IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i15p4236-d255009.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Proposal for a Decision-Making Tool in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection Based on Multi-Criteria Analysis and the Fuzzy Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Jovčić

    (Faculty of Transport Engineering, University of Pardubice, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic)

  • Petr Průša

    (Faculty of Transport Engineering, University of Pardubice, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic)

  • Momčilo Dobrodolac

    (Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, University of Belgrade, 11 000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Libor Švadlenka

    (Faculty of Transport Engineering, University of Pardubice, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The selection of a third-party logistics (3PL) provider is an important and demanding task for many companies and organizations dealing with distribution activities. To assist in decision making, this paper proposes the implementation of fuzzy logic. To design a fuzzy inference system (FIS), the first prerequisite is to determine a set of evaluation criteria and sub-criteria and to find the relationship between them. This task was solved by an extensive review of the literature and expert opinions on implementing the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) approach. The results obtained in the first part of the research, together with data collected from 20 3PL providers, were further used in the second part, which was related to the implementation of the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method. Finally, a decision-making tool for 3PL provider selection was designed as an FIS structure, where the inputs were the previously defined criteria and the output was a preference for 3PL selection. The fuzzy rules were generated on the basis of the collected empirical data, the preferences obtained by the TOPSIS method, and expert opinion using the Wang–Mendel method. The proposed fuzzy model is particularly suitable when input data are not crisp values but are provided descriptively through linguistic statements.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Jovčić & Petr Průša & Momčilo Dobrodolac & Libor Švadlenka, 2019. "A Proposal for a Decision-Making Tool in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection Based on Multi-Criteria Analysis and the Fuzzy Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-23, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:15:p:4236-:d:255009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4236/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4236/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cheng, Ching-Hsue & Yang, Kuo-Lung & Hwang, Chia-Lung, 1999. "Evaluating attack helicopters by AHP based on linguistic variable weight," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 423-435, July.
    2. R. E. Bellman & L. A. Zadeh, 1970. "Decision-Making in a Fuzzy Environment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 141-164, December.
    3. Cheng, Ching-Hsue, 1997. "Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 343-350, January.
    4. W C Tsai, 2009. "Fuzzy measures of supplier evaluation under lean concepts," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(7), pages 1005-1011, July.
    5. Korpela, Jukka & Tuominen, Markku, 1996. "A decision aid in warehouse site selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1-3), pages 169-180, August.
    6. S Yahya & B Kingsman, 1999. "Vendor rating for an entrepreneur development programme: a case study using the analytic hierarchy process method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(9), pages 916-930, September.
    7. Weber, Charles A. & Current, John R. & Benton, W. C., 1991. "Vendor selection criteria and methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 2-18, January.
    8. Aguezzoul, Aicha, 2014. "Third-party logistics selection problem: A literature review on criteria and methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 69-78.
    9. Ho, William & Ma, Xin, 2018. "The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 399-414.
    10. Y H Yang & Y V Hui & L C Leung & G Chen, 2010. "An analytic network process approach to the selection of logistics service providers for air cargo," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(9), pages 1365-1376, September.
    11. Liu, Fuh-Hwa Franklin & Hai, Hui Lin, 2005. "The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting supplier," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 308-317, September.
    12. Kannan Govindan & Vernika Agarwal & Jyoti Dhingra Darbari & P. C. Jha, 2019. "An integrated decision making model for the selection of sustainable forward and reverse logistic providers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 273(1), pages 607-650, February.
    13. Berna Bulgurcu, 2018. "An extent analysis of 3PL provider selection criteria: A case on Turkey cement sector," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1469183-146, January.
    14. Rajesh Kr. Singh & Angappa Gunasekaran & Pravin Kumar, 2018. "Third party logistics (3PL) selection for cold chain management: a fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 531-553, August.
    15. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Abbas Mardani & Zenonas Turskis & Ahmad Jusoh & Khalil MD Nor, 2016. "Development of TOPSIS Method to Solve Complicated Decision-Making Problems — An Overview on Developments from 2000 to 2015," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 645-682, May.
    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. Joseph Junior Aduba, 2022. "Framework for firm-level performance evaluations using multivariate linear correlation with MCDM methods: application to Japanese firms," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-44, February.
    2. Sanja Puzović & Jasmina Vesić Vasović & Dragan D. Milanović & Vladan Paunović, 2023. "A Hybrid Fuzzy MCDM Approach to Open Innovation Partner Evaluation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-26, July.
    3. Dražen Žgaljić & Edvard Tijan & Alen Jugović & Tanja Poletan Jugović, 2019. "Implementation of Sustainable Motorways of the Sea Services Multi-Criteria Analysis of a Croatian Port System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-21, December.
    4. Marjana Čubranić-Dobrodolac & Libor Švadlenka & Svetlana Čičević & Aleksandar Trifunović & Momčilo Dobrodolac, 2020. "Using the Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Inference Systems to Compare the Impact of Speed and Space Perception on the Occurrence of Road Traffic Accidents," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Kexin Bi & Mengke Yang & Latif Zahid & Xiaoguang Zhou, 2020. "A New Solution for City Distribution to Achieve Environmental Benefits within the Trend of Green Logistics: A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-25, October.
    6. Stefan Jovčić & Petr Průša, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(21), pages 1-19, October.

    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. Stefan Jovčić & Petr Průša, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(21), pages 1-19, October.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Chan, Felix T.S. & Kumar, Niraj, 2007. "Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 417-431, August.
    5. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    6. García Alcaraz Jorge Luis & Alvarado Iniesta Alejandro & Maldonado Macías Aidé Araceli, 2013. "Selección de proveedores basada en análisis dimensional," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 58(3), pages 249-278, julio-sep.
    7. Christodoulos Nikou & Socrates J. Moschuris, 2012. "Final Supplier Selection System in Military Critical Items," SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, University of Piraeus, vol. 62(1-2), pages 28-46, January -.
    8. Mohamed Rafik Noor Mohamed Qureshi, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Third-Party Logistics Services Providers (3PLSP) Selection for Supply Chain Strategic Advantage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    9. Chen, Lisa Y. & Wang, Tien-Chin, 2009. "Optimizing partners' choice in IS/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 233-242, July.
    10. Eleonora Bottani & Piera Centobelli & Teresa Murino & Ehsan Shekarian, 2018. "A QFD-ANP Method for Supplier Selection with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks Considerations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 911-939, May.
    11. Dobos, Imre & Vörösmarty, Gyöngyi, 2014. "Green supplier selection and evaluation using DEA-type composite indicators," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 273-278.
    12. V. Alpagut Yavuz, 2016. "An Analysis of Job Change Decision Using a Hybrid Mcdm Method: A Comparative Analysis," International Journal of Business and Social Research, MIR Center for Socio-Economic Research, vol. 6(3), pages 60-75, March.
    13. Yahya, Salleh & Kingsman, Brian, 2002. "Modelling a multi-objective allocation problem in a government sponsored entrepreneur development programme," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(2), pages 430-448, January.
    14. Hsu, C.-H. & Wang, Fu-Kwun & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2012. "The best vendor selection for conducting the recycled material based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 95-111.
    15. Lin, Rong-Ho, 2012. "An integrated model for supplier selection under a fuzzy situation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 55-61.
    16. Raut, Rakesh D. & Gardas, Bhaskar B. & Narwane, Vaibhav S. & Narkhede, Balkrishna E., 2019. "Improvement in the food losses in fruits and vegetable supply chain - a perspective of cold third-party logistics approach," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    17. Holweg, Matthias & Reichhart, Andreas & Hong, Eui, 2011. "On risk and cost in global sourcing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 333-341, May.
    18. Chen, Chen-Tung & Lin, Ching-Torng & Huang, Sue-Fn, 2006. "A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 289-301, August.
    19. Kamath, Giridhar & Naik, Rakesh & Prasad, H C Shiva, 2016. "A vendor’s evaluation–using AHP for an Indian steel pipe manufacturing company," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8(3), pages 442-461.
    20. Hu, Kuo-Jen & Yu, Vincent F., 2016. "An integrated approach for the electronic contract manufacturer selection problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 68-81.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:15:p:4236-:d:255009. 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.