A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT

Fatma Selen MADENOĞLU (Abdullah Gül Üniversitesi, Yönetim Bilimleri Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümü, Kayseri, Türkiye)
Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi
3 1
Yıl: 2023 Cilt: Sayı: 56 Sayfa Aralığı: 123 - 137 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.30794/pausbed.1129214 İndeks Tarihi: 29-05-2023

A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT

Öz:
This paper presents a group decision-making mechanism to properly manage ranking problems in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment. TOPSIS ranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods is utilized under the intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. This solution technique examines the sets of criteria employed in decision-making problems, the preferences of a group of decision-makers, and the importance levels of decision-makers. Managers use the ranking methods as a reliable technique for making supplier evaluation decisions. Furthermore, the supply chain suffers from the shortage of materials, transportation problems, etc. In the post COVID-19 era, the need for a practical and exhaustive tool is explicit. An illustrative case on a supplier selection problem considering sustainability and risks in the post-COVID-19 era is used to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed technique by detailing the procedure step by step. A comparative analysis of the results is carried out. The results are compared with the results of the MARCOS method. The results show that the presented methodology is applicable to the other areas as well.
Anahtar Kelime: Multi-criteria decision making Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets TOPSIS Sustainability Risk Multi-criteria decision making, Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets, TOPSIS, Sustainability, Risk

SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİRLİK, RİSKLER VE SEZGİSEL BULANIK ORTAMDA SIRALAMA PROBLEMLERİ İÇİN GRUP KARAR VERME YÖNTEMİ

Öz:
Bu makale, sezgisel bulanık bir ortamda sıralama problemlerini düzgün bir şekilde yönetmek için bir grup karar verme mekanizması sunmaktadır. Sezgisel bulanık küme teorisi kapsamında çok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV) yöntemi olan TOPSIS kullanılmaktadır. Bu çözüm tekniğinde karar verme problemlerinde kullanılan birtakım kriterler, karar vericiler grubunun tercihleri ve karar vericilerin önem düzeyleri incelenmektedir. Yöneticiler, sıralama yöntemlerini tedarikçi değerlendirme kararlarını vermek için güvenilir bir teknik olarak kullanır. Ayrıca, COVID-19 döneminden sonra tedarik zinciri malzeme sıkıntısı, ulaşım sorunları vb. sıkıntılardan muzdariptir, pratik ve kapsamlı bir araca olan ihtiyaç açıktır. Prosedürü adım adım detaylandırarak önerilen tekniğin uygulanabilirliğini göstermek için, COVID-19 sonrası dönemde sürdürülebilirliği ve riskleri dikkate alan bir tedarikçi seçimi sorununa ilişkin örnek bir vaka kullanılmıştır. Sonuçların karşılaştırmalı analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sonuçlar, MARCOS yönteminin sonuçları ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Sonuçlar, sunulan metodolojinin diğer alanlara da uygulanabilir olduğunu göstermektedir.
Anahtar Kelime: Çok kriterli karar verme Sezgisel Bulanık Kümeler TOPSIS MARCOS Sürdürülebilirlik Risk

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Alikhani, R., Torabi, S. A. and Altay, N. (2019). “Strategic supplier selection under sustainability and risk criteria”. International Journal of Production Economics, 208, 69-82.
  • Amiri, M. P. (2010). “Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods”. Expert systems with applications, 37(9), 6218-6224.
  • Atanassov, K. (1986). “Intuitionistic fuzzy sets”. Fuzzy sets and systems 20 (1), 87-96.
  • Bilgili, F., Zarali, F., Ilgün, M. F., Dumrul, C. and Dumrul, Y. (2022). “The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using intuitionistic fuzzy-TOPSIS method”. Renewable Energy, 189, 1443-1458.
  • Boran, F. E., Genç, S., Kurt, M. and 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.
  • Chamodrakas, I. and Martakos, D. (2011). “A utility-based fuzzy TOPSIS method for energy efficient network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks”. Applied Soft Computing, 11(4), 3734-3743.
  • Chan, F. T., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M. K., Lau, H. C. and Choy, K. (2008). “Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach”. International Journal of production research, 46(14), 3825-3857.
  • Chang, B., Chang, C. W. and Wu, C. H. (2011). “Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria”. Expert systems with Applications, 38(3), 1850-1858.
  • Chen, W. and Zou, Y. (2017). “An integrated method for supplier selection from the perspective of risk aversion”. Applied Soft Computing, 54, 449-455.
  • Chen, Z., Ming, X., Zhou, T. And Chang, Y. (2020). “Sustainable supplier selection for smart supply chain considering internal and external uncertainty: An integrated rough-fuzzy approach”. Applied Soft Computing, 87, 106004.
  • Chou, S. Y. and Chang, Y. H. (2008). “A decision support system for supplier selection based on a strategy-aligned fuzzy SMART approach”. Expert systems with applications, 34(4), 2241-2253.
  • Chou, Y. C., Yen, H. Y., Dang, V. T. and Sun, C. C. (2019). “Assessing the human resource in science and technology for Asian countries: Application of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS”. Symmetry, 11(2), 251.
  • Dhiman, H. S. and Deb, D. (2020). “Fuzzy TOPSIS and fuzzy COPRAS based multi-criteria decision making for hybrid wind farms”. Energy, 202, 117755.
  • Fagundes, M. V., Hellingrath, B. andFreires, F. G. (2021). “Supplier selection risk: a new computer-based decision-making system with fuzzy extended AHP”. Logistics, 5(1), 13.
  • Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K. (1981). “Methods for multiple attribute decision making”, In Multiple attribute decision making (pp. 58-191), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  • Heizer, J. H. and Render, B. (2004). “Principles of operations management”. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
  • Kannan, D., Khodaverdi, R., Olfat, L., Jafarian, A. and Diabat, A. (2013). “Integrated fuzzy multi criteria decision making method and multi-objective programming approach for supplier selection and order allocation in a green supply chain”. Journal of Cleaner production, 47, 355-367.
  • Kannan, D., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L. and Jabbour, C. J. C. (2014). “Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: Using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company”. European Journal of operational research, 233(2), 432-447.
  • Krohling, R. A. And Campanharo, V. C. (2011). “Fuzzy TOPSIS for group decision making: A case study for accidents with oil spill in the sea”. Expert Systems with applications, 38(4), 4190-4197. Lee, A. H., Kang, H. Y., Hsu, C. F. and Hung, H. C. (2009). “A green supplier selection model for high-tech industry”. Expert systems with applications, 36(4), 7917-7927.
  • Li, G. D., Yamaguchi, D. and Nagai, M. (2007). “A grey-based decision-making approach to the supplier selection problem”. Mathematical and computer modelling, 46(3-4), 573-581.
  • Kumar, A., Jain, V. and Kumar, S. (2014). “A comprehensive environment friendly approach for supplier selection”. Omega, 42(1), 109-123.
  • Kuo, M. S., Tzeng, G. H. and Huang, W. C. (2007). “Group decision-making based on concepts of ideal and anti-ideal points in a fuzzy environment”. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45(3-4), 324-339.
  • Kuo, R. J., Wang, Y. C. and Tien, F. C. (2010). “Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection”. Journal of cleaner production, 18(12), 1161-1170.
  • Onu, P. U., Quan, X., Xu, L., Orji, J. and Onu, E. (2017). “Evaluation of sustainable acid rain control options utilizing a fuzzy TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis model frame work”. Journal of cleaner production, 141, 612-625.
  • Rouyendegh, B. D., Yildizbasi, A. And Üstünyer, P. (2020). “Intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method for green supplier selection problem”. Soft Computing, 24(3), 2215-2228.
  • Salih, M. M., Zaidan, B. B., Zaidan, A. A. and Ahmed, M. A. (2019). “Survey on fuzzy TOPSIS state-of-the-art between 2007 and 2017”. Computers & Operations Research, 104, 207-227.
  • Saputro, T. E., Figueira, G. and Almada-Lobo, B. (2022). “A comprehensive framework and literature review of supplier selection under different purchasing strategies”. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 108010.
  • da Silva, E. M., Ramos, M. O., Alexander, A. and Jabbour, C. J. C. (2020). “A systematic review of empirical and normative decision analysis of sustainability-related supplier risk management”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 244, 118808.
  • Szmidt, E., and Kacprzyk, J. (2002). “Using intuitionistic fuzzy sets in group decision making”. Control and Cybernetics, 31, 1037–1053.
  • Şengül, Ü., Eren, M., Shiraz, S. E., Gezder, V. and Şengül, A. B. (2015). “Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey”. Renewable energy, 75, 617-625.
  • Qin, J., Liu, X. and Pedrycz, W. (2017). “An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment”. European Journal of Operational Research, 258(2), 626-638.
  • Ting, S. C. and Cho, D. I. (2008). “An integrated approach for supplier selection and purchasing decisions”. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal.
  • Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Zavadskas, E. K. and Zolfani, S. H. (2017). “Integrated QFD-MCDM framework for green supplier selection”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 3728-3740.
  • Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Pamucar, D. And Abad, M. D. (2019). “A risk-based integrated decision-making model for green supplier selection: A case study of a construction company in Spain”. Kybernetes.
  • Yazdi, M., Korhan, O. and Daneshvar, S. (2020). “Application of fuzzy fault tree analysis based on modified fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS for fire and explosion in the process industry”. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics, 26(2), 319-335.
  • Yu, C., Shao, Y., Wang, K. and Zhang, L. (2019). “A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment”. Expert Systems with Applications, 121, 1-17.
  • Zadeh, L.A. (1965) “Fuzzy sets”. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353.
  • Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M. and Schultmann, F. (2016). “Sustainable supplier management–a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development”. International journal of production research, 54(5), 1412-1442.
  • Zyoud, S. H., Kaufmann, L. G., Shaheen, H., Samhan, S. and Fuchs-Hanusch, D. (2016). “A framework for water loss management in developing countries under fuzzy environment: Integration of Fuzzy AHP with Fuzzy TOPSIS”. Expert Systems with Applications, 61, 86-105
APA Madenoglu F (2023). A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. , 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
Chicago Madenoglu Fatma Selen A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. (2023): 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
MLA Madenoglu Fatma Selen A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. , 2023, ss.123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
AMA Madenoglu F A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. . 2023; 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
Vancouver Madenoglu F A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. . 2023; 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
IEEE Madenoglu F "A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT." , ss.123 - 137, 2023. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
ISNAD Madenoglu, Fatma Selen. "A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT". (2023), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1129214
APA Madenoglu F (2023). A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (56), 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
Chicago Madenoglu Fatma Selen A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi , no.56 (2023): 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
MLA Madenoglu Fatma Selen A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, vol., no.56, 2023, ss.123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
AMA Madenoglu F A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2023; (56): 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
Vancouver Madenoglu F A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2023; (56): 123 - 137. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
IEEE Madenoglu F "A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT." Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, , ss.123 - 137, 2023. 10.30794/pausbed.1129214
ISNAD Madenoglu, Fatma Selen. "A GROUP DECISION-MAKING METHOD FOR RANKING PROBLEMS UNDER SUSTAINABILITY, RISKS, AND INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT". Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 56 (2023), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1129214
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
24-04-2024 7:31

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları