4.6 Article

EVALUATING COMPLEX DECISION AND PREDICTIVE ENVIRONMENTS: THE CASE OF GREEN SUPPLY CHAIN FLEXIBILITY

期刊

出版社

VILNIUS GEDIMINAS TECH UNIV
DOI: 10.3846/20294913.2018.1483977

关键词

flexibility; green supply chain; information systems; probability evaluation methodology; rough set; TOPSIS; grey number

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China Project [71472031, 71772032]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Supply chain flexibility is an important operations strategy dimension for organizations to achieve and maintain competitive advantage. With rising greener customer expectations and increasingly stringent environmental regulations, green supply chains are now viewed as another competitive weapon. Green supply chains are characterized by higher complexity and turbulence. Green supply chain flexibility can aid organizations function in this complex and uncertain environment, yet investigation into this area is very limited. This paper aims contribute to this field by investigating green supply chain flexibility achievement through information systems. This paper introduces a green supply chain flexibility matrix framework. Given the large data needs, as described in the matrix, a novel probability evaluation methodology that can help predict rankings of projects and programs is introduced. The methodology extends a TOPSIS based three-parameter interval grey number (TpGN) approach by incorporating neighborhood rough set theory (RST) to evaluate IS programs' green flexibility support capability. The results of this methodology are more objective and effective for two reasons. (1) The results are predictive rankings based on probability degree instead of the fixed deterministic ranks. (2) Neighborhood rough set theory used in this study can limit loss of information when compared to rough set theory, yet still simplify extensive data sets. This paper also identifies study limitations and future research directions for green supply chain flexibility.

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

4.6
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