SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi / 2006 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2

DEVELOPING A NEW MODEL FOR SUPPLIER EVALUATION PROCESS FOR A COMPANY AND ITS APPLICATION

BİR İŞLETMEDE TEDARİKÇİ DEĞERLENDİRME SÜRECİ İÇİN YENİ BİR MODEL TASARIMI VE UYGULAMASI

Metin DAĞDEVİREN
Nilay DÖNMEZ
Mustafa KURT
Pages
247–255
Publication Date
2013-03-01
DOI
—
🏛️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)

The proposed supplier evaluation model is verified with the supplier representatives and it is determined to use this model periodically.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Today, the role of working with the right suppliers in achieving the goals of the companies is getting more important.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Many companies, which used to evaluate their suppliers with traditional methods, are now seeking for new evaluation methods.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The proposed supplier evaluation model is verified with the supplier representatives and it is determined to use this model periodically.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Tedarikçi değerlendirme · çok kriterli analiz · analitik ağ prosesi.

Abstract

Today, the role of working with the right suppliers in achieving the goals of the companies is getting more important. Many companies, which used to evaluate their suppliers with traditional methods, are now seeking for new evaluation methods. In this study, a new supplier evaluation method is developed for a company. The Analytical Network Process (ANP) method is used in the proposed model. ANP is a multi criteria decision making method that takes into account the dependence and feedback among the factors affecting the decisionmaking process. The proposed supplier evaluation model is verified with the supplier representatives and it is determined to use this model periodically.

Özet

Günümüzde doğru tedarikçilerle çalışmanın, işletmelerin hedeflerine ulaşmasındaki rolü gittikçe önem kazanmaktadır. Geçmişte alışılagelmiş yöntemlerle tedarikçi değerlendiren birçok işletme, bugün yeni değerlendirme yöntemleri arayışı içindedir. Bu çalışmada, bir işletme için yeni bir tedarikçi değerlendirme modeli geliştirilmiştir. Geliştirilen modelde Analitik Ağ Prosesi (AAP) yöntemi kullanılmıştır. AAP karar verme sürecini etkileyen faktörler arasındaki her türlü bağımlılık ve geri beslemeyi dikkate alan çok ölçütlü karar verme yöntemlerinden biridir. Önerilen tedarikçi değerlendirme modeli tedarikçi temsilcileri ile birlikte değerlendirilmiş ve belirli periyotlarla kullanılmasına karar verilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

DAĞDEVİREN, M., DÖNMEZ, N., KURT, M. (2013). DEVELOPING A NEW MODEL FOR SUPPLIER EVALUATION PROCESS FOR A COMPANY AND ITS APPLICATION. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2, 247–255. https://ajindex.com/articles/21125

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Turban, A.J., Decision Support Systems and Intelligence Systems, Prentice Hall, New York, A.B.D., 1998.
  2. Çetinyokuş, T., Tedarikçi Performansının Değerlendirilmesi İçin Bir Karar Destek Sistemi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 2003.
  3. Venkatraman, N., Ramanujam, V., “Measurement of business performance in syrategy research: a comparison of approaches”, Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-, 1986.
  4. Germain, R., Droge, C., “Wholesale operations and vendor evaluation”, Journal of Business Research, 21(2), 119-129, 1990.
  5. Mentzer, J.T., Konrad, B.P., “An efficiency/effectiveness approach to logistics performance analysis”, Journal of Business Logistics, 12(1), 33-62, 1991.
  6. Weber, C.A., Current, J.R., Benton, C., “Vendor selection criteria and methods”, European Journal of Operational Research, 50(1), 2-18, - Limmerick, D., Cunnington, B., Managing the New Organization-A Blue Print for Network and Strategic Alliances, Business and Professional Publishing, Sydney, 1993.
  7. Chao, C., Scheuing, E.E., Ruch, W.A., “Purchasing performance evaluation: an investigation of different perspectives”, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 29(3), 33-39, 1993.
  8. Mummalaneni, V., Dubas, K.M., Chao, C., “Chinese purchasing managers preferences and trade-offs in supplier selection and performance evaluation”, Industrial Marketing Management, 25(1), 115-124, 1996.
  9. Krause, D.R., “Supplier development: current practices and outcomes”, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, (2), 12-19, 1997.
  10. Roodhooft, F., Konings, J., “Vendor selection and evaluation an activity based costing approach”, European Journal of Operational Research, 96(2), 97-102, 1997.
  11. Humphreys, P., Mcvor, R., Chan, F., “Using case-based reasoning to evaluate supplier environmental management performance”, Expert Systems with Application, 25(2), 141-, 2003.
  12. Schmitz, J., Platts, K.W., “Supplier logistics performance measurement: Indications from a study in the automotive industry”, International Journal of Production Economics, 89(2), 231-, 2004.
  13. Hartley, J.L., Choi, T.Y., “Supplier development: customers as a catalyst of process change”, Business Horizons, 39(4), 37-44, 1996.
  14. Porter, A.M., “Supplier evaluation revisited”, Purchasing, 111(6), 58-68, 1991.
  15. Purdy, L., Astad, U., Safayeni, F., “Perceived effectiveness of the automotive supplier evaluation process”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, (6), 91-103, 1994. F