4.7 Article

New hybrid COPRAS-G MADM Model for improving and selecting suppliers in green supply chain management

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2015.1010747

关键词

green supply chain management (GSCM); multi-attribute decision-making (MADM); analytic network process (ANP); DEMATEL-based ANP (DANP); COmplex PRoportional ASsessment of alternatives with Grey relations (modified COPRAS-G)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Greening the supply chain is an increasingly important concern for many business enterprises and a challenge for logistics management. Critical functions within green supply chain management are internal improvements and selection of green suppliers. This study proposes a novel, hybrid model that addresses dependent relationships between various criteria and the vague information coming from decision-makers. The Decision-making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) technique structures the relationships among criteria, thereby constructing an influential network relationship map (INRM). Meanwhile the DEMATEL-based, analytical network process (ANP) method aids in obtaining influential weights of the criteria. Decision-makers may hold diverse opinions and preferences due to incomplete information, differences in knowledge or simply conflicts that are inherent between various departments. This can make it difficult to judge the performance of alternatives. One remedy is to apply a modified COmplex PRoportional ASsessment of alternatives with Grey relations. Next, this is applied to improve each criterion for integration of the performance values obtained in closing the aspiration level from different expert opinions based on INRM. An empirical example using data from a Taiwanese electronics company is provided to demonstrate our proposed method. The results can provide firms with a knowledge-based understanding of the source of some problems, thus reducing the performance gaps and closing the aspiration levels. Finally, there is a discussion on certain managerial implications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据