跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.192.20.240) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/02/25 00:10
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:韓慧林
研究生(外文):Hui-Lin Hai
論文名稱:運用多目標決策方法評選供應鏈組成夥伴
論文名稱(外文):Using Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Method for Partners Selection in Supply Chain
指導教授:劉復華劉復華引用關係
指導教授(外文):Fuh-Hwa Franklin Liu
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立交通大學
系所名稱:工業工程與管理系所
學門:工程學門
學類:工業工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2006
畢業學年度:94
語文別:英文
論文頁數:60
中文關鍵詞:資料包絡法多目標二元整數規劃多目標決策
外文關鍵詞:Data Envelopment AnalysisMultiple Objectives Binary Integer Linear ProgrammingMultiple Criteria Decision-Making
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:11
  • 點閱點閱:559
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:184
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
供應鏈組成夥伴評選之議題廣受注目,然選擇對的供應鏈組成夥伴,對高階管理者言,是一項艱難的任務。因為供應鏈組成夥伴之選擇並不是獨立的,乃與其他成員間之互動息息相關,深受決策模式之影響。本論文探討兩個不同選擇供應鏈上供應商之議題。
第一個議題,運用層級分析法 (AHP) 進行供應商評選作業。我們以投票式排序評選模式,即所謂投票式層級分析法 (VAHP) 以取代既有AHP成對比較的方法。此投票式層級分析法區分三個步驟,首先,由每一位決策者針對受評估目標進行排序,以避免兩兩比較方法的不一致性問題;其次,運用線性規劃模式求出排序之權重值;再其次,計算出受評估目標的總得分數,以排列優先順序。
第二個議題,運用多目標二元整數規劃模式,以個別受評單元進行組合評估方式,評選不同組合之供應商。在假設有K個供應商時,則有2^K個不同之受評供應商組合,並應用成本、交期、彈性與品質等四項績效衡量指標,結合資料包絡法 (DEA),進行多元組合供應商評選。最後,針對落在高效外廓之受評單元,實施敏感度分析。
The issue of supplier selection catches many attentions in supply chain management. The suppliers of the supply chain operate interactively rather than independently, as the output of one organization could be the input of another organization. In this dissertation, we are dealing with two issues of supplier selection in supply chain.
The first issue is that a group of decision-makers to rank a set candidates of suppliers. We employ Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for supplier selection. The pair-wise comparison method proposed by Saaty in AHP is substituted by a voting method. The voting method contains three steps. In the first step, each decision-maker ranks the alternatives to avoid the inconsistency that usually appeared in pair-wise comparison method. The second step is to summarize the votes each alternative earned in every rank. The third step is using a linear programming model to determine the weights assigned to every votes in those ranks. Then, the score of each alternative earned is the sum of weighted votes and gets priority of alternatives.
The second issue is to select a set of multiple suppliers. There are 2K possible sets of multiple suppliers under selection if there are K supplier candidates. Cost, delivery, flexibility and quality are the four indices used to measure the suppliers’ performance. These four indices are also used to measure the performance of the possible sets under selection. The value of each index of a set is equal to the sum of values of the suppliers in it. We employ data envelopment analysis (DEA) to measure the relative performance of each set of multiple suppliers against the 2^K possible sets with the four indices. Then, we perform sensitivity analysis on each index of candidates and provide different strategies in order to select various suppliers of a supply chain for customers.
摘 要 i
ABSTRACT ii
誌 謝 iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v
CONTENTS vi
FIGURE CAPTIONS viii
TABLE CAPTIONS ix
NOTATIONS x
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction of Supply Chain 1
1.2 Problem Definition 3
1.3 Dissertation Organization 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2.1 Supplier Selection in Supply Chain 5
2.2 Supply Chain Evaluation 8
2.3 Multiple Criteria Methods for Evaluation 10
2.3.1 Multiple Criteria Decision-Making 10
2.3.2 Multiple Objectives Binary Integer Linear Programming 11
2.3.3 Data Envelopment Analysis 12
3. THE VAHP METHOD FOR SELECTING SUPPLIERS 21
3.1 Introduction 21
3.2 Related Theories and Models 21
3.2.1 Analytic Hierarchy Process 21
3.2.2 Vote-Ranking Method 24
3.3 A Example for Umbrella Scheme of Malaysia’s Furniture Industry 26
3.3.1 Step 1: Select Supplier Criteria 27
3.3.2 Step 2: Structure the Hierarchy of the Criteria 29
3.3.3 Step 3: Prioritize the Criteria and Sub-criteria 29
3.3.4 Step 4: Calculate the Weights of Criteria and Sub-criteria 30
3.3.5 Step 5: Measure Supplier Performance 31
3.3.6 Step 6: Identify Supplier Priority 31
3.4 The Selection of Shipbuilding Corporations 33
3.4.1 The Selection Process 33
3.4.2 The Six Steps of Shipbuilding Corporations Selection 34
3.5 Discussion 41
4. SELECTING MULTIPLE SUPPLIERS FOR A SUPPLY CHAIN 43
4.1 Introduction 43
4.2 Method 43
4.2.1 Step 1: Find Suppliers of Supply Chain 43
4.2.2 Step 2: Define Performance Indices 44
4.2.3 Step 3: Collect the Data of Suppliers 45
4.2.4 Step 4: Correspondence of DCU and DMU 47
4.2.5 Step 5: Evaluate DMUs by DEA Model 47
4.2.6 Step 6: Output Results 48
4.3 Sensitivity Analysis 49
5. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 52
5.1 Conclusions 52
5.2 Suggestions 53
REFERENCES 55
1. Ahn, H. J. and Lee, H., “An agent-based dynamic information network for supply chain management,” BT Technology Journal, 22(2), pp. 18-27, 2004.
2. Ali, A. I., “Computational aspects of data envelopment analysis,” in Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y. and Seiford, L. M., Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology and application, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp. 63-88, 1997.
3. Banker, R. D., Chang, H. H. and Cooper, W. W., “Equivalence and implementation of alternative methods for determining returns to scale in data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, 89, pp. 473-481, 1996.
4. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W. W., “Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis,” Management Science, 30(9), pp. 1078-1092, 1984.
5. Banker, R. D. and Thrall, R. M., “Estimation of returns to scale using data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, 62, pp. 74-84, 1992.
6. Belton, V. and Vickers, S. P., “Demystifying DEA: a visual interactive approach based on multiple criteria analysis,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 44, pp. 883-896, 1993.
7. Bowersox, D. J. and Closs, D. J., Logistical management: the integrated supply chain process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996.
8. Cheng, C. H., “Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function,” European Journal of Operational Research, 96, pp. 343-350, 1996.
9. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., Morey, R. C. and Rousseau, J., “Sensitivity and stability analysis in DEA,” Annuals of Operations Research, 2, pp. 139-156, 1985.
10. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. and Rhodes, E., “Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units,” European Journal of Operational Research, 2, pp. 429-444, 1978.
11. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. and Thrall, R. M., “A structure for classify and characterizing efficiency and inefficiency in data envelopment analysis,” Journal of Productivity Analysis, 2, pp. 97-237, 1991.
12. Charnes, A. and Neralic, L., “Sensitivity analysis of the additive model of data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, 48, pp. 332-341, 1990.
13. Choi, T. Y. and Hartley, J. L., “An exploration of supplier selection practices across the supply chain,” Journal of Operations Management, 14, pp. 333-343, 1996.
14. Condon, E. M., Golden, B. L. and Wasil, E. A., “Predicting the success of nations at the summer Olympics using neural networks,” Computers and Operations Research, 26, pp. 1243-1265, 1999.
15. Cook, W. D. and Kress, M., “A data envelopment model for aggregating preference rankings,” Management Science, 36(11), pp. 1302-1310, 1990.
16. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M. and Tone, K., Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2000.
17. Dalu, R. S. and Deshmukh, S. G., “Multi-attribute decision model for assessing components of total quality management,” Total Quality Management, 13(6), pp. 779-796, 2002.
18. Dey, P. K., “Project risk management: a combined analytic hierarchy process and decision tree approach,” Cost Engineering, 44(3), pp. 13-26, 2002.
19. Dickson, G. W., “An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions,” Journal of Purchasing, 2(1), pp. 5-17, 1996.
20. Doyle, J. and Green, R., “Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision-making,” The International Journal of Management Science, 21, pp. 713-715, 1993.
21. Fawcet, S. E., Stanley, L. L. and Smith, S. R., “Developing a logistics capability to improve the performance of international operations,” Journal of Business Logistics, 18(2), pp. 101-127, 1997.
22. Frohlich, M. T. and Westbrook, R., “Demand chain management in manufacturing and services: web-based integration, drivers and performance,” Journal of Operations Management, 20, pp. 729-745, 2002.
23. Green, R. H., Doyle, J. R. and Cook, W. D., “Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation,” European Journal of Operational Research, 90, pp. 461-472, 1996.
24. Hai, H. L., “Evaluating efficiency of the top semiconductor manufactures in Taiwan (in Chinese),” Management Research (in Taiwan), 4(1), pp. 71-89, 2004.
25. Kanter, R. M., “Collaborative advantage: the art of alliances,” Harvard Business Review, 72(4), p. 100, 1994.
26. Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H., Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1976.
27. Lambert, D. M., Cooper, M. C. and Pagh, J. D., “Supply chain management: implementation issues and research opportunities,” The International Journal of Logistics Management, 9(2), pp. 1-19, 1998.
28. Lee, H., Kwak, W. and Han, I., “Developing a business performance evaluation system: An analytic hierarchical model,” The Engineering Economist, 40(4), pp. 343-357, 1995.
29. Li, C. C., Fun, Y. P. and Hung, J. S., “A new measure for supplier performance evaluation,” IIE Transactions, 29, pp. 753-758, 1997.
30. Li, D. and O’Brien, C., “Integrated decision modeling of supply chain efficiency,” International Journal of Production Economics, 59, pp. 147-157, 1999.
31. Lins, M. P. E., Gomes, E. G., Soares de Mello, J. C. C. B. and Soares de Mello, A. J. R., “Olympic ranking based on a zero sum gains DEA model,” European Journal of Operational Research, 148, pp. 312-322, 2003.
32. Liu, F. H. F. and Hai, H. L., “Using DEA to select suppliers in a supply chain,” Proceedings of the 5th Annual International Conference on Industrial Engineering Theory, Applications and Practice, Hsinchu, Taiwan, ID356, 2000.
33. Liu, F. H. F. and Hai, H. L., “The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting supplier,” The International Journal of Production Economics, 97, pp. 308-317, 2005a.
34. Liu, F. H. F. and Hai, H. L., “Assessing the performance of countries at the Olympics using vote-ranking,” Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Conference of Operations Research Society of Taiwan, Taipei, Taiwan, B6-1, 2005b.
35. Liu, F. H. F. and Hai, H. L., “Using vote-ranking method to explore the pair-wise comparison for AHP,” Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Conference of Operations Research Society of Taiwan, Taipei, Taiwan, B6-2, 2005c.
36. Liu, F. H. F. and Hai, H. L., “New way to select multiple suppliers for a supply chain,” Journal of Statistics and Management Systems, 2006a. (Accepted)
37. Liu, F. H. F. and Hai, H. L., “An exploration of shipbuilding corporation selection for Taiwan Navy,” Computers and Industrial Engineering, 2006b. (Submitted)
38. Liu, F. H. F. and Hai, H. L., “Olympics ranking by the total ranking method with restricted weight-ratio constraints,” 2006c. (Submitted)
39. Liu, F. H. F., Huang, C. C. and Yen, Y. L., “Using DEA to obtain efficient solutions for multi-objective 0-1 linear programs,” European Journal of Operational Research, 126, pp. 51-68, 2000.
40. Liu, F. H. F. and Lai, C. H., “Using DEA for multi-objective binary integer programming without constraint,” Proceedings of the 5th Annual International Conference on Industrial Engineering Theory, Applications and Practice, Hsinchu, Taiwan, ID351, 2000.
41. Lozano, S., Villa, G., Guerrero, F. and Cortes, P., “Measuring the performance of nations at the summer Olympics using data envelopment analysis,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53, pp. 501-511, 2002.
42. Luo, X., “Evaluating the profitability and marketability efficiency of large banks an application of data envelopment analysis,” Journal of Business Research, 56, pp. 627-635, 2003.
43. Mabert, V. A. and Venkataramanan, M. A., “Special research focus on supply chain linkages: challenges for design and management in the 21st century,” Decision Sciences, 29, pp. 537-549, 1998.
44. Maloni, M. J. and Benton, W. C., “Supply chain partnerships: opportunities for operations research,” European Journal of Operational Research, 101, pp. 419-429, 1997.
45. Mamaghani, F., “Evaluation and selection of an anti-virus and content filtering software,” Information Management and Computer Security, 10(1), pp. 28-32, 2002.
46. Monczka, R. M., Petersen, K. J., Handfield, R. B. and Ragatz, G. L., “Success factors in strategic supplier alliances: the buying company perspective,” Decision Sciences, 29, pp. 553-577, 1998.
47. Motwani, J., Larson, L. and Ahuja, S., “Managing a global supply chain partnership,” Logistics Information Management, 11(6), pp. 349-354, 1998.
48. Narasimhan, R., Talluri, S. and Mendez, D., “Supplier evaluation and rationalization via data envelopment analysis: an empirical examination,” The Journal of Supply Chain Management, 37(3), pp. 28-37, 2001.
49. Noguchi, H., Ogawa, M. and Ishii, H., “The appropriate total ranking method using DEA for multiple categorized purposes,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 146, pp. 155-166, 2002.
50. Olhager, J. and Selldin, E., “Supply chain management survey of Swedish manufacturing firms,” International Journal of Production Economics, 89, pp. 353-361, 2004.
51. Partovi, F. Y., Burton, J. and Benerjee, A., “Application analytic hierarchy process in operation management,” International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 10(3), pp. 5-9, 1990.
52. Partovi, F. Y. and Hopton, W. E., “The analytic hierarchy process as applied to two types of inventory problems,” Production and Inventory Management Journal, pp. 13-19, 1994.
53. Prahinski, C. and Benton, W. C., “Supplier evaluations: communication strategies to improve supplier performance,” Journal of Operations Management, 22, pp. 39-62, 2004.
54. Ram, N., Srinivas, T. and David, M., “Supplier evaluation and rationalization via data envelopment analysis: an empirical examination,” Journal of Supply Chain Management, pp. 28-37, 2001.
55. Rangon, A., “An analytic hierarchy process for comparing the overall performance of manufacturing departments,” International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 16(8), pp. 104-119, 1996.
56. Ross, A. D. and Droge, C., “An analysis of operations efficiency in large-scale distribution systems,” Journal of Operations Management, 21, pp. 673-688, 2004.
57. Saaty, T. L., The analytic hierarchy process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
58. Saaty, T. L. and Vargas, L. G., Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2001.
59. Saraoglu, H. and Detzler, M. L., “A sensible mutual fund selection model,” Financial Analysts Journal, pp. 60-72, 2002.
60. Schmitz, J. and Platts, K. W., “Supplier logistics performance measurement: Indication from a study in the automotive industry,” International Journal of Production Economics, 89, pp. 231-243, 2004.
61. Schneeweiss, C., “On the applicability of based costing as a planning instrument,” International Journal of Production Economics, 54, pp. 277-284, 1998.
62. Schneeweiss, C., “Distributed decision-making in supply chain management,” International Journal of Production Economics, 84, pp. 71-83, 2003.
63. Seiford, L. M. and Zhu, J., “Stability regions for maintaining efficiency in data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, 108, pp. 127-139, 1998.
64. Seiford, L. M. and Zhu, J., “Profitability and marketability of the top 55 U.S. commercial banks,” Management Science, 45(9), pp. 1270-1288, 1999.
65. Steuer, R. E., Multiple criteria optimization: theory, computation and application, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1986.
66. Stewart, T. J., “Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision-making: a response,” The International Journal of Management Science, 22, pp. 205-206, 1994.
67. Stewart, T. J., “Relationship between DEA and MCDM,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47, pp. 654-665, 1996.
68. Tagaras, G. and Lee, H. L., “Economic models for vendor evaluation with quality cost analysis,” Management Science, 42(11), pp. 1531-1543, 1996.
69. Talluri, S. and Baker, R. C., “A multi-phase mathematical programming approach for effective supply chain design,” European Journal of Operational Research, 141, pp. 544-558, 2002.
70. Thompson, R. G., Dharmapala, P. S. and Thrall, R. M., “DEA sensitivity analysis of efficiency measures with applications to Kansas farming and Illinois coal mining,” in Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y. and Seiford, L. M., Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology and application, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp. 393-422, 1997.
71. Treville, S. D., Shapiro, R. D. and Hameri, A. P., “From supply chain to demand chain: the role of lead time reduction in improvement demand chain performance,” Journal of Operations Management, 21, pp. 613-627, 2004.
72. Villa, G. and Lozano, S., “A constant sum of outputs DEA model for Olympic games target setting,” The 4th International Symposium of DEA and Performance Management, Birmingham, UK, pp. 9-15, 2004.
73. Wang, G., Huang, S. H. and Dismuke, J. P., “Product-driven supply chain selection using integrated multiple criteria decision-making methodology,” International Journal of Production Economics, 91, pp. 1-15, 2004.
74. Weber, C. A., “A data envelopment analysis approach to measuring vendor performance,” Supply Chain Management, 1(1), pp. 28-30, 1996.
75. Weber, C. A., Current, J. R. and Benton, W. C., “Vendor selection criteria and methods,” European Journal of Operational Research, 50, pp. 2-18, 1991.
76. Weber, C. A., Current, J. R. and Benton, W. C., “A multi-objective approach to vendor selection,” European Journal of Operational Research, 68, pp. 173-184, 1993.
77. Yahya, S. and Kingsman, B., “Vendor rating for an entrepreneur development programme: a case study using the analytic hierarchy process method,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50, pp. 916-930, 1999.
78. Zhu, J., “Robustness of the efficient DMUs in data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, 90, pp. 451-460, 1996.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top