Abstract
In a supply chain, the upper echelons plays a key role in tuning the chain performance. In the procurement cycle of the supply chain, the manufacturer outsources more parts and services to focus on their own core competencies. A situation may arise in which some suppliers may under perform in providing critical strategic supplies. This paper analyzes supplier performance using multi-criteria decision procedure along with Pareto analysis in identifying sub-optimal suppliers to be included in the supplier development to optimize the supply chain performance.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akarte, M., Surendra, N., Ravi, B., Rangaraj, N.: Web based casting supplier evaluation using analytical hierarchy process. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 52(5), 511–522 (2001)
Andijani, A., Anwarul, M.: Manufacturing blocking discipline: A multi-criterion approach for buffer allocations. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 51(3), 155–163 (1997)
Bensaou, M.: Portfolios of buyer supplier relationships. Sloan Manag. Rev. 40(4), 35–44 (1999)
de Boer, L., Labro, E., Morlacchi, P.: A review of methods supporting supplier selection. Eur. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 41(7), 75–89 (2001)
de Boer, L., Labro, E., Morlacchi, P.: A review of methods supporting supplier selection. Eur. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 7, 75–89 (2001)
Burnes, B., Whittle, P.: Supplier d.r.development: getting started. Logist. Focus 3(1), 10–14 (1995)
Chan, F.: Interactive selection model for supplier selection process: an analytical hierarchy process approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 41(15), 3549–3579 (2003)
Chan, F., Jiang, B., Tang, N.: Development of intelligent decision support tools to aid the design of flexible manufacturing systems. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 65(1), 73–84 (2000)
Chin, K., Yeung, I., Pun, K.: Development of an assessment system for supplier quality management. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 23(7), 743–765 (2006)
Choi, T., Hartley, J.: An exploration of supplier selection practices across the supply chain. J. Oper. Manag. 14, 333–343 (1996)
Ellram, L.: The supplier selection decision in strategic partnerships. J. Purch. Mater. Manag. 26(4), 8–14 (1990)
Esposito, E., Passaro, R.: The evolution of supply chain relationships: an interpretative framework based on the Italian inter-industry experience. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 41(15), 114–126 (2009)
Geldermann, J., Treitz, M., Rentz, O.: Towards sustainable production networks. Int. J. Prod. Res. 45(19), 4207–4224 (2007)
Handfield, R., Krause, D., Scannell, T., Monczka, R.: Avoid the pitfalls in supplier development. Sloan Manag. Rev. 41(2), 37–49 (2000)
Harker, P.: The art and science of decision making: The analytic hierarchy process. Springer (1989)
Hou, J., Su, D.: Ejb-mvc oriented supplier selection system for mass customization. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 18(1), 54–71 (2007)
Hu, G., Wang, L., Fetch, S., Bidanda, B.: A multi-objective model for project portfolio selection to implement lean and six sigma concepts. Int. J. Prod. Res. 46(23), 6611–6625 (2008)
Jiang, K., Wicks, E.: Integrated investment justification approach for cellular manufacturing systems using activity-based costing and the analytic hierarchy process. J. Eng. Valuat. Cost Anal. 2(4), 271–284 (1999)
Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., Ulukan, Z.: Multi criteria supplier selection using fuzzy ahp. Logist. Inf. Manag. 16(6), 382–394 (2003)
Kamann, D., Bakker, E.: Changing supplier selection and relationship practices: a contagion process. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 10, 55–64 (2004)
Kraljic, P.: Purchasing must become supply management. Harv. Bus. Rev. 61(5), 109–117 (1983)
Lai, V., Trueblood, R.P., Wong, B.: Software selection: a case study of the application of the analytical hierarchical process to the selection of a multimedia authoring system. Inf. Manag. 36(4), 221–232 (1999)
Lamming, R.: Beyond Partnership: Strategies For Innovation and Lean Supply. Prentice Hall (1993)
Lehner, P., Zirk, D.: Cognitive factors in user/expert system interaction. Hum. Factors 29(1), 97–109 (1987)
Levary, R.: Using the analytic hierarchy process to rank foreign suppliers based on supply risks. Comput. Ind. Eng. 55, 535–542 (2008)
Lin, Z.C., Yang, C.B.: Evaluation of machine selection by the ahp method. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 57(3), 253–258 (1996)
Mansouri, S.A., Moattar Husseini, S.M., Newman, S.: A review of the modern approaches to multi-criteria cell design. Int. J. Prod. Res. 38(5), 1201–1218 (2000)
Muralidharan, C., Anantharaman, N., Deshmukh, S.: A multi-criteria group decision-making model for supplier rating. J. Supply Chain Manag. 38(4), 22–33 (2002)
Murry, J.W., Hammons, J.O.: Delphi: a versatile methodology for conducting qualitative research. Rev. High. Educ. 18(4), 423–436 (1995)
ONeal, C.: Concurrent engineering with early supplier involvement: a cross functional challenge. J. Supply Chain Manag. 29(2), 2–9 (2006)
Quinn, J., Anderson, P., Finkelstein, S.: Leveraging intellect. Acad. Manag. Exec. 10(3), 7–27 (1996)
Saaty, T.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw Hill International (1980)
Saaty, T.L.: Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with The Analytical Hierarchy Process. RWS Publications (1994)
Saen, R.: Suppliers selection in the presence of both cardinal and ordinal data. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 183(2), 741–747 (2007)
Sarkis, J., Talluri, S.: Evaluating and selecting e-commerce software and communication systems for a supply chain. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 159, 318–329 (2004)
Schniederjans, M., Garvin, T.: Using the analytic hierarchy process and multi-objective programming for the selection of cost drivers in activity-based costing. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 100(1), 72–80 (1997)
Syson, R.: Improve Purchase Performance. Pitman Publishing (1992)
Tam, M., Tummala, V.: Evaluation of machine selection by the ahp method:an application of the ahp in vendor selection of a telecommunications system. Omega 29, 171–182 (2001)
Tummala, V., Chin, K., Ho, S.: Assessing success factors for implementing ce: a case study in Hong Kong electronics industry by ahp. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 49(1), 265–283 (1997)
Verma, R., Pullman, M.E.: An analysis of the supplier selection process. Omega Int. J. Manag. Sci. 26(6), 739–750 (1998)
Watts, C., Hahn, C.: Supplier development programs: an empirical analysis. J. Purch. Mater. Manag. 29, 11–17 (1993)
Wu, C.R., Chang, C.W., Lin, H.L.: A fuzzy anp-based approach to evaluate medical organizational performance. Inf. Manag. Sci. 19(1), 53–74 (2008)
Young, R.: The machine inside the machine: users models of pocket calculators. Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 15, 51–85 (1981)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Appendices
Appendix A
Sample AHP question form for evaluation
Please read the following questions and put check marks on the pair wise comparison matrices. If a criterion on the left is more important than the matching one on the right, put your check mark to the left of the importance ‘Equal’ under the importance level you prefer. If a criterion on the left is less important than the matching on on the right, put your check mark to the right of the importance ‘Equal’ the importance level you chose.
With respect to overall objective of supplier selection corresponding to main criterion Cost (C 1)
-
1.
How important is Product price (M 1) when it is compared with Freight cost (M 2)
-
2.
How important is Product price (M 1) when it is compared with Tariff and duties (M 3)
-
3.
How important is Freight cost (M 2) when it is compared with Tariff and duties (M 3)
Criterion Cost (C 1) | Preference of one sub-criterion over another | ||||||||||
Questions | Criteria | Absolute | Very strong | Fairly strong | Weak | Equal | Weak | Fairly strong | Very strong | Absolute | Criteria |
1 | M 1 | M 2 | |||||||||
2 | M 1 | M 3 | |||||||||
3 | M 2 | M 3 |
With respect to overall objective of supplier selection corresponding to main criterion Quality (C 2)
-
1.
How important is Rejection rate (M 4) when it is compared with Increased lead time (M 5)
-
2.
How important is Rejection rate (M 4) when it is compared with Qulality assessment (M 6)
-
3.
How important is Increased lead time (M 5) when it is compared with Qulality assessment (M 6)
Criterion Profile (C 2) | Preference of one sub-criterion over another | ||||||||||
Questions | Criteria | Absolute | Very strong | Fairly strong | Weak | Equal | Weak | Fairly strong | Very strong | Absolute | Criteria |
1 | M 4 | M 5 | |||||||||
2 | M 4 | M 6 | |||||||||
3 | M 5 | M 6 |
With respect to overall objective of Supplier selection corresponding to main criterion Supplier’s profile (C 4)
-
1.
How important is Financial status (M 10) when it is compared with Customer base (M 11)
-
2.
How important is Financial status (M 10) when it is compared with Facility and capacity (M 12)
-
3.
How important is Customer base (M 11) when it is compared with Facility and capacity (M 12)
Criterion Profile (C 4) | Preference of one sub-criterion over another | ||||||||||
Questions | Criteria | Absolute | Very strong | Fairly strong | Weak | Equal | Weak | Fairly strong | Very strong | Absolute | Criteria |
1 | M 10 | M 11 | |||||||||
2 | M 10 | M 12 | |||||||||
3 | M 11 | M 12 |
Similarly the remaining criteria are put in a similar questionnaire format with which the alternatives are evaluated.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sharma, M.J., Yu, S.J. Selecting critical suppliers for supplier development to improve supply management. OPSEARCH 50, 42–59 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-012-0097-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-012-0097-y