The application of the multiple criteria decision making/aiding methodology to evaluation and redesign of logistics systems

Jacek Żak

Abstract


The paper presents the methodological background of Multiple Criteria Decision Making/Aiding (MCDM/A) and its practical application in logistics systems. It explains why MCDM/A methodology is important while dealing with different categories of decision problems that arise in those systems. Major features and basic notions of MCDM/A methodology are presented. Different categories of MCDM/A methods are characterized and classified. Two case studies demonstrate possible applications of MCDM/A methodology in logistics. In the first case study multiple objective optimization of the distribution system is carried out and compared with the single objective optimization. The decision problem is formulated as multiple criteria mathematical programming problem and solved by an extended version of MS Excel Solver – Premium Solver Plus. The second case study focuses on the multiple criteria evaluation and ranking of the logistics infrastructure objects, i.e. a set of warehouses – distribution centers. The decision problem is formulated as a multiple criteria ranking problem and solved with an application of ELECTRE III/IV method.

Keywords


logistics systems, multiple criteria optimization & evaluation, MCDM/A methodology

Full Text:

PDF

References


Brans J., Vincke P., Mareschal B., 1996. How to Select and How to Rank Projects: The PROMETHEE Method. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 24, 1986, pp. 228–238.

Coyle J.J., Bardi E.J., Langley Jr. J., 1996. The Management of Business Logistics. West Publishing Company, St. Paul.

Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgott M. (eds.), 2005. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. State of the Art Surveys. Springer, New York.

Forger G., 1998. Benchmark Your Warehouse for Future Success. Special Report. Modern Materials Handling, Vol. 10, pp. 39–41.

Hapke M., Jaszkiewicz A., Żak J., 2002. The Design of the Physical Distribution System with the Application of the Multiple Objective Mathematical Programming. Case Study. In: Trzaskalik T., Michnik J. (eds.) Multiple Objective and Goal Programming. Recent Developments. Advances in Soft Computing, pp. 297–309, Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg.

Hillier F. S., Lieberman G. J., 2005. Introduction to Operations Research. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Jacquet-Lagreze E., Siskos J., 1982. Assessing a Set of Additive Utility Functions for Multicriteria Decision-Making, the UTA Method. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.10, pp. 151–164.

Kieffer A.W., Novack R.A., 1998. An Empirical Analysis of Warehouse Measurement Systems in the Context of Supply Chain Implementation. Transportation Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 18–26.

Kisperska – Moroń D., 1999. Warehousing Conditions for Holding Inventory in Polish Supply Chain. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 59, pp. 123 – 128.

Kopczak L.R., 1997. Logistics Partnerships and Supply Chain Restructuring: Survey Results from the VS Computer Industry. Production and Operations Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 226–247.

Korpela J., Lehmusvaara A., 1999. A Customer Oriented Approach to Warehouse Network Evaluation and Design. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 59, pp. 135–146.

Landers T.L., Cole M.H., Walker B., Kirk R.W., 2000. The Virtual Warehousing Concept. Transportation Research, Vol. 36E, No. 2, pp. 115–125.

McKinnon A., 1989. Physical Distribution Systems. Routledge, New York.

Ross D.F., 1996. Distribution. Planning and Control. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.

Roubens M., 1982. Preference Relations on Actions and Criteria in Multicriteria Decision Making. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 10, pp. 51–55.

Rouwenhorst B., Reuter B., Strockrahm G.J., Van Houtum G.J., Mantel R.J., Zijm W.H.M., 2000. Warehouse Design and Control: Framework and Literature Review. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 122, pp. 515–533.

Roy B., 1990a. Decision-Aid and Decision Making. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.45, pp. 324–331.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.7494/dmms.2019.13.1-2.3328

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.