Multi-criteria decision support methods for the selection of the optimum contractor: A case study of a passenger transfer centre

• Autorzy: Łopatka Paweł , Tłuczak Agnieszka , Jadach Robert

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14254/jsdtl.2023.8-2.16

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: The main purpose of the paper is to apply the TOPSIS method for selecting the optimal contractor for a passenger transfer center. Methodology: The methodology is based on the use of TOPSIS, which determines the distance of decision alternatives from the ideal and anti-ideal solutions using evaluation criteria. Results: Two different contractor rankings were obtained depending on the weights of the criteria. With equal weights, the best contractor is number 5, while with weights determined by formula (8), the best is number 4. Theoretical Contribution: The paper contributes to the field of investment project management by demonstrating how the TOPSIS method can aid in decision-making for optimal contractor selection, thereby reducing the risk of erroneous decisions. Practical Implications: The practical implications of this research are significant for investment projects, as the demonstrated methodology can be directly applied to the contractor selection process, potentially leading to more successful project outcomes.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

TOPSIS; logistics projects; passenger transfer centre

• Wydawca: Fundacja Centrum Badań Socjologicznych ; Scientific Publishing House "SciView"
• Czasopismo: Journal of Sustainable Development of Transport and Logistics
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: Vol. 8, No. 2
• Strony: 219--228
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 37 poz., tab., wzory

Twórcy

autor

Łopatka Paweł

• Department of Microeconomics, Institute of Economics, Poznan University of Economics and Business, al. Niepodległości 10, Poznań 61-875, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3997-0077

autor

Tłuczak Agnieszka

• Department of Econometrics and Quantitative Methods, Faculty of Economics, Institute of Economics and Finance, Ozimska 46a, Opole 45-058, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6217-8822

autor

Jadach Robert

• Department of Marketing, Faculty of Management, Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Komandorska 118/120, Wrocław 53-345, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8697-716X

Bibliografia

• Alinezhad, A., & Khalili, J. (2019). New methods and applications in multiple attribute decision making (MADM) (Vol. 277, pp. 103-08). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15009-9
• Anable, J. (2005). “Complacent Car Addicts”; or “Aspiring Environmentalists”? Identifying travel behaviour segments using attitude theory. Transport Policy, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2004.11.004
• Araujo, C. A. S., Wanke, P., & Siqueira, M. M. (2018). A performance analysis of Brazilian public health: TOPSIS and neural networks application. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 67(9), 1526-1549. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-11-2017-0319
• Beirão, G., & Sarsfield Cabral, J. A. (2007). Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study. Transport Policy, 14(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.04.009
• Bojkovic, N., Anic, I., & Pejcic-Tarle, S. (2010). One solution for cross-country transport-sustainability evaluation using a modified ELECTRE method. Ecological Economics, 69(5), 1176-1186.
• Bouayad-Agha, S., Turpin, N., & Védrine, L. (2013). Fostering the Development of European Regions: A Spatial Dynamic Panel Data Analysis of the Impact of Cohesion Policy. Regional Studies, 47(9), 1573-1593. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.628930
• Brol, R. (2006). Rozwój regionalny - zakres pojęciowy. In D. Strahl (Ed.), Metody oceny rozwoju regionalnego (pp. 13-17). Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej im. Oskara Langego we Wrocławiu.
• Çelen, A. (2014). Comparative Analysis of Normalisation Procedures in TOPSIS Method: With an Application to Turkish Deposit Banking Market. Informatica, 25(2), 185-208. https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2014.10
• Chakraborty, S., & Yeh, C.-H. (2009). A simulation comparison of normalisation procedures for TOPSIS (pp. 1815-1820). IEEE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCIE.2009.5223811
• Chamodrakas, I., Alexopoulou, N., & Martakos, D. (2009). Customer evaluation for order acceptance using a novel class of fuzzy methods based on TOPSIS. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4), 7409-7415. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESWA.2008.09.050
• Chan, F. T. S., & Kumar, N. (2007). Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega, 35(4), 417-431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.08.004
• Chu, T. C. (2002). Facility location selection using fuzzy TOPSIS under group decisions. International journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 10(06), 687-701. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488502001739
• Cinelli, M., Kadziński, M., Miebs, G., Gonzalez, M., & Słowiński, R. (2022). Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system. European Journal of Operational Research, 302(2), 633-651. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJOR.2022.01.011
• Ertuǧrul, I., & Karakaşoǧlu, N. (2008). Comparison of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods for facility location selection. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 39(7-8), 783-795. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00170-007-1249-8
• Farahani, R. Z., & Asgari, N. (2007). Combination of MCDM and covering techniques in a hierarchical model for facility location: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research, 176(3), 1839-1858. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJOR.2005.10.039
• Govindan, K., Khodaverdi, R., & Jafarian, A. (2013). A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 345-354. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2012.04.014
• Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., & Slowinski, R. (2001). Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 129(1), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00167-3
• Groenendijk, L., Rezaei, J., & Correia, G. (2018). Incorporating the travellers’ experience value in assessing the quality of transit nodes: A Rotterdam case study. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2018.07.007
• Hernandez, S., Monzon, A., & de Oña, R. (2016). Urban transport interchanges: A methodology for evaluating perceived quality. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.08.008
• Hwang, C.-L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for Multiple Attribute Decision Making. 58-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3
• Keeney, R. L. (1996). Value-focused thinking: Identifying decision opportunities and creating alternatives. European Journal of Operational Research, 92(3), 537-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(96)00004-5
• Keeney, R. L., & Gregory, R. S. (2005). Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Operations Research, 53(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1287/OPRE.1040.0158
• Ley-Borrás, R. (2015). Deciding on the decision situation to analyze: the critical first step of a decision analysis. Decision Analysis, 12(1), 46-58. https://doi.org/10.1287/DECA.2014.0308
• Lootsma, F. A. (1999). Multi-criteria decision analysis via ratio and difference judgement (Applied optimisation 29) (Vol. 29). Kluwer.
• Luczak, A., & Just, M. (2020). The Positional MEF-TOPSIS Method for the Assessment of Complex Economic Phenomena in Territorial Units. Statistics in Transition, 21 (nr 2), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.21307/STATTRANS-2020-018
• Martín, J. M., Fajardo, W., Blanco, A., & Requena, I. (2003). Constructing linguistic versions for the multicriteria decision support systems preference ranking organisation method for enrichment evaluation I and II. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 18(7), 711-731. https://doi.org/10.1002/INT.10112
• Nguyen, N., Nguyen, H. V., Nguyen, P. T., Tran, V. T., Nguyen, H. N., Nguyen, T. M. N., ... & Nguyen, T. H. (2019). Some key factors affecting consumers’ intentions to purchase functional foods: A case study of functional yogurts in Vietnam. Foods, 9(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9010024
• Önüt, S., Kara, S. S., & Işik, E. (2009). Long term supplier selection using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach: A case study for a telecommunication company. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 3887-3895. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESWA.2008.02.045
• Peek, G. J., & Van Hagen, M. (2002). Creating synergy in and around stations: Three strategies for adding value. Transportation Research Record, 1793. https://doi.org/10.3141/1793-01
• Poh, K. L., & Ang, B. W. (1999). Transportation fuels and policy for Singapore: an AHP planning approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 37(3), 507-525. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-8352(00)00020-6
• Rossolov, A., Naumov, V., Popova, N., Vakulenko, E., & Levchenko, O. (2021). Estimation of transport accessibility in case of rational transport hub location. Transport, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2021.14299
• Roszkowska, E., & Wachowicz, T. (2013). Metoda TOPSIS i jej rozszerzenia - studium metodologiczne. Prace Naukowe / Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach, 11-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/SI0726-012-9299-1
• Strahl, D. (1990). Metody programowania rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego. Państwowe Wydawn. Ekonomiczne.
• Tabari, M., Kaboli, A., Aryanezhad, M. B., Shahanaghi, K., & Siadat, A. (2008). A new method for location selection: a hybrid analysis. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 206(2), 598-606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2008.05.111
• Tuzkaya, G., Önüt, S., 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(4), 970-983. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2007.05.004
• Wątróbski, J., Jankowski, J., Ziemba, P., Karczmarczyk, A., & Zioło, M. (2019). Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection R. Omega, 86, 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2018.07.004
• Wey, W. M., & Wu, K. Y. (2007). Using ANP priorities with goal programming in resource allocation in transportation. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46(7-8), 985-1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MCM.2007.03.017