IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i8p1793-d1119371.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Methods to Evaluate Operation Efficiency of Daycare Centers

Author

Listed:
  • Chia-Nan Wang

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 80778, Taiwan)

  • Chao-Fen Pan

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 80778, Taiwan)

  • Hoang-Phu Nguyen

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 80778, Taiwan
    School of Business, Ho Chi Minh International University, Ho Chi Minh 70000, Vietnam
    School of Business, HCM Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh 70000, Vietnam)

  • Pei-Chun Fang

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 80778, Taiwan)

Abstract

As the population ages and families become less able to offer care, the need for long-term care among older people increases. Evaluation of daycare centers, which provide localized long-term care services, is essential for the growth and direction of these institutions. Nevertheless, the present evaluation indexes do not adequately emphasize the significance of each index item or the actual effectiveness of an organization’s operations and management. To solve this issue, the purpose of this research was to develop an evaluation model for the operation and administration of daycare centers. Experts were consulted to collect pertinent criteria, which were further assessed using the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) techniques. The results indicated that organizational operation management was the top priority, with administrative operation management and service quality management having the largest impact on productivity. Among the 10 daycare services tested, Institution 3 was judged to have the highest score. These findings shed light on the operational management effectiveness of daycare centers and give a novel evaluation methodology for gauging the efficacy of nursing management.

Suggested Citation

  • Chia-Nan Wang & Chao-Fen Pan & Hoang-Phu Nguyen & Pei-Chun Fang, 2023. "Integrating Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Methods to Evaluate Operation Efficiency of Daycare Centers," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:8:p:1793-:d:1119371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/8/1793/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/8/1793/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miguel Angel Ortiz Barrios & Fabio De Felice & Kevin Parra Negrete & Brandon Aleman Romero & Adriana Yaruro Arenas & Antonella Petrillo, 2016. "An AHP-Topsis Integrated Model for Selecting the Most Appropriate Tomography Equipment," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 861-885, July.
    2. Jui-Ying Hung, 2012. "A Study On The Establish And Evaluation Of Adult Day Care Service Centers," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 6(5), pages 19-34.
    3. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    4. Baoan Song & Qiyu Sun & Ying Li & Chuanqi Que, 2016. "Evaluating the Sustainability of Community-Based Long-Term Care Programmes: A Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, July.
    5. Animesh Debnath & Jagannath Roy & Samarjit Kar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jurgita Antucheviciene, 2017. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach for Strategic Project Portfolio Selection of Agro By-Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-33, July.
    6. Jagannath Roy & Haresh Kumar Sharma & Samarjit Kar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jonas Saparauskas, 2019. "An extended COPRAS model for multi-criteria decision-making problems and its application in web-based hotel evaluation and selection," Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 219-253, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Junxi Zhu & Chia-Liang Lin, 2024. "Research on Service Quality for China’s Ceramic Product Design Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-27, September.
    2. Alin Opreana & Simona Vinerean & Diana Marieta Mihaiu & Liliana Barbu & Radu-Alexandru Șerban, 2023. "Fuzzy Analytic Network Process with Principal Component Analysis to Establish a Bank Performance Model under the Assumption of Country Risk," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-38, July.
    3. Anas A. Makki & Reda M. S. Abdulaal, 2023. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach Based on Fuzzy MEREC-G and Fuzzy RATMI," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Kai-Chao Yao & Dyi-Cheng Chen & Chih-Hsuan Pan & Cheng-Lung Lin, 2024. "The Development Trends of Computer Numerical Control (CNC) Machine Tool Technology," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-33, June.
    5. Wendong Jiang, 2024. "Key Selection Factors Influencing Animation Films from the Perspective of the Audience," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-21, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ferenc Bognár & Balázs Szentes & Petra Benedek, 2022. "Development of the PRISM Risk Assessment Method Based on a Multiple AHP-TOPSIS Approach," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Tsai, Pei-Hsuan & Chen, Chih-Jou & Hsiao, Wei-Hung & Lin, Chin-Tsai, 2023. "Factors influencing the consumers’ behavioural intention to use online food delivery service: Empirical evidence from Taiwan," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    4. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    5. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    6. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    7. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    8. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    9. Luis Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Alejandro Alvarado-Iniesta & David Luviano Cruz & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "MOORA under Pythagorean Fuzzy Set for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, April.
    10. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    11. Kumar B, Pradeep, 2021. "Changing Objectives of Firms and Managerial Preferences: A Review of Models in Microeconomics," MPRA Paper 106967, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 13 Mar 2021.
    12. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Anirban Mukhopadhyay & Sugata Hazra & Debasish Mitra & C. Hutton & Abhra Chanda & Sandip Mukherjee, 2016. "Characterizing the multi-risk with respect to plausible natural hazards in the Balasore coast, Odisha, India: a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) appraisal," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 80(3), pages 1495-1513, February.
    14. Chamoli, Sunil, 2015. "Hybrid FAHP (fuzzy analytical hierarchy process)-FTOPSIS (fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity of an ideal solution) approach for performance evaluation of the V down perforated baffle r," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 432-442.
    15. H. S. C. Perera & W. K. R. Costa, 2008. "Analytic Hierarchy Process for Selection of Erp Software for Manufacturing Companies," Vision, , vol. 12(4), pages 1-11, October.
    16. G. La Scalia & F.P. Marra & J. Rühl & R. Sciortino & T. Caruso, 2016. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology to optimise olive agro-engineering processes based on geo-spatial technologies," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15.
    17. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2014. "Dual criteria decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 101-113.
      • Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet, 2009. "Dual Criteria Decisions," Working Papers 02-2009, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    18. Mulliner, Emma & Smallbone, Kieran & Maliene, Vida, 2013. "An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-279.
    19. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Majid Ebrahimi & Hamid Nejadsoleymani & Mohammad Reza Mansouri Daneshvar, 2019. "Land suitability map and ecological carrying capacity for the recognition of touristic zones in the Kalat region, Iran: a multi-criteria analysis based on AHP and GIS," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 697-718, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:8:p:1793-:d:1119371. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.