Abstract
Supplier selection and segmentation are crucial tasks of companies in order to reduce costs and increase the competitiveness of their goods. To handle uncertainty and dynamicity in the supplier segmentation problem, this research thus proposes a new dynamic generalized fuzzy multi-criteria group decision making (MCGDM) approach from the aspects of capability and willingness and with respect to environmental issues. The proposed approach defines the aggregated ratings of alternatives, the aggregated weights of criteria, and the weighted ratings by using generalized fuzzy numbers with the effect of time weight. Next, we determine the ranking order of alternatives via a popular centroid-index ranking approach. Finally, two case studies demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed dynamic approach. The applications show that the proposed appoach is effective in solving the MCGDM in vague environment.
Highlights
Supplier segmentation is a step that follows supplier selection and plays an important role in organizations for reducing production costs and optimally utilizing resources. Enterprises classify their suppliers from a selected set into distinct groups with different needs, characteristics, and requirements in order to adopt an appropriate strategic approach for handling different supplier segments [1]
Supplier segmentation can be viewed as a fuzzy multi-criteria group decision making (MCGDM) problem
This study primarily proposes a new dynamic generalized fuzzy MCGDM approach from the aspects of capability and willingness with respect to environmental issues
Summary
Supplier segmentation is a step that follows supplier selection and plays an important role in organizations for reducing production costs and optimally utilizing resources. Numerous studies in the literature have proposed fuzzy multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approaches to select and evaluate (green/sustainable) suppliers, with some recent applications found in [4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. This study applies the popular centroid-index ranking approach proposed by [18] to determine the distance values between the centroid and minimum points of green suppliers versus the capabilities and willingness criteria. Three decision makers (D1, D2, and D3) were requested to separately evaluate the importance weights of the capabilities and willingness criteria and the ratings of GSS at three different times (t1, t2, and t3). Willingness criteria (0,126, 0,262, 0,443; 0,700) (0,214, 0,387, 0,611; 0,800) (0,198, 0,372, 0,598; 0,800) (0,214, 0,391, 0,620; 0,800) (0,191, 0,358, 0,576; 0,700) (0,219, 0,391, 0,611; 0,800) (0,212, 0,386, 0,612; 0,800) (0,130, 0,266, 0,449; 0,600) (0,205, 0,377, 0,601; 0,800) (0,184, 0,353, 0,575; 0,700) (0,203, 0,378, 0,605; 0,800) (0,214, 0,378, 0,589; 0,600)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
