A Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making Model for Airline Competitiveness Evaluation

  • Hsuan-Shih Lee
  • Ming-Tao Chou
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4252)


This paper presents a fuzzy multiple criteria decision making model to the evaluation of airline competitiveness over a period. The evaluation problem is formulated as a fuzzy multiple criteria decision making problem and solved by our strength-weakness based approach. After the strength and weakness matrices for airlines are derived, the weights of criteria, strength matrix and weakness matrix can be aggregated into strength indices and weakness indices for airlines, by which each airline can identify his own strength and weakness. The strength and weakness indices can be further integrated into an overall performance indices, by which airlines can identify their competitiveness ranking.


Service Quality Fuzzy Number Triangular Fuzzy Number Strength Index Strength Matrix 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Oum, T.H., Yu, C.: Cost competitiveness of major airlines: an international comparison. Transportation Research A 32(6), 407–422 (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bureau of Industry Economics. Aviation: international performance indicators. Research report 59. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schefczyk, M.: Operational performance of airlines: an extension of traditional measurement paradigms. Strategic Management Journal 14, 301–317 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Encaoua, D.: Liberalizing European airlines: cost and factor productivity evidence. International Journal of Industrial Organization 9, 109–124 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Windle, R.: The world’s airlines: a cost and productivity comparison. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 25(1), 31–49 (1991)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Good, D.H., Rhodes, E.L.: Productive efficiency, technological change and the competitiveness of U.S. airlines in the Pacific Rim. Journal of the Transportation Research Forum 31(2), 347–358 (1991)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bureau of Transportation and Communications Economics, The progress of aviation reform, Research report 81, Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service (1993)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Good, D.H., Nadiri, M.I., Roller, L.H., Sickles, R.C.: Efficiency and productivity growth comparisons of European and U.S. airlines: a first look at the data. The Journal of Productivity Analysis 4, 115–125 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Good, D.H., Roller, L.H., Sickles, R.C.: Airline efficiency differences between Europe and the US: implications for the pace of EC integration and domestic regulation. European Journal of Operational Research 80(1), 508–518 (1995)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oum, T.H., Yu, C.: A productivity comparison of the world’s major airlines. Journal of Air Transport Management 2(3/4), 181–195 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Windle, R., Dresner, M.: A note on productivity comparisons between air carries. Logistics and Transportation Review 31(2), 125–134 (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Janic, M.: An assessment of risk and safety in civil aviation. Journal of Air Transport Management 6, 43–50 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chang, Y.H., Yeh, C.H.: A survey analysis of service quality for domestic airlines. European Journal of Operational Research 139(1), 166–177 (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Young, C., Lawrence, C., Lee, M.: Assessing service quality as an effective management tool: the case fo the airline industry. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 2(2), 76–96 (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Truitt, L.J., Haynes, R.: Evaluating service quality and productivity in the regional airline industry. Transportation Journal 33(4), 21–32 (1994)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chang, Y.-H., Yeh, C.-H.: Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making. Omega 29, 405–415 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K.: Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (1981)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee, H.-S.: A new fuzzy ranking method based on fuzzy preference relation. In: 2000 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man And Cybernetics, pp. 3416–3420 (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee, H.-S.: An extended fuzzy preference relation for comparison of fuzzy numbers. In: The 6h World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Orlando, USA, XI, July 14-18, pp. 76–79 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee, H.-S.: A Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision Making Model for the Selection of the Distribution Center. In: Wang, L., Chen, K., S. Ong, Y. (eds.) ICNC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3612, pp. 1290–1299. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yuan, Y.: Criteria for evaluating fuzzy ranking methods. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 44, 139–157 (1991)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hsuan-Shih Lee
    • 1
  • Ming-Tao Chou
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Shipping and Transportation ManagementNational Taiwan Ocean UniversityTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Aviation and Maritime ManagementChang Jung Christian UniversityTaiwan

Personalised recommendations