IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rom/bemann/v10y2020i3p80-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis Of The Efficiency Of Trade In Oil Derivatives In Serbia By Applying The Fuzzy Ahp-Topsis Method

Author

Listed:
  • Radojko Lukic

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Belgrade, Serbia)

Abstract

The problem of analyzing trade efficiency is topical, significant and very complex. Multi-criteria decision-making has been increasingly used recently. With that regard, this paper analyzes the efficiency of trade in oil derivatives in Serbia with integrated application of the Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS method. The results of this study show that of all the observed criteria (earnings, assets, capital, sales and net profit), the most significant are employees` earnings and capital respectively, and that the most effective companies are Daki Petrol, Oil Industry of Serbia (NIS), and Horizon Petrol. The most inefficient companies are Eko Serbia, Lukoil and Naftachem. In order to improve their efficiency in the future, it is necessary to manage assets, capital, sales and profits as efficiently as possible. Likewise, it is imperative that employees' earnings are at an acceptable level in accordance with the business conditions in a given business environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Radojko Lukic, 2020. "Analysis Of The Efficiency Of Trade In Oil Derivatives In Serbia By Applying The Fuzzy Ahp-Topsis Method," Business Excellence and Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 10(3), pages 80-98, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:rom:bemann:v:10:y:2020:i:3:p:80-98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://beman.ase.ro/no103/6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    2. Radojko LUKIC, 2018. "The Analysis of the Operative Profit Margin of Trade Companies in Serbia," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(5), pages 458-475, December.
    3. Patrick T. Harker & Luis G. Vargas, 1987. "The Theory of Ratio Scale Estimation: Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1383-1403, November.
    4. Zhu, Ke-Jun & Jing, Yu & Chang, Da-Yong, 1999. "A discussion on Extent Analysis Method and applications of fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 450-456, July.
    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. Radojko LUKIC, 2022. "Analysis of Kosovo and Metohija Trade Performance," Management and Economics Review, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 7(3), pages 379-391, October.
    2. Radojko LUKIC, 2024. "Research On The Dynamics Of The Performance Positioning Of The Trade In Serbia Using The Lopcow And Edas Methods," APPLIED RESEARCH IN ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 5(1), pages 31-40, April.

    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. Jain, Bharat A. & Nag, Barin N., 1996. "A decision-support model for investment decisions in new ventures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 473-486, May.
    2. Tavana, M. & Kennedy, D. T. & Joglekar, P., 1996. "A group decision support framework for consensus ranking of technical manager candidates," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 523-538, October.
    3. Frances X. Frei & Patrick T. Harker, 1998. "Measuring Aggregate Process Performance Using AHP," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 98-07, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
    4. Lai, S-K., 1995. "A preference-based interpretation of AHP," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 453-462, August.
    5. Gordana Milentijević & Blagoje Nedeljković & Milena Lekić & Zoran Nikić & Ivica Ristović & Jelena Djokić, 2016. "Application of a Method for Intelligent Multi-Criteria Analysis of the Environmental Impact of Tailing Ponds in Northern Kosovo and Metohija," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, November.
    6. Frei, Frances X. & Harker, Patrick T., 1999. "Measuring aggregate process performance using AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 436-442, July.
    7. Alphonce, Christian B., 1997. "Application of the analytic hierarchy process in agriculture in developing countries," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 97-112, January.
    8. Leung, Lawrence C. & Cao, Dong, 2001. "On the efficacy of modeling multi-attribute decision problems using AHP and Sinarchy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 39-49, July.
    9. Stanciulescu, C. & Fortemps, Ph. & Installe, M. & Wertz, V., 2003. "Multiobjective fuzzy linear programming problems with fuzzy decision variables," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(3), pages 654-675, September.
    10. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    11. Carmone, Frank J. & Kara, Ali & Zanakis, Stelios H., 1997. "A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(3), pages 538-553, November.
    12. Jens Leth Hougaard & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero & Lars Peter Østerdal, 2022. "Optimal Management of Evolving Hierarchies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 6024-6038, August.
    13. Paul J. Componation & Dawn R. Utley & Robert L. Armacost, 1999. "Prioritizing components of concurrent engineering programs to support new product development," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 168-176.
    14. Michele Fedrizzi, 2010. "On a Consensus Measure in a Group Multi-Criteria Decision Making Problem," DISA Working Papers 1009, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 22 Dec 2010.
    15. Daji Ergu & Gang Kou & János Fülöp & Yong Shi, 2014. "Further Discussions on Induced Bias Matrix Model for the Pair-Wise Comparison Matrix," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 980-993, June.
    16. Ardalan Bafahm & Minghe Sun, 2019. "Some Conflicting Results in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 465-486, March.
    17. Stam, Antonie & Duarte Silva, A. Pedro, 2003. "On multiplicative priority rating methods for the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 92-108, February.
    18. James E. Smith & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2004. "Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 561-574, May.
    19. Bentes, Alexandre Veronese & Carneiro, Jorge & da Silva, Jorge Ferreira & Kimura, Herbert, 2012. "Multidimensional assessment of organizational performance: Integrating BSC and AHP," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(12), pages 1790-1799.
    20. Saul I. Gass, 2005. "Model World: The Great Debate—MAUT Versus AHP," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(4), pages 308-312, August.

    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:rom:bemann:v:10:y:2020:i:3:p:80-98. 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: Zamfir Andreea (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mnasero.html .

    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.