SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Akademik Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2

VDAHP Decision Support System For Supplier Selection In The Rubber Industry

VDAHP Karar Destek Sistemi ile Kauçuk Sektöründe Tedarikçi Seçimi

Serdar Özdemir(Angst Pfister Gelişmiş Teknik Çözümler A.Ş.)0009-0007-4498-5429
Sibkat Kaçtıoğlu(İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi)0000-0002-8529-3775
Pages
162–170
Publication Date
2026-08-20
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

VDAHP yields positive results when compared with sensitivity analysis, where aggressive scenarios with reduced quality weight are tested.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the automotive industry, the zero-defect principle has transformed supplier selection from a purely price-based decision into a multi-criteria strategic partnership model.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, a hybrid decision support system called VDAHP (VDA 6.3 & AHP) was applied to the procurement process of 100,000 metal bushings required for the production of vibration damping mounts for a company operating in the rubber sector.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:VDAHP yields positive results when compared with sensitivity analysis, where aggressive scenarios with reduced quality weight are tested.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:VDAHP · AHP · VDA 6.3

Abstract

In the automotive industry, the zero-defect principle has transformed supplier selection from a purely price-based decision into a multi-criteria strategic partnership model. Many businesses face operational and financial risks created by suppliers who offer cost advantages but have inadequate quality processes. In this study, a hybrid decision support system called VDAHP (VDA 6.3 & AHP) was applied to the procurement process of 100,000 metal bushings required for the production of vibration damping mounts for a company operating in the rubber sector. VDAHP combines the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method with the VDA 6.3 process control standard developed by the German Automotive Industry Association as an inflexible logical barrier. As a result of the application, the system autonomously eliminated the supplier who offered the lowest price of €1.80 but did not meet the VDA threshold, and if the capacity of the first-selected supplier was insufficient, it autonomously distributed the order to other suitable firms, creating an optimal procurement plan with a total cost of €212,000. VDAHP yields positive results when compared with sensitivity analysis, where aggressive scenarios with reduced quality weight are tested.

Özet

Otomotiv sanayisinde sıfır hata prensibi, tedarikçi seçimini sadece fiyata dayalı bir karar olmaktan çıkarıp çok kriterli bir stratejik ortaklık modeline dönüştürmüştür. Birçok işletme, maliyet avantajı sağlayan ancak kalite süreçleri yetersiz olan tedarikçilerin yarattığı operasyonel ve finansal risklerle karşı karşıyadır. Bu çalışmada, VDAHP (VDA 6.3 & AHP) olarak adlandırılan hibrit karar destek sistemi ile kauçuk sektöründe faaliyet gösteren bir işletmenin titreşim sönümleyici takoz üretimi için gereken 100.000 adetlik metal burç tedarik sürecine uygulanmıştır. VDAHP, Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (AHP) yöntemini, Alman Otomotiv Endüstrisi Birliği tarafından geliştirilen VDA 6.3 süreç denetim standardı ile esnetilemez bir mantıksal bariyer olarak birleştirmektedir. Uygulama sonucunda sistem; 1.80 € ile en düşük fiyatı vermesine rağmen VDA barajını geçemeyen tedarikçiyi otonom olarak elemiş, birinci seçilen tedarikçinin kapasitesinin yetersiz kalması durumunda ise siparişi diğer uygun firmalara otonom paylaştırarak 212.000 € toplam maliyetli optimum satınalma planını oluşturmuştur. VDAHP’nin, kalite ağırlığının düşürüldüğü agresif senaryoların test edildiği duyarlılık analizi ile karşılaştırılarak olumlu sonuçlar vermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özdemir, S., Kaçtıoğlu, S. (2026). VDAHP Decision Support System For Supplier Selection In The Rubber Industry. Türk Akademik Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 162–170. https://doi.org/10.59372/turajas.1943647

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Cheraghalipour, A., & Farsad, S. (2018). A bi-objective sustainable supplier selection and order allocation considering quantity discounts under disruption risks: A case study in plastic industry. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 118, 237–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.02.017
  2. Hosseini, S., & Barker, K. (2016). A Bayesian network model for resilience-based supplier selection. International Journal of Production Economics, 180, 68–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.07.014
  3. International Automotive Task Force [IATF]. (2016). IATF 16949:2016 Quality management system for organizations in the automotive industry (1. Baskı). IATF Publications.
  4. Jain, V., Sangaiah, A. K., Sakhuja, S., Thoduka, N., & Aggarwal, R. (2018). Supplier selection using fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS: A case study in the Indian automotive industry. Neural Computing and Applications, 29(7), 555–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2470-8
  5. Kamalahmadi, M., & Parast, M. M. (2016). A review of the literature on the principles of enterprise and supply chain resilience: Major findings and directions for future research. International Journal of Production Economics, 171, 116–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.10.023
  6. Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kannan, D., Mangla, S. K., & Garg, C. P. (2017). An integrated framework for sustainable supplier selection and evaluation in supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 1686–1698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.050
  7. Osiro, L., Lima-Junior, F. R., & Carpinetti, L. C. R. (2014). A fuzzy logic approach to supplier evaluation for development. International Journal of Production Economics, 153, 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.02.002
  8. Saaty, T. L. (1990). Multicriteria decision making: The analytic hierarchy process (2. Baskı). RWS Publications.
  9. Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., & Chatterjee, P. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 140, 106231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106231
  10. Taherdoost, H., & Brard, A. (2019). Analyzing the process of supplier selection criteria and methods. Procedia Manufacturing, 32, 1024–1034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2019.02.316
  11. Verband der Automobilindustrie [VDA]. (2016). VDA 6.3: Process audit. VDA QMC.
  12. Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Zavadskas, E. K., & Zolfani, S. H. (2017). Integrated QFD-MCDM framework for green supplier selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 3728–3740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.095
  13. Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1079340