KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Gazi University Journal of Science / 2020 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 2

3PL Service Provider Selection with a Goal Programming Model Supported with Multicriteria Decision Making Approaches

Evrencan ÖZCAN
Merve AHISKALI
Sayfa
413–427
Yayın Tarihi
2020-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

As a result of the solution of the problem with this methodology, an improvement is achieved about 7% for the rate of delivery on time, 33% for bid - bill consistency rate, and 29% for the problematic delivery rate.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In this study, third-party logistics (3PL) service provider selection problem is handled for a foreign trade company that exports the products with high quality level obtained by outsourcing, and who has problems regarding both cost, delivery quality and delivery time.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:In this direction, 7 criteria are determined for effective evaluation of the performance of the 5 logistics service providers the company is working for and the determination of the most suitable 3PL service provider according to the property of the orders (quantity, mode of conveyance, transportation channel, etc.).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:As a result of the solution of the problem with this methodology, an improvement is achieved about 7% for the rate of delivery on time, 33% for bid - bill consistency rate, and 29% for the problematic delivery rate.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:3PL Service Provider · Selection · Goal Programming

Abstract

In this study, third-party logistics (3PL) service provider selection problem is handled for a foreign trade company that exports the products with high quality level obtained by outsourcing, and who has problems regarding both cost, delivery quality and delivery time. In this direction, 7 criteria are determined for effective evaluation of the performance of the 5 logistics service providers the company is working for and the determination of the most suitable 3PL service provider according to the property of the orders (quantity, mode of conveyance, transportation channel, etc.). The priority levels of service providers are calculated by using these criteria in the combination of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Then, a goal programming (GP) model that answers the question of which service provider to choose for which order, considering these priority values and the 12 system constraints and 5 objectives that the company encountered in real life is proposed. This model is the first one proposed in the literature for the selection of 3PL service providers for multimodal international transport with consistent results. The model is solved for the current 10 orders using the last 1-year data of the company and the most appropriate 3PL service provider combination is obtained. As a result of the solution of the problem with this methodology, an improvement is achieved about 7% for the rate of delivery on time, 33% for bid - bill consistency rate, and 29% for the problematic delivery rate.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÖZCAN, E., AHISKALI, M. (2020). 3PL Service Provider Selection with a Goal Programming Model Supported with Multicriteria Decision Making Approaches. Gazi University Journal of Science, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 2, 413–427. https://ajindex.com/articles/254730

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Rantasila K; Lauri O. Measurement of National-Level Logistics Costs and Performance. ITF Discussion Paper, No.2012-4, 2012; pp. 10-14
  2. National Skills Development Corporation (NSDC). Human Resource and Skill Requirements Report (2017-22): https://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv%3A78369 (accessed on 24 Dec 2018)
  3. Aguezzoul A.; Pires S. 3PL performance evaluation and selection: A MCDM method. Suppl Ch Forum Int J 2016;17(2):87-94
  4. Ahıskalı M. A Goal Programming Model Supported with Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approachs for Third Party Logistics Service Provider Selection Problem. Master of Science Thesis, Kırıkkale University, Kırıkkale, 2018
  5. Göl H.; Çatay B. Third-party logistics provider selection: insights from a Turkish automotive company. Suppl Ch Manage Int J 2007;12(6):379-84
  6. Soh SH. A decision model for evaluating third-party logistics providers using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Afr J Bus Manage 2010;4(3):339- 49
  7. Vijayvargiya A; Dey AK. An analytical approach for selection of a logistics provider. Manage Decis 2010;48(3):403 – 18
  8. Barker TJ; Zabinsky ZB. A multicriteria decision making model for reverse logistics using analytical hierarchy process. Omega 2011;39(5):558-73
  9. Daim TU; Udbye A; Balasubramanian A. Use of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for selection of 3PL providers. J Manuf Techn Manage 2012;24(1): 28-51
  10. Hwang B; Chen T; Lin J. 3PL selection criteria in integrated circuit manufacturing industry in Taiwan. Suppl Ch Manage Int J 2016;21(1):103-24
  11. Gürcan ÖF; Yazıcı İ; Beyca ÖF; Arslan ÇY; Eldemir F. Third party logistics (3PL) provider selection with AHP application. Proc Soc Behav Sci 2016;235(1):226 – 34
  12. Jharkharia S; Shankar R. Selection of logistics service provider: an analytic network process (ANP) approach. Omega 2007; 35(3):274-89
  13. Özbek A; Eren T. Selection of third-party logistics (3PL) firms with analytical network process approach. Atatürk Üni J Econ Admin Sci 2013;27(1):95-113
  14. Qureshi MN; Kumar D; Kumar P. Selection of Potential 3PL Services Providers Using TOPSIS with Interval Data. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Singapore, Jan 2007, pp. 1512-16
  15. Aguezzoul A; Rabenasoloo B; Jolly-Desodt AM. Multicriteria Decision Aid Tool for Third-Party Logistics Providers’ Selection. International Conference Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM), France, Oct 2006, pp. 912-16
  16. Govindan K; Khodaver