SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Verimlilik Dergisi / 2021 / Sayı: 4

A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON FACILITY LOCATION SELECTION: STRATIFIED MULTI CRITERIA DECISION MAKING METHOD

TESİS YERİ SEÇİMİNE YENİ BİR BAKIŞ: KATMANLI ÇOK KRİTERLİ KARAR VERME YÖNTEMİ

Emine Nur Nacar(ANKARA YILDIRIM BEYAZIT ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-3785-1928
Babek Erdebilli(ANKARA YILDIRIM BEYAZIT ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-8860-3903
Pages
103–117
Publication Date
2021-09-29
🏛️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)

It is predicted that the study will fill this gap in the literature and will be a guide for different decision-making problems.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: Traditional Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods cannot provide solutions to problems that may be encountered in the near future.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Since it would be difficult to solve the problem by assigning new weights from the beginning, Stratified Multi-Criteria Decision Making (SMCDM) Method is used for the possibilities that may occur in the near future.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is predicted that the study will fill this gap in the literature and will be a guide for different decision-making problems.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Katmanlı Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemi · Tesis Yeri Seçimi · TOPSIS

Abstract

Purpose: Traditional Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods cannot provide solutions to problems that may be encountered in the near future. Since it would be difficult to solve the problem by assigning new weights from the beginning, Stratified Multi-Criteria Decision Making (SMCDM) Method is used for the possibilities that may occur in the near future. Methodology: In this article, the SMCDM method is explained and a sample study is carried out in a defense industry company operating in Ankara Sincan Organized Industrial Zone by comparing it with the TOPSIS method, which is one of the traditional MCDM methods, and the difference between the two methods is discussed. Findings: In the facility location selection problem, the best alternative was selected with the SMCDM method. TOPSIS ,one of the traditional MCDM method, and SMCDM methods were compared with each other, and it was seen that the events that may occur in the near future affect the facility location selection. Originality: There is no study in the literature in which facility location selection was made using the SMCDM method. It is predicted that the study will fill this gap in the literature and will be a guide for different decision-making problems.

Özet

Amaç: Geleneksel Çok Kriterli Karar Verme (ÇKKV) yöntemleri yakın gelecekte karşılaşılabilecek sorunlara çözüm verememektedir. Problemi baştan yeni ağırlıklar atayarak çözmek yorucu ve zor olacağından, yakın gelecekte meydana gelebilecek ihtimaller için Katmanlı Çok Kriterli Karar Verme (KÇKKV) Yöntemi geliştirilmiştir. Yöntem: Bu makalede, KÇÇKV yönteminin işleyişi anlatılmış ve geleneksel ÇKKV yöntemlerinden olan TOPSIS yöntemi ile karşılaştırılarak Ankara Sincan Organize Sanayi Bölgesinde faaliyet gösteren savunma sanayi firmasında örnek bir çalışma gerçekleştirilip iki yöntemin farkı tartışılmıştır. Bulgular: Tesis yeri seçimi probleminde, KÇÇKV yöntemi ile en iyi alternatif seçilmiştir. Geleneksel ÇKKV yöntemlerinden TOPSIS ile KÇKKV kıyaslanmış ve yakın gelecekte gerçekleşebilecek olayların tesis yeri seçimini etkilediği görülmüştür. Özgünlük: Literatürde KÇKKV yöntemi kullanılarak tesis yeri seçiminin yapıldığı bir çalışmaya rastlanmamıştır. Yapılan çalışmanın literatürdeki bu eksikliği dolduracağı ve farklı karar verme problemleri için de yol gösterici olacağı öngörülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Nacar, E. N., Erdebilli, B. (2021). A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON FACILITY LOCATION SELECTION: STRATIFIED MULTI CRITERIA DECISION MAKING METHOD. Verimlilik Dergisi, Sayı: 4, 103–117. https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.832480

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (30)

  1. Asadabadi, M. R. (2018). The stratified multi-criteria decision-making method. Knowledge-Based Systems, 162(June), 115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.07.002
  2. Asadabadi, M. R., Saberi, M., & Chang, E. (2017). Logistic informatics modelling using concept of stratification (CST). In IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems. https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZ-IEEE.2017.8015510
  3. Asadabadi, M. R., & Zwikael, O. (2019). Integrating risk into estimations of project activities ’ time and cost: A stratified approach. European Journal of Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.11.018
  4. Ashrafzadeh, M., Rafiei, F. M., Isfahani, N. M., & Zare, Z. (2012). Application of fuzzy TOPSIS method for the selection of Warehouse Location: A Case Study. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9), 655–671.
  5. Deluka-Tibljas, A., Karleusa, B., & Benac, C. (2011). AHP Methodology Application in Garage-Parking Facility Location Selection. Promet-Traffic&Transportation, 23(4), 303–313.
  6. Deveci, M., Akyurt, I. Z., & Yavuz, S. (2018). A GIS-based interval type-2 fuzzy set for public bread factory site selection. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 31(6), 820–847. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-02-2018-0029
  7. Dumanoğlu, S., & Ergül, N. (2010). İMKB’de İşlem Gören Teknoloji Şirketlerinin Mali Performans Ölçümü. Mufad Journal, (48), 101–111.
  8. Erdoğan, M., & Kaya, I. (2016). A combined fuzzy approach to determine the best region for a nuclear power plant in Turkey. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 39, 84–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.11.013
  9. Ertuǧrul, I. (2011). Fuzzy Group Decision Making for the Selection of Facility Location. Group Decision and Negotiation, 20(6), 725–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-010-9219-1
  10. Ertuğrul, İ., & Karakaşoğlu, N. (2008). Comparison of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods for facility location selection. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 39, 783–795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1249-8
  11. Farahani, R. Z., SteadieSeifi, M., & Asgari, N. (2010). Multiple criteria facility location problems: A survey. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 21, 1689–1709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2009.10.005
  12. Formaneck, S. (2019). A study of sustainable facility management from a green supply chain perspective in the united arab emirates. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 3(2), 314-323.
  13. Henig, M. I., & Buchanan, J. T. (1996). Solving MCDM problems: Process concepts. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 5(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199603)5:1 3.0.CO;2-6
  14. Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multi Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Application. In Springer (pp. 58–59).
  15. Kahraman, C., Ruan, D., & Doğan, I. (2003). Fuzzy group decision-making for facility location selection. Information Sciences, 157, 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-0255(03)00183-X
  16. Mokhtarian, M. N. (2011). A new fuzzy weighted average (FWA) method based on left and right scores: An application for determining a suitable location for a gas oil station. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 61(10), 3136–3145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2011.03.104
  17. Mokhtarian, M. N., & Hadi-Vencheh, A. (2012). A new fuzzy TOPSIS method based on left and right scores: An application for determining an industrial zone for dairy products factory. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 12(8), 2496–2505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2012.03.042
  18. Mokhtarian, M. N., Sadi-Nezhad, S., & Makui, A. (2014). A new flexible and reliable interval valued fuzzy VIKOR method based on uncertainty risk reduction in decision making process: An application for determining a suitable location for digging some pits for municipal wet waste landfill. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 78, 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2014.09.008
  19. Özdaǧoǧlu, A. (2012). A multi-criteria decision-making methodology on the selection of facility location: Fuzzy ANP. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 59(5–8), 787–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3505-1
  20. Partovi, F. Y. (2006). An analytic model for locating facilities strategically. The International Journal of Management Science, 34, 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.07.018
  21. Rajabi Asadabadi, M., Saberi, M., & Chang, E. (2018). Letter: The concept of stratification and future applications. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 66, 292–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.02.035
  22. Rouyendegh, B. D., & Saputro, T. E. (2014). Supplier selection using integrated fuzzy TOPSIS and MCGP: a case study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3957-3970.
  23. Seker, S., & Aydin, N. (2020). Hydrogen production facility location selection for Black Sea using entropy based TOPSIS under IVPF environment. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.12.183
  24. Tuzkaya, G., Semih, Ö., Tuzkaya, U. R., & Gülsün, B. (2008). An analytic network process approach for locating undesirable facilities: An example from Istanbul, Turkey. Journal of Environmental Management, 88, 970–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.05.004
  25. Yang, J., & Lee, H. (1997). An AHP decision model for facility location selection. Facilities, 15, 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.60.8680
  26. Yong, D. (2006). Plant location selection based on fuzzy TOPSIS. Original Article, 839–844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-004-2436-5
  27. Zadeh, L. A. (2016). Stratification, target set reachability and incremental enlargement principle. Information Sciences, 354, 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2016.02.047
  28. Asadabadi, M. R., & Zwikael, O. (2019). Integrating risk into estimations of project activities ’ time and cost: A stratified approach. European Journal of Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.11.018
  29. Ashrafzadeh, M., Rafiei, F. M., Isfahani, N. M., & Zare, Z. (2012). Application of fuzzy TOPSIS method for the selection of Warehouse Location: A Case Study. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9), 655–671.
  30. Tuzkaya, G., Semih, Ö., Tuzkaya, U. R., & Gülsün, B. (2008). An analytic network process approach for locating undesirable facilities: An example from Istanbul, Turkey. Journal of Environmental Management, 88, 970–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.05.004