Application of Hybrid MADM Methods for Performance Evaluation in Manufacturing

• Autorzy: Jiri Franek , Katerina Kashi
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The paper is focused on the application of methods of multiple attribute decision making methods and techniques from the perspective of top managers. Attention is paid to the decomposition of multiple-criteria methods of decision making under certainty, which can be used to determine allocation of preferences to criteria, attributes or variables in a wide range of tasks in the field of business economics and management. The goal of the paper is to present a systematic decision making procedure that combines selected multiple attribute decision making (MADM) methods of SAW and COPRAS-G combined with analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for performance evaluation with practical example on performance evaluation in a manufacturing company. AHP is applied to facilitate group decision making among managers and to set their priorities for further performance evaluation. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); Decision making; Performance evaluation of enterprises

PL

Analityczny proces hierarchiczny; Podejmowanie decyzji; Ocena działalności przedsiębiorstwa

• Czasopismo: Forum Scientiae Oeconomia
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: 5
• Numer: nr 2 Innovation Activities and Human Factor in Modern Business: Measurement, Results and Impact
• Strony: 41--54

Twórcy

autor

Jiri Franek

• VŠB-Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic

autor

Katerina Kashi

• VŠB-Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• Clinton, D.B., Webber S.A., Hassell, J.M. (2002), Implementing the Balance Scorecard using the analytic hierarchy process, Management Accounting Quarterly, 3(3): 1-11.
• Fontela, E., Gabus, A. (1976), The DEMATE L observer, Geneva: Battelle Geneva Research Center.
• Franek, J., Kresta, A. (2013), Competitive strategy decision making based on the five forces analysis with AHP/ANP approach, in: A. Kocourek (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference "Liberec Economic Forum" (pp. 135-145), Liberec: Technical University of Liberec.
• Franek, J., Zmeškal, Z. (2013), A model of strategic decision making using decomposition SWOT-ANP method, In: M. Čulík (Ed.), Financial management of firms and financial institutions, 9th International Scientific Conference Proceedings (Part I-III) (pp. 172-180), Ostrava: VŠB-Technical University of Ostrava.
• Ishizaka, A., Labib, A. (2011), Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11): 14336-14345.
• Mertins, K., Will, M., Wuscher, S. (2011), Germany - towards a knowledge-based economy, In: F. Lehrer, K. Bredl (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge Management, Academic Publishing International, 2: 626-636.
• Mikusova, M. (2011), The creation of the performance measurement system - house model, 2011 International Conference on Management and Service Science IPEDR, 8: 48-52.
• Pan, F.C. (2006), Escalate BSC power by AHP: Innovative approach for strategy implementation, International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 7(2-3): 337-351.
• Reisinger, H., Cravens K.S., Tell, N. (2003), Prioritizing performance measures within the Balanced Scorecard framework, Management International Review, 43(4): 429-437.
• Saaty, T.L. (1980), The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation, London: McGraw-Hill.
• Saaty, T.L. (1996), Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process (1st edition), Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.
• Saaty, T.L., Vargas, L.G. (2006), Decision making with the analytic network process: Economic, political, social and technological applications with benefits, opportunities, costs and risks, New York: Springer.
• Shannon, C.E. (1948), A mathematical theory of communication, Bell Systems Technology Journal, 27(3): 379-423.
• Simon, H.A. (1993), Strategy and organizational evolution, Strategic Management Journal, 14: 131-142.
• Tzeng, G.H., Huang, J.J. (2011), Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications, Boca Raton: CRC Press.
• Varma, S., Wadhwa, S., Deshmukh, S.G. (2008), Evaluating petroleum supply chain performance: application of analytical hierarchy process to Balanced Scorecard, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 20(3): 343-356.
• Velmurugan, M.S., Narayanasamy, K. (2009), The impact of decision support system on SME's and E-Business, In: K. S. Soliman (Ed.), Creating global economies through innovation and knowledge management: Theory & Practice, 1-3: 1158-1169.
• Yildiz, A., Yayla, A.Y. (2015), Multi-criteria decision-making methods for supplier selection: A literature review, South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 26(2): 158-177.
• Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A., Turskis, Z., Tamosaitiene, J. (2009), Multi-attribute decision making model by applying grey numbers, Informatica, 20(2): 305-320.
• Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., Kildienė, S. (2014), State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods, Technological & Economic Development of Economy, 20(1): 165-179.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.23762/fso_vol5no2_17_4