Abstract
This paper proposes a combined qualitative and quantitative approach for supplier selection problem. Multi-component product is considered in which various suppliers could provide each required part. A multi-objective mathematical model is developed to decide about the preferred supplier as well as the purchasing quantity of each part from each selected supplier. Strategic and operational risks are taken into account. In order to handle qualitative risk factors analytic network process is used. Two quantitative risk factors including delay and defect are considered. In addition, the quality of the final product is taken into account. To enable the decision maker to make preferred trade-offs between objectives a fuzzy goal programming approach with soft priorities between objectives is applied. The capability and effectiveness of the proposed model is validated through a case study.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wu C, Barnes D (2011) A literature review of decision-making models and approaches for partner selection in agile supply chains. J Purch Supply Manag 17:256–274
Sawik T (2011) Selection of supply portfolio under disruption risks. Omega 39:194–208
Sawik T (2013) Selection of resilient supply portfolio under disruption risks. Omega 41:259–269
Dickson GW (1966) An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions. J Purch 2(1):5–17
Aksoy A, Ozturk N (2011) Supplier selection and performance evaluation in just- in-time production environments. Expert Syst Appl 38(5):6351–6359
Kuo RJ, Lee LY, Hu TL (2010) Developing a supplier selection system through integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy DEA: a case study on an auto lighting system company in Taiwan. Prod Plan Control 21(5):468–484
Chai J, Liu JNK, Ngai EWT (2013) Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: a systematic review of literature. Expert Syst Appl 40(10):3872–3885
William H, Xiaowei X, Prasanta KD (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202(1):16–24
Vidalis M, Vrisagotis V, Varlas G (2014) Performance evaluation of a two-echelon supply chain with stochastic demand, lost sales, and Coxian-2 phase replenishment times. Int Trans Oper Res 21(4):649–671
Berman O, Kim E (2004) Dynamic inventory strategies for profit maximization in a service facility with stochastic service, demand and lead time. Math Methods Oper Res 60(3):497–521
Sawik T (2011) Selection of a dynamic supply portfolio in make-to-order environment with risks. Comput Oper Res 38(4):782–796
Moinzadeh K, Zhou Y (2008) Incorporating delay mechanism in ordering policies in multi-echelon distribution systems. IIE Trans 40(4):445–458
Ho W, Xu X, Dey PK (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202:16–24
Choudhary D, Shankar R (2014) A goal programming model for joint decision making of inventory lot-size, supplier selection and carrier selection. Comput Ind Eng 71:1–9
Amin SH, Zhang G (2012) An integrated model for closed-loop supply chain configuration and supplier selection: multi-objective approach. Expert Syst Appl 39(8):6782–6791
Chai J, Ngai EW (2014) Multi-perspective strategic supplier selection in uncertain environments. Int J Prod Econ 166:215–225
Kull TJ, Talluri S (2008) A supply risk reduction model using integrated multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 55(3):409–419
Rezaei J, Davoodi M (2008) A deterministic, multi-item inventory model with supplier selection and imperfect quality. Appl Math Model 32(10):2106–2116
De Boer L, Labro E, Morlacchi P (2001) A review of methods supporting supplier selection. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 7:75–89
Saaty TL (2008) Decision making for leaders: the analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh. ISBN 0-9620317-8-X
Akoz O, Petrovic D (2007) A fuzzy goal programming method with imprecise goal hierarchy. Eur J Oper Res 181:1427–1433
Azadeh A, Sheikhalishahi JM, Asadzadeh SM, Saberi M, Pirayesh Neghab AE (2013) Forecasting and optimization of service level in vague and complex SCM by a flexible neural network-fuzzy mathematical programming approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 68(5):1453–1470
Kleindorfer PR, Saad GH (2005) Managing disruption risks in supply chains. Prod Oper Manag 14(1):53–68
Oke A, Gopalakrishnan M (2009) Managing disruptions in supply chains: a case study of a retail supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 118:168–174
Chopra S, Sodhi MS (2004) Managing risk to avoid supply chain breakdown. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 46(1):53–62
Wilson MC (2007) The impact of transportation disruptions on supply chain performance. Transp Res Part E 43:295–320
Sheikhalishahi M, Torabi SA (2014) Maintenance supplier selection considering life cycle costs and risks: a fuzzy goal programming approach. Int J Prod Res 52(23):7084–7099
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for the valuable comments and suggestion from the respected reviewers. Their valuable comments and suggestions have enhanced the strength and significance of our paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Equipment part | Supplier 1 | Supplier 2 | Supplier 3 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
Suppliers’ delay (day) | ||||||||||
1 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 11 | 9 | 8 | 11 | 7 | 9 | |
2 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 12 | 14 | 11 | |
3 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 9 | 8 | 11 | 16 | 11 | 10 | |
Expected number of repairs [E(NR ijk )] (per year) | ||||||||||
1 | 0.55 | 0.52 | 0.49 | 0.52 | 0.50 | 0.48 | 0.49 | 0.46 | 0.43 | |
2 | 0.51 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.46 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.43 | 0.40 | |
3 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.43 | 0.46 | 0.44 | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.40 | 0.38 | |
Mean time to repair (MTTR) (h) | ||||||||||
1 | 5.00 | 4.75 | 4.50 | 4.80 | 4.56 | 4.42 | 4.51 | 4.20 | 3.90 | |
2 | 4.65 | 4.42 | 4.19 | 4.46 | 4.24 | 4.11 | 4.20 | 3.90 | 3.63 | |
3 | 4.40 | 4.18 | 3.96 | 4.22 | 4.01 | 3.89 | 3.97 | 3.69 | 3.43 | |
Defect rate (parts per 1000) | ||||||||||
1 | 14 | 21 | 11 | 11 | 18 | 9 | 8 | 17 | 4 | |
2 | 13 | 26 | 20 | 12 | 10 | 13 | 13 | 18 | 13 | |
3 | 17 | 23 | 10 | 8 | 14 | 11 | 9 | 4 | 5 | |
Expected values of the repair cost (C ijk ) (Dollar) | ||||||||||
1 | 79 | 65 | 53 | 80 | 66 | 57 | 79 | 63 | 50 | |
2 | 78 | 64 | 52 | 79 | 64 | 56 | 77 | 61 | 48 | |
3 | 78 | 63 | 51 | 78 | 64 | 55 | 76 | 60 | 47 | |
Purchasing price (\( C_{ijk}^{0} \)) (Dollar) | ||||||||||
1 | 115.9 | 104.3 | 93.9 | 127.5 | 114.7 | 103.2 | 139.0 | 125.1 | 112.6 | |
2 | 127.5 | 114.7 | 103.2 | 140.2 | 126.2 | 113.6 | 153.0 | 137.7 | 123.9 | |
3 | 140.2 | 126.2 | 113.6 | 154.2 | 138.8 | 124.9 | 168.2 | 151.4 | 136.3 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nekooie, M.A., Sheikhalishahi, M. & Hosnavi, R. Supplier selection considering strategic and operational risks: a combined qualitative and quantitative approach. Prod. Eng. Res. Devel. 9, 665–673 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-015-0643-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-015-0643-6