. (2011). A weighted max–min model for fuzzy multi-objective supplier selection in a supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 131(1), 139-145. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.04.044Chen, Y.-J. (2011). Structured methodology for supplier selection and evaluation in a supply chain. Information Sciences, 181(9), 1651-1670. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.07.026Zeydan, M., Çolpan, C., & Çobanoğlu, C. (2011). A combined methodology for supplier selection and performance evaluation. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 2741-2751. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.08.064Şen, C. G., Baraçlı, H., Şen, S., & Başlıgil, H. (2009). An integrated decision support system dealing with qualitative and quantitative objectives for enterprise software selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5272-5283. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.070Bottani, E., & Rizzi, A. (2008). An adapted multi-criteria approach to suppliers and products selection—An application oriented to lead-time reduction. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 763-781. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.03.012Govindan, K., Kadziński, M., & Sivakumar, R. (2017). Application of a novel PROMETHEE-based method for construction of a group compromise ranking to prioritization of green suppliers in food supply chain. Omega, 71, 129-145. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2016.10.004Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49-57. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009Rezaei, J., & Ortt, R. (2013). Multi-criteria supplier segmentation using a fuzzy preference relations based AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1), 75-84. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2012.09.037Segura, M., & Maroto, C. (2017). A multiple criteria supplier segmentation using outranking and value function methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 69, 87-100. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.10.031Bloemhof, J. M., & Soysal, M. (2016). Sustainable Food Supply Chain Design. Springer Series in Supply Chain Management, 395-412. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-29791-0_18Grimm, J. H., Hofstetter, J. S., & Sarkis, J. (2014). Critical factors for sub-supplier management: A sustainable food supply chains perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 152, 159-173. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.12.011Lau, H., Nakandala, D., & Shum, P. K. (2018). A business process decision model for fresh-food supplier evaluation. Business Process Management Journal, 24(3), 716-744. doi:10.1108/bpmj-01-2016-0015Beske, P., Land, A., & Seuring, S. (2014). Sustainable supply chain management practices and dynamic capabilities in the food industry: A critical analysis of the literature. International Journal of Production Economics, 152, 131-143. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.12.026Schmitt, E., Galli, F., Menozzi, D., Maye, D., Touzard, J.-M., Marescotti, A., … Brunori, G. (2017). Comparing the sustainability of local and global food products in Europe. Journal of Cleaner Production, 165, 346-359. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.039Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R. B., Albadvi, A., & Aghdasi, M. (2010). PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 200(1), 198-215. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.021The PROMETHEE Bibliographical Databasehttp://www.promethee-gaia.net/bibliographical-database.htmlChen, Y.-H., Wang, T.-C., & Wu, C.-Y. (2011). Strategic decisions using the fuzzy PROMETHEE for IS outsourcing. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 13216-13222. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.137Araz, C., & Ozkarahan, I. (2007). Supplier evaluation and management system for strategic sourcing based on a new multicriteria sorting procedure. International Journal of Production Economics, 106(2), 585-606. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.08.008Dulmin, R., & Mininno, V. (2003). Supplier selection using a multi-criteria decision aid method. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 9(4), 177-187. doi:10.1016/s1478-4092(03)00032-3Seuring, S. (2013). A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management. Decision Support Systems, 54(4), 1513-1520. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.053Brandenburg, M., Govindan, K., Sarkis, J., & Seuring, S. (2014). Quantitative models for sustainable supply chain management: Developments and directions. European Journal of Operational Research, 233(2), 299-312. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2013.09.032Xu, Z. (2000). On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 126(3), 683-687. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(99)00082-xKonys. (2019). Green Supplier Selection Criteria: From a Literature Review to a Comprehensive Knowledge Base. Sustainability, 11(15), 4208. doi:10.3390/su11154208D-Sight CDMhttp://www.d-sight.com/solutions/d-sight-cd

    Improving Food Supply Chain Management by a Sustainable Approach to Supplier Evaluation

    Full text link
    [EN] Increasing food supply chain sustainability means having to deal with many conflicting aspects and involves producers, several departments in distribution companies, and consumers. The objectives of this research are to develop models to solve real-world supplier evaluation problems and validate them with real data on fresh fruits in a supermarket chain. Literature review and results from a survey with managers from purchasing, logistics, and quality departments of a food distribution company are used to establish criteria, to first model the assessment of products and, second, to model supplier evaluation. A multicriteria hybrid approach is proposed, using multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT) to assess the quality of products and Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE) to complete their evaluation with strategic criteria to be included in the second phase. The results allow companies to rank suppliers by product and classify them according to the main criteria categories, such as product strategy, food safety, economic, logistic, commercial, green image and corporate social responsibility. A sorting approach is also applied to obtain ordered groups of suppliers. Finally, the models proposed can form the core of a decision support system in order to create and monitor the supplier base in food distribution companies, as well as to inform sustainable decision making.This research was funded by the Regional Ministry of Education, Research, Culture and Sport of the Autonomous Government of the Valencian Region, Spain, grant number AICO/2017/066.Segura Maroto, M.; Maroto Álvarez, MC.; Segura García Del Río, B.; Casas-Rosal, JC. (2020). Improving Food Supply Chain Management by a Sustainable Approach to Supplier Evaluation. Mathematics. 8(11):1-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8111952S123811Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.05.009Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M., & Schultmann, F. (2015). Sustainable supplier management – a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. International Journal of Production Research, 54(5), 1412-1442. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1079340Aouadni, S., Aouadni, I., & Rebaï, A. (2019). A systematic review on supplier selection and order allocation problems. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 15(S1), 267-289. doi:10.1007/s40092-019-00334-yChai, J., Liu, J. N. K., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2013). Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(10), 3872-3885. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.12.040Chai, J., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2020). Decision-making techniques in supplier selection: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Expert Systems with Applications, 140, 112903. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.112903Wetzstein, A., Hartmann, E., Benton jr., W. C., & Hohenstein, N.-O. (2016). A systematic assessment of supplier selection literature – State-of-the-art and future scope. International Journal of Production Economics, 182, 304-323. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.06.022Ansari, Z. N., & Kant, R. (2017). A state-of-art literature review reflecting 15 years of focus on sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2524-2543. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.023Schramm, V. B., Cabral, L. P. B., & Schramm, F. (2020). Approaches for supporting sustainable supplier selection - A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 273, 123089. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123089Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., & Murugesan, P. (2015). Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 66-83. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046Rajeev, A., Pati, R. K., Padhi, S. S., & Govindan, K. (2017). Evolution of sustainability in supply chain management: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 299-314. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.026Demir, L., Akpınar, M. E., Araz, C., & Ilgın, M. A. (2018). A green supplier evaluation system based on a new multi-criteria sorting method: VIKORSORT. Expert Systems with Applications, 114, 479-487. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.07.071Diaz-Balteiro, L., González-Pachón, J., & Romero, C. (2017). Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review. European Journal of Operational Research, 258(2), 607-616. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2016.08.075Thies, C., Kieckhäfer, K., Spengler, T. S., & Sodhi, M. S. (2019). Operations research for sustainability assessment of products: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 274(1), 1-21. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2018.04.039Konys. (2019). Green Supplier Selection Criteria: From a Literature Review to a Comprehensive Knowledge Base. Sustainability, 11(15), 4208. doi:10.3390/su11154208Segura, M., Maroto, C., & Segura, B. (2019). Quantifying the Sustainability of Products and Suppliers in Food Distribution Companies. Sustainability, 11(21), 5875. doi:10.3390/su11215875Memari, A., Dargi, A., Akbari Jokar, M. R., Ahmad, R., & Abdul Rahim, A. R. (2019). Sustainable supplier selection: A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 50, 9-24. doi:10.1016/j.jmsy.2018.11.002Dweiri, F., Kumar, S., Khan, S. A., & Jain, V. (2016). Designing an integrated AHP based decision support system for supplier selection in automotive industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 62, 273-283. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.06.030Chang, L., Ouzrout, Y., Nongaillard, A., Bouras, A., & Jiliu, Z. (2014). Multi-criteria decision making based on trust and reputation in supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 362-372. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.04.014Ekici, A. (2013). An improved model for supplier selection under capacity constraint and multiple criteria. International Journal of Production Economics, 141(2), 574-581. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.09.013Lin, R.-H. (2012). An integrated model for supplier selection under a fuzzy situation. International Journal of Production Economics, 138(1), 55-61. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.02.024Amid, A., Ghodsypour, S. H., & O’Brien, C. (2011). A weighted max–min model for fuzzy multi-objective supplier selection in a supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 131(1), 139-145. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.04.044Chen, Y.-J. (2011). Structured methodology for supplier selection and evaluation in a supply chain. Information Sciences, 181(9), 1651-1670. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.07.026Zeydan, M., Çolpan, C., & Çobanoğlu, C. (2011). A combined methodology for supplier selection and performance evaluation. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 2741-2751. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.08.064Şen, C. G., Baraçlı, H., Şen, S., & Başlıgil, H. (2009). An integrated decision support system dealing with qualitative and quantitative objectives for enterprise software selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5272-5283. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.070Bottani, E., & Rizzi, A. (2008). An adapted multi-criteria approach to suppliers and products selection—An application oriented to lead-time reduction. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 763-781. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.03.012Segura, M., & Maroto, C. (2017). A multiple criteria supplier segmentation using outranking and value function methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 69, 87-100. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.10.031Trapp, A. C., & Sarkis, J. (2016). Identifying Robust portfolios of suppliers: a sustainability selection and development perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 2088-2100. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.062Araz, C., & Ozkarahan, I. (2007). Supplier evaluation and management system for strategic sourcing based on a new multicriteria sorting procedure. International Journal of Production Economics, 106(2), 585-606. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.08.008Boran, F. E., Genç, S., Kurt, M., & Akay, D. (2009). A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS method. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(8), 11363-11368. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.03.039Zopounidis, C., & Doumpos, M. (2002). Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 138(2), 229-246. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(01)00243-0Brans, J. P., Vincke, P., & Mareschal, B. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The Promethee method. European Journal of Operational Research, 24(2), 228-238. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(86)90044-5Nemery, P., & Lamboray, C. (2007). ℱlow S\mathcal{S} ort: a flow-based sorting method with limiting or central profiles. TOP, 16(1), 90-113. doi:10.1007/s11750-007-0036-xLau, H., Nakandala, D., & Shum, P. K. (2018). A business process decision model for fresh-food supplier evaluation. Business Process Management Journal, 24(3), 716-744. doi:10.1108/bpmj-01-2016-0015D-Sight CDM http://www.d-sight.com/solutions/d-sight-cdmNemery, P., Lidouh, K., & Mareschal, B. (2011). On the usefulness of taking the weights into account in the GAIA visualisations. International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences, 3(3), 228. doi:10.1504/ijids.2011.041585Nemery, P., Ishizaka, A., Camargo, M., & Morel, L. (2012). Enriching descriptive information in ranking and sorting problems with visualizations techniques. Journal of Modelling in Management, 7(2), 130-147. doi:10.1108/17465661211242778Xu, Z. (2000). On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 126(3), 683-687. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(99)00082-xOrtiz‐Barrios, M., Miranda‐De la Hoz, C., López‐Meza, P., Petrillo, A., & De Felice, F. (2019). A case of food supply chain management with AHP, DEMATEL, and TOPSIS. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 27(1-2), 104-128. doi:10.1002/mcda.169

    Logistics outsourcing and 3PL selection: A Case study in an automotive supply chain

    Get PDF
    Outsourcing logistics functions to third-party logistics (3PL) providers has been a source of competitive advantage for most companies. Companies cite greater flexibility, operational efficiency, improved customer service levels, and a better focus on their core businesses as part of the advantages of engaging the services of 3PL providers. There are few complete and structured methodologies for selecting a 3PL provider. This paper discusses how one such methodology, namely the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), is used in an automotive supply chain for export parts to redesign the logistics operations and to select a global logistics service provider

    Cultivating Collaborative Improvement: An Action Learning Approach

    Get PDF
    As competitive pressure mounts to innovate in the global knowledge economy, many organizations are exploring new ways of collaborating with their supply chain partners. However, the process of implementing collaborative initiatives across disparate members of supply networks is fraught with difficulties. One approach designed to tackle the difficulties of organizational change and inter-organizational improvement in practice is `action learning¿. This paper examines the experiential lessons that arise when cultivating collaborative improvement in an interorganizational learning environment. The authors, acting as action researchers, facilitated a practical learning program in an Extended Manufacturing Enterprise involving a large system integrator in the automotive industry and three of its\ud suppliers. Based on this experience, a practical learning model is offered to promote and facilitate inter-organizational change as part of a collaborative improvement process

    How supplier selection criteria affects business performance? A study of UK automotive sector

    Get PDF
    According to KPMG international (2015), global sales of automobiles are forecasted to reach 73.9 million vehicles and expected to hit 100 million units in the next two years. This shows that automotive sector has a tremendous growth potential and UK automotive sector is no different. However, in recent years the growing environmental awareness has become a major concern for automotive sector as they are faced with pressure of reducing carbon emissions as well as the costs. Suppliers play a significant role in achieving environmental goals set by organisations. Under these circumstances it is worth exploring the criteria that are used in assessing suppliers including the green aspects and how that affects the business performance. Design/methodology/approach: This research adopts a mixed method research approach. In order to collect the quantitative data a survey questionnaire was constructed and sent to automotive businesses listed in the FAME database. In order to triangulate the findings of this study, survey was complemented with in-depth interviews. Around 100 automotive manufacturers were invited for the survey however only 38 usable responses were received. In total seven semi-structured interviews were also conducted with people from different backgrounds and work experiences in the automotive sector. Findings: Literature identified delivery, cost, quality and technology as the supplier assessment criteria commonly used in assessing suppliers in automotive industries. Yet the issue of culture and green supply chain practices (GSP) were also widely concerned in several studies. The data analysis showed that delivery, quality, cost, technology, culture are correlated with exception of green supply chain practices. GSP was only found to be correlated with technology and cultural criteria. Semi-structured interviews suggest delivery and quality as the most important criteria when assessing supplier because of their greater impact toward business performance and reputation. Findings from all respondents also showed that most automotive manufacturers have already adopted environmental competency in their criteria. However, interviewees mentioned that this criterion does not take a major role in assessment compared with other criteria. The results also indicate that all factors studied do affect the business performance of automotive organisations. Value: This study contributes to the limited literature focused on assessing supplier selection criteria and business performance linkage in the UK automotive organisations. In addition, most studies on supplier selection and business performance ignore the green practices as important criteria which this study aims to address. Research limitations/implications: The study is based on the findings from a limited survey responses and semi-structured interviews. Having larger sample population would certainly improve the validity of the findings. The perspective of SMEs and large businesses with regard to each supplier selection criterion may be different hence the future research in this domain would also provide some valuable contributions. Practical implications: The survey responses indicate green supply practices as one of the important criteria in supplier selection. This suggests that automotive manufacturers should realize the importance of green practices while selecting their suppliers. This will help them to meet their own green goals while simultaneously meeting the government environmental.Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan ▪ Economic Development Bureau, Kaohsiung, Taiwan ▪ National Kaohsiung First University of Science & Tech, Taiwan ▪ National Taiwan Ocean University, Taiwan ▪ Taiwan International Ports Corp. Ltd. ▪ Jade Yachts Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. ▪ International Academy for Marine Economy and Technology, The University of Nottingham Ningbo Campus, China ▪ The Institute for Advanced Manufacturing, The University of Nottingham, U

    SME Food Suppliers Versus Large Retailers: Perspectives in the International Supply Chains

    Get PDF
    The market share of international retail chains substantially increased from the beginning of the nineties. The supplier’s market has been adapted to the evolutions of retailers’ market in terms of modified purchasing processes. Due to these changes, the requirements for food industry suppliers grew in number and quality. The paper shows how the relationship between suppliers and retailers is affected by several important changes, above all at international level. In particular, the analysis is focused on the Italian food SME suppliers related with large retailers. In-depth interviews to 89 Italian food SME suppliers have been conducted in 2008. Results have been analyzed and compared to the retailers’ point of view, resulting from public reports (such as Annual report, CSR report, etc.). Considering the selection criteria used by retailers, one of the main results of the analysis is that the growth of small and medium suppliers is stimulated when they operate with international large retailers. At the same time, the pressure on price and the required organizational qualifications lead to a selection process in which smaller manufacturers seem to be the more vulnerable actors.Supplier-Retailer Relations; Italian Food SME; Large Retailers; International Supply Chains

    The Role of Maintenance and Facility Management in Logistics: A Literature Review

    Get PDF
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide a literature review on the different ways of carrying out Facility Management and related topics in order to uncover that there is limited research regarding the impact of Facility Management on the logistics and operational performance of warehouses. Design/methodology/approach - Four different focus areas have been identified and for each one different methodologies and streams of research have been studied. Findings - The study underlines the importance of Facility Management for the logistics operations; therefore it supports the notion that investments aiming at preserving the status of the building and service components of warehouses are crucial. Originality/value - This paper aims to suggest to Facility Management managers that they can contribute to enhance business performance by designing effective Facility Management strategie
    corecore